Volume 25 Number 94
Produced: Fri Jan 31 6:54:31 1997
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Appropriated names
[Yitzchok Adlerstein]
Bentching Gomel for a Child
[Carl and Adina Sherer]
Converting Aron Kodesh to Other Use
[Mottel Gutnick]
Judaism - The Only Religion With A Mass Revelation?
[David Brotsky]
Name Correction
[Carl Sherer]
Names of Sforim
[Carl Sherer]
Titles of Works re-used
[Avraham Reiss]
Tzemach Tzedek
[Eli Clark]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yitzchok Adlerstein <yadler@...>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:33:26 -0800
Subject: Appropriated names
David Glasner wrote:
>Does anyone know of another instance in which the title of a famous work
>by an earlier author has been appropriated by a later one?
One of the earliest modern "critics" of rabbinic Judaism (back in the
halcyon days when such critics ate only glatt) was Azarya de Rossi (or, Min
HaAdomim as he was called in Hebrew) of the 16th century. Maharal's Be'er
HaGolah was written as a strong response to de Rossi's charges, all
contained in his Meor Einayim.
Somehow, when the Chernobyler Rebbe wrote his work on Chumash in the
middle of the 19th century, he adopted the same name for his work.
I learned this the hard way. Years ago, I ordered a copy of Meor
Einayim during the famous annual YU Seforim sale. I was puzzled when I
received a work of Chassidic derush. It was the best mistake I ever
made. De Rossi's work would have taken up space on my shelf as an
historical oddity; the Chernoblyler's derush is now some of my favorite
and most-often used.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl and Adina Sherer <sherer@...>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:08:21 +0200
Subject: Bentching Gomel for a Child
This Dvar Torah is largely based upon an article by Rav Moshe Linder
shlita, which is entitled "Birkas HaGomel al Bno Katan" (bentching
gomel on one's child who has not reached the age of majority) which
is in the Sefer Mizmor L'Thoda at Page 67. I have not translated word
for word, and any mistakes are strictly mine. I'd like to publicly thank
R. Jonathan Taub of Har Nof for obtaining the sefer for me.
The Shulchan Aruch in OH 219:1 quotes the Gemara in Brachos 54b which
states, "Four [people] are obligated to say thanks. Those who go
down into the sea when they come out of it, those who cross the
desert when they reach civilization, one who was ill and was healed,
and one who was in jail and was released." In s'if 9 of the same
Siman, the Shulchan Aruch adds that these four are not the only ones,
"but also anyone for whom a miracle was performed, such as if a wall
fell upon him, or he was saved from being trampled or gored by an ox,
or if a lion tried to eat him in the city, or if burglars came to him
and he was saved from them, and other similar matters."
Even if a child under the age of majority fell into one of the four
categories of those who have to bentch gomel, nevertheless he does
not do so. (Mishna Brura 219 at note 3). When I
asked our LCP (local competent posek) this question last summer, he
told me that the reason a child does not bentch gomel is that a child
cannot say the text of the bracha - "HaGomel l'chayavim tovos
shegmalani kol tov" (he who grants those are liable good things, who
has done all good for me) - because a child, as is well known, is not
punished for his/her aveiros; things that happen to a child are the
parents' punishment, and it would be chutzpa for the child to refer
to his/her parents as "chayavim" (liable, i.e. for aveiros - sins).
One could ask a question here from the Gemara in Brachos 54b. The
Gemara relates the following story: Rav Yehuda was ill and became
well again. Rav Chana from Baghdad and the Rabbis came to visit him.
They said to him "blessed is Hashem who gave you to us and did not
render you dust of the earth". Rav Yehuda answered, "you have
relieved me of my obligation to thank Hashem." The Gemara asks,
didn't Abaye say that thanks must be given before ten people? The
Gemara says that there were ten people there. The Gemara then asks,
but he himself (Rav Yehuda) did not thank Hashem, and the Gemara
answers that he said Amen.
We see from this Gemara that there is a concept of someone bentching
gomel for someone else. If this is the case, if one's son has a
miracle performed for him, is he obligated to bentch gomel for his
son? Should he bentch gomel for him? May he bentch gomel for him?
The side for saying that the father should bentch gomel for his son
is that a miracle has been performed for which the son, if he has not
reached the age of majority, is unable to thank Hashem. If this is
the case, should someone else, i.e. the father, thank Hashem? On the
other hand, if the miracle did not happen to the father, how can the
father make the bracha? Isn't that a bracha levatala (a needless bracha)?
