Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 229

Sun, 15 Nov 2009

• 1. Re: Yom Tov Sheni for Olim LeReget to the Beit Mikdash (Elazar M. Teitz)
• 2. Bereshit 23: 6-16 (Joseph Mosseri)
• 3. Re: Moda ani (Micha Berger)
• 4. Using Company Time (Liron Kopinsky)
• 5. Re: Using Company Time (Micha Berger)
• 6. Re: Moda ani (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 7. Re: Moda ani (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 8. Re: Moda ani (Gershon Dubin)
• 9. Re: Yom Tov Sheni for Olim LeReget to the Beit Mikdash (Zev Sero)
• 10. Re: Yom Tov Sheni for Olim LeReget to the Beit Mikdash (rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com)
• 11. Re: Moda ani (Zev Sero)
• 12. Re: Moda ani (Micha Berger)
• 13. Modah ani (SBA)
• 14. moda ani (Eli Turkel)
• 15. Writing a Get Yom Tov Sheni (martin brody)
• 16. Re: Writing a Get Yom Tov Sheni (Zev Sero)
• 17. Re: Moda ani (T6...@aol.com)

R. Micha Berger wrote: 

<So I would think we now have two shitos:

R' Chananeil / R' Bachayei: we used an algorithm from day 1, this being
   the essence of the mitzvah
Rambam: Until Abayei veRava, which could be as late as Hillel Nesi'ah,
   if they set the calendar up toward the beginning of his nesi'us.
   However, the Rambam might have held that Rav Ashi veRavina closed
   the Sanhedrin, not R' Gamliel IV.>

     Where does Rabbeinu Chananel say that an algorithm was used? All he
     says is that the cheshbon was used, and cheshbon and algorithm are not
     one and the same. AIUI, Moshe was told miSinai that the average time
     between molados is 29 days, 12 hours and 793 chalakim; that we begin
     calculations from an original molad of BHR"D, that the molad is unseen
     for six hours, and thus the time of the molad could be determined
     without recourse to eidim.  But just as when r'iyah was used, the Beis
     Din was not required to act on the testimony they heard, but could
     refrain from being m'kadeish, so too could they refrain from declaring
     as Rosh Chodesh the day which came out al pi cheshbon, as indeed
     happens now.  
     The algorithm, on the other hand, did not come until the fixed
     calendar, and it consisted of more than just the use of the cheshbon
     for determining the molad: it fixed which months were to have 29 days
     and which 30, and which years should be m'ubaros, which were not part
     of the halacha-l'Moshe-'miSinai cheshbon.	Where do you see anything
     in R. Chananel that says differently?
     On a related matter, Tosafos in P'sachim 58b, d.h. K'ilu, says that Lo
     AD"U Rosh (or, rather, Lo D"U -- he says nothing about Sunday) was
     practiced during the time of kiddush al pi r'iya.	This does not imply
     that Lo BD"U Pesach was in effect, since it is not an independent
     rule, but a consequence of Lo AD"U Rosh and the fixed number of days
     we now have between Pesach and Rosh Hashana.  Today, if Pesach would
     be Monday, then RH would perforc be Wednesday. When r'iyah was used, a
     Monday Pesach did not automatically result in a Wednesday Rosh
     Hashana, since, e.g., Tammuz could have had 30 days, causing RH to be
     Thursday, or Av could have had 29, so that RH would be Tuesday. . 
     As for Rabban Gamliel's Yom Kippur, as R. Zev Sero pointed out, it
     wasn't an attempt to manipulate the calendar.  Witnesses came on the
     thirtieth, and he was m'kadesh the new month (otherwise, the old one
     would automatically have been a thirty-day month).  Then, when the
     moon was not visible that night, R. Yehoshua contended that it proved
     that the witnesses must have been wrong, and he therefore held that
     the month should indeed have been thirty days and Rosh Chodesh should
     be on the thirty-first.  However, he was informed by R.Akiva that
     whether R. Gamliel's kiddush was based on true or false witnesses,
     what was done was valid and could not be undone because "atem afilu
     muta'in."
EMT
____________________________________________________________
Manufacturer-Direct Hardwood Floors
Never pay retail again. Wholesale prices on all hardwood floors!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=LMBTAcy9k3709yiUrqFj2wAAJ
1DzeK-F0bLcqGb51B0rOTOKAAQAAAAFAAAAAKmBqj4AAAMlAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANldAAAAAA=

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091113/3e6ceb73/attachment-0001.htm>

What is going on in these 10 pesouqim?

