Volume 52 Number 52
Produced: Tue Jul 18 6:32:33 EDT 2006
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Aseh lekho rav
[Perets Mett]
Dalet vs Daled
[Lipman Phillip Minden]
Davening for Amud during Shana
[Aryeh A. Frimer]
Dealing with Multiple Minhagim (2)
[Carl Singer, Ira L. Jacobson]
Letters of the Alef-beys
[Perets Mett]
Molad of Tishrei
[Richard Fiedler]
Pesach Minhogim
[Perets Mett]
Vegetarianism/Veganism and R. Moshe
[o7532]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 09:05:24 +0100
Subject: Aseh lekho rav
Someone wrote:
> BTW who was the "personal posek" who authorized chassidut?
What exactly was there to 'authorise' ?
Greater devotion to mitsvos? Kavono in tfilo? These are things mandated
by the Shulchon Orukh
Why do so many contributors to this forum equate chasidus with ch"v some
Reform movement?
PM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Lipman Phillip Minden <phminden@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 09:17:38 +0200
Subject: Re: Dalet vs Daled
Just to complicate things (hehe), let me add that the names of some
letters in Western Ashkenez have retained the fricative pronunciation of
-dh (dales refuye), also in W Yiddish, for example in their function of
numbers. Most frequently, this is true for Yus (=10, you also have
derivations like 'e yusser' = "a tenner, i. e. a ten-whatever coin"
etc.), but also lames. Dales is more difficult because of the writing
DLT, which would result in 'dales' anyway. (In WA including colloquially
pronounced WA Hebrew, word-ending consonants are voiceless.)
I'm not sure where the writing with a final Dal-, er, you know what I
mean, comes from. It looks like this is a later writing, but I'm not
sure. At least the writing with a final T is old, as show the antique
puns with the word meaning "poverty".
To further complicate this, in the traditional Italian pronunciation,
the word-ending th (tav refuye) in daleth would be pronounced -d, so
both writings render 'daled', just as in WA, both render 'dales'.
About a year ago, there was some discussion on Avodah about this - topic
"dalet, daled".
Lipman Phillip Minden
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aryeh A. Frimer <frimea@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 09:35:53 +0300
Subject: Davening for Amud during Shana
> Searching for heter for a 12 month avel who has been davening Yom
> Kippur Mincha for a number of years to do so during his avelus. Need
> sources
> Dovid
The grounds are straightforward. If he has been davening for years
he may continue, if people would notice his absence, because otherwise
it would be aveilut be-farhessya.
For many years I would lead the dancing for Hakafot at our Shul in
Rehovot. During the 3 periods I was an Aveil I asked Rav Aharon
Lichtenstein whether I could continue to do so. He told me that if
people would notice my absence then it would be aveilut be-farhessya.
Kol Tuv
Aryeh
<FrimeA@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <casinger@...> (Carl Singer)
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 19:12:38 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: Dealing with Multiple Minhagim
From: Ira L. Jacobson
> <casinger@...> (Carl Singer) stated:
>
>> Rather than dig into the dirt pile, let me retell a contrasting story
>> that I heard from Rabbi Abraham Levene (of Lower Merion Synagogue.)
>> When his father retired to Israel, the congregation there consisted of
>> Jews from many different parts of Europe (the holy remnants of
>> European Jewry - if you want to be poetic.) They worked out a system
>> by which each shaliach tzibor davened the nusach that he had grown up
>> with - thus (in my words) an inclusive "rainbow" minhag.
>
> Several questions present themselves. If a visiting Yemenite who
> prayed Baladi nusah were to daven far'n omud, would they let him do so
> according to his own nusah? What about a plain Sefardi? What about a
> Lubavitcher? What about a Vizhnitzer? (They say Aleinu twice on a day
> where there is musaf.)
>
> Is there a halakhic justification for not having a fixed minhag in a
> shul that has the same population (more or less) day after day? This
> question does not refer to (and excludes) minyanim in bus stations and
> hospitals, for example.
Clearly the "bandwidth" was narrow -- but still some differences did
exist. I guess this goes back to a fundamental question -- that of
objective. Does one enter a situation and strive to make it work -- or
strive to derail it. Based on that initial objective / attitutude /
outlook -- whatever -- things can be made to work out -- just like some
Israeli congregations have a "mixed" kaddish -- with the nusach Ashkenas
Jews waiting a few moments so the nusach Sfard Jews can say their
additional wording. Clearly those involved have an objective of wanting
to make it work -- and have reached a solution. I cannot speak to the
halachic underpinnings.
