Volume 52 Number 17
Produced: Fri Jun 16 6:17:44 EDT 2006
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Kaddish D'rabbanim
[Jack Gross]
Kedusha to Yerushalyim Shel Zahav
[SBA]
New Web Resource: Rav Kook, Art and Education
[Jeffrey Saks]
Question About Logic and Eternity
[Ava Guerrero]
Translations
[Ari Trachtenberg]
Twin Bar Mizvah Boys
[<rubin20@...>]
Women again...
[Freda B Birnbaum]
Women saying kaddish (4)
[Joel Rich, SBA, SBA, Avi Feldblum]
Yerushalyim Shel Zahav
[Gilad J. Gevaryahu]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jack Gross <jbgross@...>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:28:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Kaddish D'rabbanim
From: SBA <sba@...>
> IIANM, Kaddish Derabonon should be said only after a Dvar Agada - rather
> than following Halacha or Mishna/gemara.
>
> That is why you'll ususally hear the magid shiur say 'Reb Chananya ben
> Akashya omer etc" - so that the previous studying [of whatever]
> qualifies for the Kaddish derabonon.
An Agada that quotes a verse with shem Hashem is always selected. I
believe it is to provide an explicit referent for "Shemeh" ("His name"),
and not because teaching of Halacha is insufficient reason for reciting
the Kaddish.
Similarly, edot hamizrach add verses that speak of G'd's *name* (Yehi
shem...; Uvaruch shem kevodo) before certain instances of Kaddish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: SBA <sba@...>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 19:57:48 +1000
Subject: Kedusha to Yerushalyim Shel Zahav
From: Ken Bloom
> I've seen at several different Sepharadi synagogues, that the chazan and
> the kehilla sing "hu eloheinu" in the Musaf Kedusha to the melody of
> "Yerushalyim Shel Zahav". How did this minhag take hold? Was the melody
> first used for Kedusha or for Yerushalyim Shel Zahav?
YSZ was composed in 1967 after the 6-Day war.
SBA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jeffrey Saks <atid@...>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 21:02:30 +0200
Subject: New Web Resource: Rav Kook, Art and Education
Iyyunei Omanut
As part of ATID's Art Initiative, we are pleased to bring you an archive of
discussions and learning sessions exploring the world of Rav Avraham Yitzhak
HaKohen Kook zt"l and how his teachings shed light on the place of art and
creativity in religious life and Jewish education.
Three new sessions have been added on the topics of Creativity and
Authenticity, the Individual, and the Religious Lifestyle. (Exploring
sections of Rav Kook's Orot HaKodesh and Ayn Ayah.)
Listen online, or download the audio sessions and accompanying texts:
http://www.atid.org/resources/art/ravkook.asp
Rabbi Jeffrey Saks
Director, ATID
<atid@...> * www.atid.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ava Guerrero <ava.square@...>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:32:02 +0800
Subject: Question About Logic and Eternity
I agree that God is logical and He cannot do things which are illogical.
My question now is this, is His existence logical? Though my mind's
telling me it's impossible for nothing to create something because it's
NOTHING, I also cannot comprehend what makes something going on forever.
Why is the existence of SOMETHING possible? What makes God eternal? Why
is He eternal? Why is He self-sustaining? Or self-existing? To put it
simply, why does God exist?
I'm sorry if my question is a bit gobbled but I hope you could answer
them for me.
[Any adequate exposition in response to the above is may require
discourse well beyond what email is set to handle, I suspect. The best
responses are likely to be pointers to books that deal with this
issue. Mod]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ari Trachtenberg <trachten@...>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:47:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Translations
From: SBA <sba@...>
> Good point.
> (Similar - being maavir sidra 'shnayim mikra ve'echod targum' is a Din.
In the spirit of keeping mail-jewish accessible, could you please
explain?
Thanks, -Ari
Ari Trachtenberg, Boston University
http://people.bu.edu/trachten mailto:<trachten@...>
[Reviewing the weekly portion of the Torah, twice in the Hebrew and once
with the "targum" / translation, usually identified as Targum
Unkalos. There is also an opinion / tradition that does it with the
Greek translation, the Septuagint. Recently there have been moves to
replace the "targum" with learning the Rashi on the pasuk. Mod.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <rubin20@...>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:05:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Twin Bar Mizvah Boys
> question;twin bar mizvah boys who are going to be bar mizvah on the same
> shabbos and where both boys want to say the entire haftorah with the
> brachos. what is the halachic method to accomplish this.
