Volume 51 Number 50
Produced: Wed Mar 8 6:15:15 EST 2006
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Credit for Thought without deed
[Martin Stern]
Jewish Calendar
[Ari Trachtenberg]
Jewish vs. non-Jewish Calendars (3)
[Asher Grossman, Mike Gerver, Shayna Kravetz]
Mezuza at work
[I. Balbin]
Reading Aloud Of The Ten Sons Of Haman (2)
[Elazar M. Teitz, Russell J Hendel]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 20:54:19 +0000
Subject: Credit for Thought without deed
Various posters have queried my claim that the mitsvah of pru urvu
basically involves making the effort rather than achieving the result of
at least one child of each sex capable themselves of having
children. Perhaps I should have been slightly clearer in what I wrote
and made a distinction between kiyum hamitsvah, fulfilment of the
mitsvah, and being mevatel aseh by not fulfilling that minimal
requirement. What I meant was that someone who made every effort to
fulfil it but did not do so cannot be held to be mevatel aseh since that
depends on factors entirely beyond his control. Whether this distinction
would apply to other mitsvot would depend on their nature and to what
extent external factors are involved.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ari Trachtenberg <trachten@...>
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 10:21:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Jewish Calendar
From: Nathan Lamm <nelamm18@...>
> In a few thousand years, Pesach will fall in the wrong season, to take
> one example. May Jewish unity arrive well before then.
My understanding is that Jewish calendar is properly defined past the
year 6000 (e.g. with respect to what years are leap years, etc), so that
it is not really possible to talk about Pesach in a few thousand years,
except maybe by extrapolation.
Ari Trachtenberg, Boston University
http://people.bu.edu/trachten mailto:<trachten@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Asher Grossman <asherg@...>
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 00:10:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Jewish vs. non-Jewish Calendars
In response to my post, Mike Gerver wrote:
This is confusing two different things. The need to add leap
seconds has nothing to do with the accuracy of the calendar, but
is due to the fact that the length of the second is based on the
average rotation period of the earth in the year 1900 CE, and the
earth's rotation rate is slowing down due to tidal drag. You would
need to add the same leap seconds whether you were using the
Jewish or secular calendar, if you want your electric clock time
to continue to coincide with sundial time.
It is true that the fixed Jewish calendar is somewhat more
accurate, as far as the seasons of the year are concerned, than
the Julian calendar, but it is much less accurate than the
Gregorian calendar. The Julian calendar is off by 1 day in 128
years, the Jewish calendar is off by one day every 217 years, and
the Gregorian calendar is off by one day every 3200 years.
I stand corrected. I was speaking of the corrections taken at both the
time of the switchover from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar, and
those which are ongoing. While some of these corrections are due to the
change of the Earth's rotation, some of them are done to prevent the
inaccuracy built into the Gregorian calendar.
But the fixed Jewish calendar was not invented by Jews, it was
invented by the Greeks, who called it the Metonic calendar, after
the Greek astronomer Meton. The Jews adopted it when they needed a
fixed calendar, due to the collapse of the organized the community
in Eretz Yisrael in the fourth century CE, and their inability to
continue relying on a Beit Din to decide each year whether to add
an Adar Sheni.
I must take exception with this. If you look well into the Gemara on
Masechet Rosh Hashana, especially, pgs. 20-22, as well as the other
Sugyot that deal with Kiddush Hachodesh, you'll see that even at the
times when the Jewish calendar was set by visual sightings of the moon,
there was still a known set of calculations which the Beit Din followed.
In order to have this coincide with the visual sightings, they would
either station many witnesses in various places to see the new moon, or
might prevent witnesses from completing their testimony in time. (There
are many discussions in various sources explaining the reasons for this)
These calculations (known collectively as "Sod Ha'Ibur") far predated
either Ptolemy or Meton - as they were part of the Halachot of Kiddush
Hachodesh handed over to Moshe Rabbeinu.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <MJGerver@...> (Mike Gerver)
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 17:40:52 EST
Subject: Jewish vs. non-Jewish Calendars
Asher Grossman writes, in reply to my recent post in v51n47,
While some of these corrections [leap seconds] are due to the
change of the Earth's rotation, some of them are done to prevent
the inaccuracy built into the Gregorian calendar.