The Mishna Brura in Siman 219 Note 18 writes that the permission to
bentch gomel for someone else is limited to someone whose recovery one
is happy about, but one should not bentch gomel for another person just
out of darchei shalom (ways of peace, politeness). The Mishna Brura
then cites the Biur Halacha, which indicates that there are some - the
Beis Yosef and the Eliyahu Rabba amongst others - who indicate that this
rule is limited to bentching gomel for one's father and one's Rebbe (Rav
Yehuda was the Rebbe of Rav Chanan from Baghdad in the story in the
Gemara) and that therefore it is proper not to make the blessing for
anyone else other than his father's or his Rebbe's recovery.
More explicitly, the Biur Halacha brings in the name of the Birkei
Yosef, that a father should not bentch gomel for his son who fell
into a pit and was saved. And from the Birkei Yosef's source it
appears that the son involved was not over the age of majority, i.e.
he could not make the bracha himself. Yet one could argue from the
rule of Birkas HaNes (the blessing on a miracle) that it should not
be so, for it says in Shulchan Aruch OH 218:4 that a child who sees a
place where a miracle was performed for his father makes a blessing,
and the Mishna Brura at Note 16 comments that this applies whether or
not the child was born before the miracle occurred. In other words,
the child makes the blessing, not because he owes his existence to
this miracle, but out of love for his father. And if this is the
case, why should the father not bentch gomel for a child who was ill
and recovered out of love for the child?
From this point, Rav Linder reaches the conclusion that a father should
bentch gomel if his son was R"L a choleh sheyeish bo sakono (a seriously
ill person) and recovered. However, our LCP has ruled that I should not
bentch gomel for Baruch Yosef, and therefore I will not be doing so. We
will, however, bli neder, be making a Kiddush next Shabbos (Parshas
Mishpatim) in honor of Baruch Yosef's continuing recovery, and anyone
who is in or around Ramat Shlomo (I only know of one other Mail Jewish
subscriber who lives in the neighborhood) is welcome to attend.
Adina and I would like to publicly thank all of the people who have
davened and learned for Baruch Yosef (including all those who dedicated
mj posts to his recovery - I have tried, often unsuccessfully, to
remember to write thank you notes to each of you privately, so please
accept this public thanks instead). In your merit his recovery
continues. I should add that our new signature line was written at the
suggestion of a LCP.
-- Carl Sherer
Thank you for davening for our son, Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya. Please
keep him in mind for a healthy, long life.
Carl and Adina Sherer
<sherer@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mottel Gutnick <MottelG@...>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:32:44 AEDT
Subject: Converting Aron Kodesh to Other Use
I belong to a small, relatively new congregation and we are about to
purchase a piece of furniture that will serve as our first "Ark."
Because of the temporary nature of our present premises, it is likely
that this will, in future, be replaced by a permanent, inbuilt
structure. Is anyone aware of any halachic problem we may then face in
using the old ark for either a lower-status purpose (in terms of the
holiness attached to the object), such as a bookcase, or for a
completely secular purpose?
Mottel Gutnick, Australia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <DaveTrek@...> (David Brotsky)
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:01:39 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Judaism - The Only Religion With A Mass Revelation?
A friend was involved in editing a book entitled Permission to Receive:
A Rational Approach to the Torah's Divine Origin by Lawrence
Keleman(Targum). The aim of the book is to demonstrate that a person
who wishes to believe that the Torah is the result of a single
non-continuous Divine revelation to Moshe and the Jewish people of the
desert generation need not sacrifice rationality in order to do so; that
rather, such a person is on solid intellectual ground and thereby has
PERMISSION (but not a obligation) to believe, such as would be mandated
by "logical proof".
One of the main arguments was that Judaism is the only religion with a
"MASS REVELATION". This refers to Har Sinai when Hashem communicated a
portion of the Aseret Hadibrot (Ten Commandments) directly to Bnai
Yisrael. Such a "mass revelation" would tend to give a religion more
validity in a histroric context, since it relies on many peoples
recollections of a common event, as opposed to having only one or two
people experiencing a communication from G-d. For this to transmitted
down to our day means that either many people conspired a long time ago
to fake such a revelation or there is some 'objective' truth to the
incident, outside of the text itself. I do not wish to debate the merits
of this argument here. Rather, my question is, is Judaism the only such
religion that has a record of such a 'mass revelation'? The author of
the book maintains that Judaism is the only religion in history with
such a 'mass revelation' to a named, clearly identified people, such as
Bnai Yisrael. Is this true? As a sidenote, Hinduism has a tradition
relating to 'mass revelation' by a group of warriors, but they were all
killed as part of the revelation. Obviously, this has no value in the
current discussion, since by definition no one could attest to the
validity of the mass revelation if everyone who received it died right
afterwards.