 

Shem'enou Adoni (23:6)

 

Shema'ouni (23:8)

 

Shema'eni (23:11)

 

Shema'eni (23:13)

 

Shema'eni (23:15)

 

Vayishma' (23:16)

 

BeOzne Bene Het (23:10)

 

BeOzne 'Am HaAress (23:13)

 

BeOzne Bene Het (23:16)

 

Why such a large concentration of SH.M.'A. in these pesouqim?

Do we find this any where else?

If that wasn't enough we also have all these instances of people talking
into ears.

 

This may sound silly but was everyone deaf???

 

Any ideas?

Thanks,

Joey Mosseri

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091112/e51010cf/attachment-0001.htm>

RnTK wrote:
: My own  feeling is that "Modeh ani" is a kind of fixed text that everyone says 
: just the  way it was fixed, like the pasuk, "Na'ar hayisi gam zakanti velo 
: ra'isi tzadik  ne'ezav" -- which I have no problem saying even thought I was 
: never a na'ar and  am not yet a zekeina.  

I earlier accidentally mentioned E-lokai Netzor... It's another techinah
in the first person, and it IS reconjugated from the pasuq. As you
know from Shabbos Morning, "LeDavid, Beshanoso es Ta'amo" has "Netzor
leshonkha meira, usefasekha medabeir mirma", in the 2nd person.

Fixed texts is more of an issue for tefillos than techinos, so I might
be able to argue that any prayer written in the first person singular
should not be considered so firmly etched in stone,

But my point was that Modeh Ani is no pasuq or maamar Chazal, and
even post-dates the rishonim. Any reluctance we might have for tampering
with pesuqim really shouldn't apply.

As for were the Gaon says that "Modah" is appropriate.... It's something
I've repeted bishmo now for years. I have to go back to re-find where I
got it from. I'm not ignoring you, just have patience!

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Despair is the worst of ailments. No worries
mi...@aishdas.org        are justified except: "Why am I so worried?"
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507

Hi All,
I am giving a chaburah next week probably on doing non-work related things
while at work. This will probably include both using company time as well as
using company property, although I am not sure yet if I will include both.

If anyone knows any good sources I should focus on for this talk, please let
me know.

Thanks,
Liron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091113/14dcd24a/attachment-0001.htm>

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 06:53:34AM -0800, Liron Kopinsky wrote:
: If anyone knows any good sources I should focus on for this talk, please let
: me know.

What me, sources?

Seriously, though, perhaps THE central issues I would focus on if I were
the one talking are:

1- The difference between a po'el and an uman -- how much are they paid
to work certain hours, and how much is it by getting the job done. Most
modern professins are somewhere in between -- if you aren't making a
deadline but you put in some overtime to try, you're okay. Putting in
the time but not getting work done or getting the work done on time but
chatting on Avodah/Areivim for 6 hours out of 9 would both typically be
grounds for dismissal. Our current employment agreements are therefore
somewhere in the middle. Again, IMHO.

2- Contracts vs expectations, today vs the gemara. In the days of the
gemara, hand labor in the orchards meant not having the time to get out
of the tree for minchah. Few of us are in those kinds of jobs. Also,
there is usually a gap between the terms in the contract and the
informal understanding of our business culture. How much to each of
these -- the norm at the time the halakhah was codified, the norm today,
and the contract you signed -- each play into my obligations toward my
boss.

3- Does it make a difference if it's an issue of geneivas akum?

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A cheerful disposition is an inestimable treasure.
mi...@aishdas.org        It preserves health, promotes convalescence,
http://www.aishdas.org   and helps us cope with adversity.
Fax: (270) 514-1507         - R' SR Hirsch, "From the Wisdom of Mishlei"

SBA wrote:
> Has anyone ever seen a siddur (or indeed any reference to)
> pre-WW2 which mentions "modah"?

Good point, but beware: If one goes back *too* far, he'll be in an era of siddurim which had no printed vowels.

I think this topic is a great example of "lo ra'inu aino raaya" (absence of
evidence is not evidence of absence). If we can't find any siddurim which
include "modah", one could easily argue that this says nothing about how
the women davened, but that it shows *who* used the siddurim. In other
words, one could argue that women have been saying "modah" for ages, but
that it was passed on orally; if women were less literate than men, why
bother printing it in the siddur?

Akiva Miller


____________________________________________________________
Save On Health Insurance
Compare health insurance companies and save money today.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/c?cp=E9xZ1-J0mKkH_vOAj25cdAAAJ
z3zeK-F0bLcqGb51B0rOTOKAAQAAAAFAAAAABtD2z0AAAMlAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAkQRwAAAAA=

R'n Toby Katz wrote:
> This was discussed at least once before on avodah (a long time ago

Indeed it has. For those who would like to see those posts, put the following line into Google:

"modah ani" site:aishdas.org

It will show you all web pages with the exact phrase "modah ani", but only the ones which are on R' Micha's site.