Leap seconds only deal with reconciling clock time to astronomical (e.g.
sundial) time. They wouldn't help with the inaccuracies of the Gregorian
calendar, which are due to having the wrong ratio of the year (defined
as the time from one vernal equinox to the next) to the day (defined as
the rotation period of the earth). To fix the inaccuracies of the
Gregorian calendar, you would have to remove a day somewhere about once
every 3200 years, for example make February only 28 days long in some
year where, according to the Gregorian calendar, it should be 29 days
long.
I also wrote in v51n47:
But the fixed Jewish calendar was not invented by Jews, it
was invented by the Greeks, who called it the Metonic
calendar, after the Greek astronomer Meton. The Jews adopted
it when they needed a fixed calendar, due to the collapse of
the organized the community in Eretz Yisrael in the fourth
century CE, and their inability to continue relying on a
Beit Din to decide each year whether to add an Adar Sheni.
and Asher replied:
I must take exception with this. If you look well into the Gemara
on Masechet Rosh Hashana, especially, pgs. 20-22, as well as the
other Sugyot that deal with Kiddush Hachodesh, you'll see that
even at the times when the Jewish calendar was set by visual
sightings of the moon, there was still a known set of calculations
which the Beit Din followed. In order to have this coincide with
the visual sightings, they would either station many witnesses in
various places to see the new moon, or might prevent witnesses
from completing their testimony in time. (There are many
discussions in various sources explaining the reasons for this)
These calculations (known collectively as "Sod Ha'Ibur") far
predated either Ptolemy or Meton - as they were part of the
Halachot of Kiddush Hachodesh handed over to Moshe Rabbeinu.
Sod Ha-Ibur has nothing to do with the Metonic calendar, which only
deals with the number of months in the year, i.e. the 19-year cycle,
with Adar Sheni added in 7 of those years. For purposes of deciding
whether to add an Adar Sheni, the Beit Din relied on a number of
factors, listed in perek 4 of Kiddush HaChodesh in the Rambam, but I am
not aware that they used the present 19-year cycle to calculate when the
equinox would be, for example. They might very well have, and if they
did, they might or might not have gotten the idea from Meton, but I am
not aware of any sources for this. And it would be easy enough to tell
when the vernal equinox was, by directly observing when the sun rises
due east and sets due west, so I don't think there would have been any
reason to calculate it many years in advance.
Sod Ha-Ibur does have to do with Ptolemy's value for the length of the
synodic month (i.e. the time from one new moon to the next). I don't
know whether the calculations made by the Beit Din, in order to decide
whether to accept eidim, were based on the same length of the synodic
month that is used now in the fixed Jewish calendar (and calculated by
Ptolemy), and in particular, whether that value was used all the way
back to Moshe Rabbeinu. There would have been no need to use such a
precise value, if they weren't setting up a fixed calendar that might
have to stay accurate for thousands of years. If all the Beit Din wanted
was to know, each month, when the ibbur would be, to within a fraction
of an hour, then it would suffice to use a much less precise value for
the length of the synodic month, and make corrections every few years
when there was a lunar eclipse visible, to keep things from drifting.
Mike Gerver
Raanana, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shayna Kravetz <skravetz@...>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 19:00:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Jewish vs. non-Jewish Calendars
After Asher Grossman wrote:
>> ... In many conversations with secular Jews in Israel, my father will
>> ask them: When is Yom Ha'Atzmaut? Roughly %95 have no clue! Mind you,
>> this is a National holiday - not a strictly religious one. Could you
>> imagine an American not knowing when is Independence Day?
David Charlap <shamino@...> replied:
>I suggest that most American's would not know the answer to that
>question. Most people never use the name "Independence Day" and always
>refer to it as "July 4th".