Carl A. Singer, Ph.D.
www.ProcessMakesPerfect.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 08:33:04 +0300
Subject: Re: Dealing with Multiple Minhagim
I had asked, about a synagogue that lets the sheli'ah tzibbur choose the
nusah at each prayer:
If a visiting Yemenite who prayed Baladi nusah were to daven far'n
omud, would they let him do so according to his own nusah? What
about a plain Sefardi? What about a Lubavitcher? What about a
Vizhnitzer? (They say Aleinu twice on a morning where there is
musaf.)
Is there a halakhic justification for not having a fixed minhag in
a shul that has the same population (more or less) day after day?
This question does not refer to (and excludes) minyanim in bus
stations and hospitals, for example.
<casinger@...> responded with the following:
Clearly the "bandwidth" was narrow -- but still some differences
did exist.
I guess this goes back to a fundamental question -- that of
objective. Does one enter a situation and strive to make it work
-- or strive to derail it.
Isn't this is rather vague and subjective? How YOU want to make it work
may be different from how I want to make it work.
Based on that initial objective / attitutude / outlook -- whatever
-- things can be made to work out -- just like some Israeli
congregations have a "mixed" kaddish -- with the nusach Ashkenas
Jews waiting a few moments to the nusach Sfard Jews can say their
additional wording.
Referring to the individual (and not the sheli'ah tzibbur), R' Moshe
Feinstein says that one should recite the qaddish and qedusha of the
shul he is praying in. R' Shlomo Aviner cites this ruling and rules the
other way--that you recite your own qaddish and qedusha. Thus,
halakhically, one seems to have someone to rely on in either case. And
this in any event has little to do with whether or not the congregation
has even established (or adopted) a minhag. In bus stations (and many
army bases) in Israel, you may encounter just about any minhag,
depending on who is the sheli'ah tzibbur.)
Clearly those involved have an objective of wanting to make it
work -- and have reached a solution.
Regarding an established synagogue with no established minhag, I still
wonder whether there is a halakhic justification. I know that the first
person who revealed to me that such a phenomenon exists in the city I
had just moved in to, expressed his preference for a shul with a fixed
minhag, even if it was different from the one he himself uses.
IRA L. JACOBSON
mailto:<laser@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 08:42:36 +0100
Subject: Letters of the Alef-beys
Akiva wrote:
> Some readers might be surprised to see that he spells Tzadi as Tzadi
> Dalet Yod (and not as Tzadik, with a Kuf at the end), and Tav as Tav
> Yod Vav (and not as Taf, with a Feh at the end).
The letter called Tsadi in Hebrew is called Tsadik in Yiddish. The
letter Tov is pronounced Tof by many Yiddish speakers: devoicing of the
last sound in a word is common in Polish Yiddish.
[I don't believe anyone in the world says Taf]
PM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Richard Fiedler <richardfiedler@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 07:06:51 -0500
Subject: Molad of Tishrei
In September of 2002 the Molad of Tishrei happened on Shabbat 12 hours
and 982 helekim, which is the equivalent of Sat, 7 Sep, 2002 6:54
AM. The astronomical conjunction was Sat, 7 Sep, 2002 5:29 AM. Since
Rosh HaShanah began Friday night it seemed strange that Rosh HaShanah
would begin two days before there was any possibility of witnesses
sighting the New Moon. Indeed the Moslems started their New Month of
Rajab on Sunday Night.
I was interested in knowing just how often such an anomaly occurred so I
related Molads of Tishrei from 101 CE through 2100 with the astronomical
conjunction.
I was surprised to learn that the date calculated for the Rosh HaShanah
when the dehiyot are excluded is 75% of the time exactly as it was in
2002, two days before any possibility of witnesses. In fact the Hebrew
Calendar calculation always produces such a Rosh HaShanah at least one
day before it would have been possible for witnesses to testify to it.
Factoring this fact into the references in the:
Mishna Rosh HaShanah (19b): From the days of Ezra and onward we never
found Elul to be full.
Yerushalmi Rosh Hashana: There, they are concerned and observe the
fast of Yom Kippur for two days. Rav Chisdah asked them, "Why are you
concerned over such a far-fetched possibility? One can safely assume
that the court is not negligent in this regard."