David Brotsky
BILUBI - The Religious Zionists Young Professionals Group In NY
Check Out Our Website At http://www.echonyc.com/~ericg/bilubi
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Sherer <sherer@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 01:27:15 +0200
Subject: Name Correction
Someone wrote:
> Rav Yosef(?) Rubin of Har Nof, ( a known ben-bayit of Rav Shlomo
> Zalman ZT"L - He has generally been considered a reliable source of
> psakim of Rav Auerbach) wrote a teshuva printed in Hamoriah
> (approximately Cheshvan 5752) differentiating between metal and
> plastic bottle caps.
I assume you mean Rav Yitzchak Mordechai Rubin shlita, the Moreh D'Asra of
Congregation Kehillas Ashkenaz in Har Nof.
-- Carl Sherer
Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.
Carl and Adina Sherer
<sherer@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Sherer <sherer@...>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 01:27:16 +0200
Subject: Names of Sforim
David Glasner asks:
> Does anyone know of another instance in which the title of a famous
> work by an earlier author has been appropriated by a later one?
Here are a few based upon Artscroll's Rishonim book from their history
series:
Sefer HaZikaron by the Ritva (refuting the Ramban's criticisms of the
Rambam's philosophical works) and by R. Yosef Kimchi (father of the
Radak, who lived about 200 years earlier - this sefer is about Hebrew
grammar).
Menoras HaMaor by R. Yitzchak Abohab (on Aggadot - parables - in the
Gemara) and by R. Yitzchak al- Nakavah (on ethics - both were fourteenth
century but R. al-Nakavah was first).
Tzofnas Paneach by R. Yosef Gikatilla (1248-1310 - sefer on the
Hagadah), by R. Yosef Tuv Elem (1320-1390 - commentary on Ibn Ezra's
commentary on the Torah) and by the Ravan (1090-1170 - responsa on
Shulchan Aruch Even HaEzer).
Amongst others, Artscroll lists two Arugas HaBosem's, four (!) Shaar
HaShamayim's and two Tashbetz's.
This phenomenon is apparently quite common.
-- Carl Sherer
Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.
Carl and Adina Sherer
<sherer@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Avraham Reiss <areiss@...>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:35:12 +0200
Subject: Re: Titles of Works re-used
>Does anyone know of another instance in which the title of a famous work
>by an earlier author has been appropriated by a later one?
>David Glasner
Try "Mishneh Torah", original author Moses son of Amram,
appropriated by Moses son of Maimon
Avraham Reiss
Jerusalem,
Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eli Clark <ECLARK@...>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:51:23 -0500
Subject: Tzemach Tzedek
In Vol. 25 No. 89, David Glasner wrote:
>The attribution of this teshuvah quoted in the Shevut Yaakov to R.
>Menahem Mendel (the third Lubavitcher Rebbe) is clearly problematic
>since R. Menachem Mendel was born around 1790 and, according to
>Eli, the Shevut Yaakov was written in the late seventeenth or early
>eighteenth centuries.
>The more likely source for the Shevut Yaakov was the original book of
>responsa published under the name Tzemach Tzedek which was
>published in the seventeenth century by R. Yom Tov Lipman Heller,
>nowadays known as the Tosafot Yom Tov, who as it happens was
>also from Prague. But at least until the nineteenth century the Tosafot
>Yom Tov was also widely known not only as the Tosafot Yom Tov, but
>as the Tzemach Tzedek.
>However, the name Tzemach Tzedek has since pretty well become the
>exclusive possession of Lubavitch.
>Does anyone know of another instance in which the title of a famous
>work by an earlier author has been appropriated by a later one?
I appreciate Mr. Glasner's remarks regarding R. Yom Tov Lippman Heller.
However, R. Heller was not the author of the Tzemah Tzedek which I
quoted in my earlier post. Rather, the author was, as I originally
indicated, R. Menahem Mendel Krokhmal. R. Krokhmal was born in 1660 and
died in 1661. He was a student of R. Yoel Sirkes, better known as the
Bah. For 11 years, R. Krokhmal was the Landesrabbiner (chief rabbi) of
Moravia. His responsa, titled Tzemah Tzedek, was first published in
Amsterdam in 1675, with addenda written by his son, R. Aryeh Yehudah
Leib.
The third Lubavitcher rebbe, who also authored a work named Tzemah
Tzedek, is generally referred to as Menahem Mendel Schenerson, making
him the namesake of the last Lubavitcher rebbe. To my knowledge, he was
not related to Menahem Mendel Krokhmal.
In response to Mr. Glasner's query, many titles have been appropriated
by later authors from earlier ones. Some popular titles that have been
used at least three times include "Sefer ha-Yashar" and "Menorat
ha-Maor." Also R. Yehoshua Falk, author of the Penei Yehoshua, took
that title from the responsa collection authored by his grandfather.
Regards,
Eli
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 25 Issue 94