>
>Other American holidays (that are not referred to by date), like
>Presidents' Day, Memorial Day and Labor Day would similarly result in
>most Americans having to consult a calendar.
Not a fair analogy, I think, since all these holidays move with the
calendar and are fixed by the day of the week (e.g., first Monday in
September for Labor Day), rather than by a numerical date. And I've
certainly heard many Americans refer to July 4 as Independence Day.
Isn't that how it's marked on your calendars? Surely it would be a
tautology to have the note on the page for July 4 that read: "Holiday --
Fourth of July."
And, also in reply to Asher Grossman's exclamation above, Nathan Lamm
<nelamm18@...> writes:
>
>Well, I'd cut some slack, as the actual day varies depending on the day
>of the week.
It's always good to 'dan le-chaf z'chut' but I fear it's not quite
applicable here. Tisha b'Av is sometimes nidkheh from Shabbat to Sunday
and thus observed on 10 Av. We still manage to remember its date
<g>. Ta'anit Esther is sometimes pushed back from Erev Purim to the
Thursday previous. We still know that it's (mostly) on Adar 13. So I
don't see why the fact that occasionally Yom Ha-'Atzma'ut is nidkheh to
Sunday should make it impossible to remember its 'real' date of 5 Iyar,
other than the factors of poor education or lack of cultural
reinforcement for the idea of a fixed Jewish date on a separate Jewish
calendar.
Perhaps, since Pesach seems to still ring a bell, we should just say
it's three weeks after Erev Pesach. At least it's a day that people can
keep track of.
Kol tuv from
Shayna in Toronto
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: I. Balbin <isaac@...>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 09:39:08 +1100
Subject: Re: Mezuza at work
>> What are the halachic opinions about whether it is necessary to have
>> a mezuza on the doors of one's work place?
Please see
http://www.ottmall.com/mj_ht_arch/v12/mj_v12i10.html#CBW
where you can find my question of 12 years ago ((almost to the day :-)
and answer from Rav Elyashiv Shlita related to this
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Elazar M. Teitz <remt@...>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 19:07:39 GMT
Subject: Re: Reading Aloud Of The Ten Sons Of Haman
In posting on this topic, I mentioned in passing that a few words could
be read by heart. An off-list questioner pointed to the Mishna which
states that if one reads the m'gillah by heart, the obligation is not
fulfilled.
The answer is given in the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 690:3, and the
Mishnah B'rurah there. If the majority is read from the m'gillah, and
part is said by heart, the reading is valid after the fact, though it
_should_ all be read from the written m'gillah. Because it is valid, a
m'gillah with a mistake such as a missing word may be used in the
absence of a full one.
EMT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@...>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 19:30:24 -0500
Subject: RE: Reading Aloud Of The Ten Sons Of Haman
There is an 'obscure' obligation to read the 10 names of haman in one
breath. HOwever this obscure obligation does NOT OVERRIDE the obligation
to make sure the congregation hears all words.
So my advice if a person cannot read 10 names in one breath to a big
crowd is NOT TO EVEN TRY because the risk of not enunciating all words
to the congregation is greater than the merit of following this obscure
obligation.
I personally believe that the "real" reason the congregation says the 10
names is because they probably didnt fulfill their obligation thru
someone who botches them up.
That being said my practice is to practice....I stand in a field and try
and say (At Leining speed) the 10 names of Haman (By the way there are
several PAUSES (lines) which must also be observed!!!! I usually have
to practice an hour or so before I am ready.
I also advise people that if they a) can lein in one breath but b) do
not have time to pause at the official pause marks (Pasayk) then even c)
if they can enable the congregation to hear it then they should not even
attempt to do it.
Like everything else in Jewish law, Halachah consists of sets of
obligations which have to be weighed. We have three obligations a) make
sure the congregation hears every word b) make sure all cantillations
are sung correctly (pauses) c) follow the obscure law of saying in one
breath. Quite simply (a) and (b) take precedence over (c). A person can
"test" before hand if he has the lung capacity to do otherwise.
Russell Jay Hendel; http://www.Rashiyomi.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 51 Issue 50