Yerushalmi Rosh Hashana: Rabbi Hiya the Great walked by the light of
the old moon 4 miles. Rabbi Avon threw stones at (the old moon).
And said to it: "Do not upset the children of you Master (i.e., the
Jews), tonight we have to see you from this side (i.e., the new
moon), and you are seen from here (the old moon is still visible)",
Immediately it disappeared.
And cemented by the story of in the Bavli Rosh HaShanah of Rabban
Gamiel and R' Yehoshua an entire new understanding of the Jewish
Calendar emerges.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 09:01:54 +0100
Subject: Re: Pesach Minhogim
Andy Goldfinger wrote:
> This is a good question! The minhag comes from his father who
> followed Yerushalmi minhagim (for example, both his father and the
> Bostoner Rebbe wear gold on Yom Kippur). Beyond this, I do not have a
> good answer. I
The first Bostoner Rebbe (R' Pinchos Dovid) was born in Yerusholayim,
a scion of the Lelover dynasty which established itself there in 1850.
The wearing of a gold kaftan on Yom Kippur is a bit unusual. Yerushalmi
minhog is to wear gold on Shabbos and Sholosh Regolim. On Yomim Noroim
and Hoshano Rabo they wear a white kaftan (not a kitl).
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: o7532 <o7532@...>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 10:18:41 -0400
Subject: Vegetarianism/Veganism and R. Moshe
Nothing came up on a search but please ignore if this is a rehash of
some earlier vegetarianism discussion. Shortly after having viewed some
of the Peta website materials I ran across R. Moshe EH 4:92 on veal. At
face value it seemed that any line between raising veal, which if I
understand the response prohibits, and that of raising other factory
farm animals would be a hard one to draw.
The response appears to consider a number of types of tza'ar including
confinement, food deprivation, eating enjoyment deprivation, edible
animal yield, parent/young separation, and sickness. It is not clear if
these stand as independent or only cumulative considerations. One other
factor here was the kashrut risks inherent in the high trefot rate in
veal processing.
The response then counterbalances the tza'ar consideration with a number
of permitted tzorech types. These tzorech types seem to include
nutritional value and perhaps taste but seemingly not expense or
aesthetic value. One other factor was the deception practiced by the
producers misrepresenting veal as healthier than other meats. I wasn't
completely clear on how to read which factors were driving the
prohibition.
All told, the response prohibits raising veal and, for a ba'al nefesh,
discourages eating it, even when the calf clearly is not a trefah.
However, if the Peta and other militant vegetarian websites are to be
believed the conditions for veal are not at all or only marginally worse
on sustained tza'ar counts than for chickens and many other factory farm
animals. From the response it sounds that R. Moshe was only responding
to data provided to him and hadn't seen first hand the conditions for
calves or for other animals.
How does this response square with meat and dairy eating generally when
the actual process for the other animals seems almost identical to that
of calf processing. Is there a way not to draw the conclusion that had
R. Moshe been provided with accurate, complete and current data or would
have seen the conditions for other animals he would have been a
proponent of vegetarianism or veganism. Are there other overriding
ethical considerations in encouraging wholesale vegetarianism like the
inculcation or reflection of skewed values which Albo discusses, or
considerations of misplaced effort. Why does R. Moshe opt not to
categorize the promotion of tza'ar that eating veal would appear to be
as m'sayea or mizvah/heter haba'a b'avera, and prohibit not only raising
veal but eating it as well. If raising veal is prohibited why isn't the
general kashrut of veal producers impugned on grounds of violating a
de'oraita in the way that hillul Shabbat would impugn it. Is this a
case of g'zerah she'en rov hatzibur or a case of an actual de'oraita
with safek l'humra implications. In any case, with regard to veal why
does it seem that this response has been roundly ignored by producers
and by the community.
This particular response aside the issue of systemic tza'ar ba'le chayim
of factory farming only has arisen in the last century since of course
historically the vast majority of farm animals were free range or close
to it. On the other hand, the tzorech and relative nutritional
necessity or benefit of animal products has come under greater
scientific question with every passing decade. Is it possible that,
short of a free range alternative, the heter for eating meat simply does
not exist under the current reality and its seemingly dramatically
different tza'ar/tzorech balance. At the least it would appear that
meat eating should be viewed as a kula on par with other kulas.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 52 Issue 52