Akiva Miller


____________________________________________________________
Doctorate Degrees Online
Boost your career with an online doctoral degree. Enroll today!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/c?cp=AkwgfXSrWOnIQ26n8tJhVwAAJ
z3zeK-F0bLcqGb51B0rOTOKAAQAAAAFAAAAAEAPOz8AAAMlAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAyOQAAAAA=

---------- Original Message ----------
From: T6...@aol.com
 <<"Na'ar hayisi gam zakanti velo ra'isi tzadik ne'ezav" -- which I
 have no problem saying even thought I was never a na'ar and am not yet a
 zekeina.>> which is good, because the intent is not for each person
 to assume that role.  The Gemara says that "sar shel olam" said it.  The
 identification of sar shel olam is left to the student as an exercise.
Gershon
gershon.du...@juno.com 
____________________________________________________________
Online Doctorate Degrees
Find leading online Phd programs. Study anywhere anytime.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=eRZ9U9NeH190w68P9Rof4gAAJ
1DzeK-F0bLcqGb51B0rOTOKAAQAAAAFAAAAAG2tMT8AAAMlAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaUcwAAAAA=

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091113/089f67e4/attachment-0001.htm>

Elazar M. Teitz wrote:
> But just as when r'iyah was used, the Beis 
> Din was not required to act on the testimony they heard, but could 
> refrain from being m'kadeish, so too could they refrain from declaring 
> as Rosh Chodesh the day which came out al pi cheshbon, as indeed happens 
> now. 

This is one opinion brought by the Rambam KHCh 3:17, but the other
opinion he brings is that once they have heard the testimony and it
appears to be valid they no longer have a choice, and must act on it
(though of course if they refused to do their duty it would remain
undone, and Rosh Chodesh would be delayed).

Without having looked at all at the sources, simply as a matter of
logic and jurisprudence the second opinion seems to me to make more
sense; nobody forced them to hear the eidim in the first place, but
now that the hearing has been held and the evidence is there, how can
they not act on it?  If they wanted a 30-day month they should have
declared a bank holiday and closed the BD for the day.  Give the eidim
a nice meal so they don't feel their trip was a waste, but don't go
through the charade of a judicial hearing that you have no intention
of acting on.

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

REMT:
> On a related matter, Tosafos in P'sachim 58b, d.h. K'ilu, says that
> Lo AD"U Rosh (or, rather, Lo D"U -- he says nothing about Sunday) was
> practiced during the time of kiddush al pi r'iya. This does not imply
> that Lo BD"U Pesach was in effect, since it is not an independent rule,
> but a consequence of Lo AD"U Rosh and the fixed number of days we now
> have between Pesach and Rosh Hashana.

Question:
How strictly wad LO AD"U or LO D"U applied?

If you have a strict LO AD"U, then sfeiqa deyoma is de facto limitted
to the case of Mon. Vs. Tues. [Which as we have it is only 1/9 possibiity]

> As for Rabban Gamliel's Yom Kippur, as R. Zev Sero pointed out, it
> wasn't an attempt to manipulate the calendar. Witnesses came on the
> thirtieth, and he was m'kadesh the new month (otherwise, the old one
> would automatically have been a thirty-day month). Then, when the moon
> was not visible that night, R. Yehoshua contended that it proved that
> the witnesses must have been wrong, and he therefore held that the
> month should indeed have been thirty days and Rosh Chodesh should be
> on the thirty-first. However, he was informed by R.Akiva that whether
> R. Gamliel's kiddush was based on true or false witnesses, what was done
> was valid and could not be undone because "atem afilu muta'in."

I dunno.

Re: The first 2
R Yochanan Ben Nuri says "eidei sheqer heim" because their internal
eidus was contradictory. As such AFAIK their eidus is passul. But RG
said they simply were mistaken

In the second R Dosa b Hyrcanos says Sheqer re: the moon's
disappearance...

This is how I understand P'shat:

This mihsnah is saying RG took very "flaky" eidim and accepted their
edus because of his cheshbon, something that comes accross to me as
"The ends justify the means" in that ?wink wink? the eidim were really not
solid eidim but RG "heard what he wanted to hear and disregarded the rest"

And no one defended his tactic! R Aqiva only defended his Authority to
"pull shtick" [so to speak] because what's done is done even be'ta'us.

No one defended him by saying : "RG was simply someich on palginan
dibbura" etc.