Rav Moshe Fienstien has a Tshuvah in which he allowes a minyan to go out
while the first boy recites the Haftorah, and then come in for the
second boy the read the Haftorah
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Freda B Birnbaum <fbb6@...>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:23:54 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Women again...
SBA asks:
>> Having said that I used to return home and chap a few hours sleep ready
>> to look after my children while my wife went to shul.<<
>
> You have ANY source that require or even suggest that women should learn
> (or say Tikun Leil Shovuos - which BTW was the original idea/minhag) on
> Shovuos night?
Do you have any source that says they are not permitted to?
Avi already replied very nicely to:
> Does anyone disagree that in a case where there is no son - paying a
> needy Jew to say a kaddish or 2 and learn a mishna daily - would bring
> the merit of Torah, Avodah and gemilas chasodim to the niftar.
It seems to me that the big mitzvah here is the tzedakah and making it
something you are paying him for (giving him a job rather than
"charity"). As Avi noted, the issue of women saying kaddish is
distinct.
And the 99.99% figures are off nowadays. It's already quite accepted in
many places that women say Kaddish.
And they ask why BTs go "off the derech"... how much of this
oppositional stuff do women have to put up with, anyway?
Freda Birnbaum
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joel Rich <JRich@...>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 06:13:59 -0400
Subject: Re: Women saying kaddish
>> Does anyone disagree that in a case where there is no son - paying a
>> needy Jew to say a kaddish or 2 and learn a mishna daily - would bring
>> the merit of Torah, Avodah and gemilas chasodim to the niftar.
>
>In the case where there is a son, would "paying a needy Jew to say a
>kaddish or 2 and learn a mishna daily bring the merit of Torah, Avodah
>and gemilas chasodim to the niftar"? If yes, then I would clearly agree
>that doing so with no son would also bring that merit.
IMHO the answer to this question turns on whether the R' Akiva story
where he teaches the son implies that it's the father/son or
parent/child relationship which is key. I don't know if this is
discussed anywhere' I've not seen it.
KT
joel rich
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: SBA <sba@...>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 22:36:34 +1000
Subject: Women saying kaddish
From: SBA <sba@...>
I suppose it depends on the type of woman SAS was referring to.
[SBA, by SAS did you mean to say RAS = Rav Aaron Solovietchik? Mod.]
Yes. Apologies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: SBA <sba@...>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 01:38:22 +1000
Subject: Women saying kaddish
From: Avi Feldblum <feldblum@...>
>> Does anyone disagree that in a case where there is no son - paying a
>> needy Jew to say a kaddish or 2 and learn a mishna daily - would bring
>> the merit of Torah, Avodah and gemilas chasodim to the niftar.
>
>In the case where there is a son, would "paying a needy Jew to say a
>kaddish or 2 and learn a mishna daily bring the merit of Torah, Avodah
>and gemilas chasodim to the niftar"? If yes, then I would clearly agree
>that doing so with no son would also bring that merit.
I have no doubt that even with a son it merits the niftar to do all that
[and any other mitzva or limud Torah - le'ilui nishmoso]. But
additionally sons have a halachic requirement to say Kaddish the first
year and upon the yarzeit in following years.
> I'm not clear that this question has any relevance to the question of
> whether or under what circumstances it is a positive (or neutral)
> halachic activity for a daughter to say Kaddish for a parent. If it is
> a positive halachic activity, and she desires to do so, then it would
> seem to me that she should be allowed to do so.
The fact that the Shulchan Aruch does not require women to do so,
obviously shows that it is not even a matter of 'reshus' - and
definitely not a preferred course of action - otherwise the Shulchan
Aruch would use its standard "baal(as) Nefesh Yachmir al atzmo".
(BTW, thousands of Jews who DO have sons nevertheless sign up with
organizations like Kolel Shomrei Hachomos in Jm. These offer various
levels of enrolment. Eg kaddish and mishnayos the entire 1st year after
petireh, keeping the yahrzeit similarly - 'ad bias hagoel' etc. This
service has been available for about 150 years resulting on members
having Kaddish and Mishnayos zechusim even a century after their
passing.)
>If it is a negative halachic activity, she should be discouraged from
>doing so.
I am no rav or posek, but would suggest that whilst the saying of
kaddish in itself may not be a negative [as some other 20th century
'inventions'], innovating new halachos and minhagim may indeed be
considered negative development. Al titosh toras imecho. And I have no
doubt that in the strictly observant/charedi world if a rav is asked -
he will reply with a flat 'no'.
We should remember that our female ancestors were no less emotional and
heartbroken at the passing of their parents, but AFAIK rarely did one
consider saying kaddish.