Technically the eidim gave a piece of emes but the on the whole the
eidus was really passul as "eidei sheqer heim"

Thus, RG arrived at a correct verdict by dubious means. And afaik no one
defended his tactics, only they told R Yehoshua not to deviate from the
results lest we break up into sects. IOW we cannot have two calendars
even if RG was "playing fast and loose"

Limmud z'chus:
Now RG might have felt compelled to get in the qiddush Hachodesh "on
time" and extenuating curcumstances may have pressed him to pull this
"fast one.". So there is room to be melamed zechus, But his colleagues
did. not seem to do so. Only later generations were more forgiving

My 2 Cents

PS See artscroll yad avraham RH 2:8 [P. 53 in old edition]

Although RG knew they could not have seen the moon on both occassions..

Also see above that the Aruch Laner that states "New moon is never
visible in the morning"

GS
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
> SBA wrote:
>> Has anyone ever seen a siddur (or indeed any reference to)
>> pre-WW2 which mentions "modah"?

> Good point, but beware: If one goes back *too* far, he'll be in an era
> of siddurim which had no printed vowels.

AFAIK the earliest printed siddurim have vowels.  And I don't think modeh
ani itself existed before printing.

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

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 01:38:50PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
: AFAIK the earliest printed siddurim have vowels.  And I don't think modeh
: ani itself existed before printing.

As I wrote a number of times, I agree. I also gave the suggested origin,
a replacement for that part of E-lokai Neshamah (not "netzor", thanks)
after the berakhah got moved from a waking up ritual to part of
Shacharis.

To say something new:
The oldest source for Modeh Ani is Seder haYom, a siddur written by R'
Moshe ibn Makhir miTzefas in 1599. Despite his name, RMiMmS was in Venice
at the time.

See Halikhos Shelomo ch 2, RSZA advises women to say "Modah". R' Chaim
Kanievsky does as well. Still working on the source for the Gra...

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
mi...@aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

From: rabbirichwol...@gmail.com

> Has anyone ever seen a siddur (or indeed any reference to) pre-WW2 which
> mentions "modah"?
> SBA

AIUI Yekkes and Sephardim did follow the diqduq of modah for females
long before WWII.
++

Any proof  - in print?

SBA

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 1450 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091114/8302300c/attachment-0001.bin>

There is a book entitled "tefillat nashim" by aliza lavi

It is a collection ofprayers written by or for women over the ages.
The first prayer in the book begins

modis ani lefanecha elokai al kol hachesed ...

the exact version is from Italy about 200 years but she traces
similar versions to the middle ages.
Note that it begins in the feminine (modis) but different than modern Hebrew.
Other prayers also use the feminine

The author spoke recently in our town and mentioned that over 100,000
copies have
seen sold.
She told a story about a phone call she received from the Belz
rebbetzin. She remarked
that she was surprised to get a phone call from Belz. The rebbetzin
responded that she
was also surprised to call but that enough women in the kehila had bought the
book that they wanted a meeting

-- 
Eli Turkel

"When Rabbi Eleazer Landau, the grandson of the Noda beYehudah
permitted a man who was on his deathbed to write a get, to avoid
agunah problems on 2nd day Yom Tov"

Excuse my ignorance, but it seems this fellow was so sickly that he was
unlikely to make it through the day, and anyway, where was he going if he
did manage another few hours or days?

With all these witnesses around, what was the Agunah problem?


Martin Brody
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20091114/f3ee8e2a/attachment-0001.htm>

martin brody wrote:
> "When Rabbi Eleazer Landau, the grandson of the Noda beYehudah
> permitted a man who was on his deathbed to write a get, to avoid
> agunah problems on 2nd day Yom Tov"
>  
> Excuse my ignorance, but it seems this fellow was so sickly that he was 
> unlikely to make it through the day, and anyway, where was he going if 
> he did manage another few hours or days?
>  
> With all these witnesses around, what was the Agunah problem?

He may have had no children, and a brother whose location was unknown or
who was a minor, or an apikores or meshumad who could be expected to
refuse chalitza.

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

 
From: menucha _m...@inter.net.il_ (mailto:m...@inter.net.il) 




>>For those, who were surprised that I was surprised at the  artscroll 
women's siddur use of Modeh, thinking that moda was more in their  "not 
modern" type nusach, remember that artscroll did put the brackets  around 
the "male bits" in Tefilla Zaka.   <<
menucha




>>>>>>
 
I always have the feeling, when saying Tefila Zaka, that whoever composed  
it never imagined that it would be recited by women.  Actually most  years I 
skip most of it, except for the one paragraph I want to be sure to  say  
("I forgive everybody.....") (And then I always pause for a  second before 
saying "Ani mochel" -- wondering every year for just one second if  I should 
"fix" the grammar....)
 
PS  Putting in brackets is not the same as changing words!   Although the 
use of punctuation  _is_ refreshingly modern....
 

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



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



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-ai
shdas.org/attachments/20091114/942ab7c0/attachment.htm>

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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 229
***************************************

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..."