>If it is a neutral halachic activity, it needs to be balanced with
>other community implications and the call made by the LOR.
That was, more or less, what I wrote in my previous post - regarding
those women who are not [yet?] prepared to fully accept and follow our
halachos and minhagim of old.
SBA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Avi Feldblum <feldblum@...>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006
Subject: Re: Women saying kaddish
SBA, part of my point is that what is "obvious" to you, and may indeed
be the "obvious" position of the charedi world, it is not so clearly
obvious to many of us in the non-charedi world. I think one of the lines
in your response above is crucial to the difference in opinion. You
write:
> innovating new halachos and minhagim may indeed be considered negative
> development. Al titosh toras imecho.
Along with that is the statement that is the Shulchan Aruch did not
explicitly discuss and permit something, then the assumption is that
doing that activitiy is a negative or forbidden activity. A related
premise is that if something has been done in a certain way for many
years it is assumed to have halachic validity / value.
However, there are groups within the rubric of haalchic observance that
take a different approach. Halachic change does occur and has been
occuring over the last 1000 years. There are many things we do/follow
today that are different from what was common in the time of Rambam and
Rashi. There have been sociatal changes during the last 50 years, and
how to respond to those is a fundimental difference between some of the
different Halachic communities.
While you take the approach that if the Shulchan Aruch does not say that
women should or are allowed to say Kaddish, that drives that women
should NOT be allowed / encouraged to say Kaddish, others take the
approach that since the Shulchan Aruch does not say that it is forbidden
for women to say Kaddish, then we are free to examine that question and
come to our own halachic conclusion of the value of that activity.
There does not appear to be any disagreement that there is a halachic
status to a son to say Kaddish for a parent during the 11 months
following the death of the parent. That is not in a disagreement that I
have heard here, at least. The sources, as far as I understand, clearly
see that as having some level of benefit for the niftar / the departed
parent. I think that it is also clear to me and I think many others,
that the activity also has impact on the son. The nature of this impact
is likely different for different individuals, but is often an integral
portion of the mourning and healing process.
There also appears to be a view, and understanding the sources that
support this would be of interest, that someone other than a son who
says Kaddish for a departed person also imparts merit / benefit to the
deceased. SBA refers to one such organization, Kolel Shomrei Hachomos,
who do this activity.
This then lays the groundwork for the halachic discussion concerning
women saying Kaddish for their parents. This is an activity that the
Shulchan Aruch does not discuss, so there is no requirement for them to
do this, but also no clear prohibition for them to do this. The
activity, for many people, is one that would act as a positive part of
their mourning and healing process. At the same time, even though there
is no requirement, if there is merit to a stranger saying Kaddish for
the departed, then there should be at least an equal merit to the
departed for a non-obligated relative to say kaddish, e.g. a daughter.
The fundimental question then becomes, in my opinion, how one views the
interplay between the social /halachic desire to minimize change vs
viewing the social / halachic value of any given change. The total
social environment today is different from what it was 150 years
ago. Choosing to allow / encourage women to say Kaddish moves the social
/ halachic fabric in one direction, prohibiting / discouraging women
from saying Kaddish moves (or one may look at it as preventing movement)
in the other direction. Different halachic communities come up with
different answers to what the greater halachic good is.
In general, the charedi community tends to try and preserve / recreate
the social / halachic fabric that mimics what was the existance 150
years ago. One impact of that, as Freida indicates, is that there is a
portion of the women of the community that will not accept that. There
is no question that there are many, clearly a majority, that fully
accept the charedi philosophical approach. However, for those that do
not, these topics are of critical interest, and a different approach
allows many of them to find a halachic community that they find better
suited to their needs.
Avi
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <Gevaryahu@...> (Gilad J. Gevaryahu)
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:21:41 EDT
Subject: Yerushalyim Shel Zahav
Ken Bloom (MJv52n16) asks:
> I've seen at several different Sepharadi synagogues, that the chazan
> and the kehilla sing "hu eloheinu" in the Musaf Kedusha to the melody
> of "Yerushalyim Shel Zahav". How did this minhag take hold? Was the
> melody first used for Kedusha or for Yerushalyim Shel Zahav?>>
Neither one of the alternatives is right. "The song Jerusalem of Gold
(Yerushalyim shel Zahav) was not an original creation of its composer,
Naomi Shemer, but a copy of a Basque lullaby... " See and listen to the
original at http://www.eibar.org/blogak/luistxo/en/359
Gilad J. Gevaryahu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 52 Issue 17