Volume 56 Number 39
Produced: Mon Sep 8 5:25:55 EDT 2008
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Free Chazanut downloads!
[Shmuel Himelstein]
A plurality of customs
[Martin Stern]
A plurality of local customs (2)
[Mordechai Horowitz, Meir]
Prayer for the Country in UK
[Chana Luntz]
The Quest for Authenticity by Michael Rosen
[<FriedmanJ@...>]
Royal Family - UK - Carved in Stone
[Jack Wechsler]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shmuel Himelstein <himels@...>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:21:06 +0300
Subject: Free Chazanut downloads!
If you go to http://faujsa.fau.edu/jsa/home.php, the Jewish Music
Archive has over 5800 pieces (including about 150 albums of Chazanut)
that you can listen to. This is a public service archive - no charge!
Some of the greatest Chazanim's recordings are to be found there:
Yossele Rosenblatt, Gershon Sirota, Moshe Koussewitzky, etc. As this is
a non-denominational site, you will also find a few women cantors and
mixed choirs represented.
This can be a very valuable resource for those who will acting as Baalei
Tefillah on the Yamim Noraim.
You will also find sections there (under the "Collections" tab) of
Chassidic, Children, Holiday, Israel, etc.
If you want to grab the music, I suggest you use audiograbber, which you
can download for free at
http://www.audiograbber.com-us.net/download.html.
If you want advice on how to run Audiograbber, please contact me off-list.
Shmuel Himelstein
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 16:52:37 +0100
Subject: Re: A plurality of customs
Since my position might have been misunderstood, I wrote the following
some months ago which might be a useful point from which the discussions
may proceed:
Adass Yeshurun Minhagim Position statement
Since I am thought to oppose any changes I feel I must clarify my
position. My line is that some changes are inevitable but, provided
they are halachically permitted, should only be introduced subject to
the following criteria:
1. they should be overwhelmingly beneficial
2. they should not cause any problems, or at least these should be
insignificant relative to the benefits (a significant factor to be
considered must be the problem of tirkha detsibbura which has to be
balanced against any lengthening of davenning time)
3. they should be acceptable to the overwhelming majority of active
members, not merely those who pay a membership subscription but hardly
ever attend
4. every effort should be made to persuade objectors of their
desirability and they should not be forced through over their heads
(cf. Igros Mosheh, Orach Chaim second series, siman 21)
Furthermore, while everything reasonable should be done to accommodate
those who wish to daven with greater kavannah, and in consequence more
slowly, this should not be at the expense of the legitimate needs of
others who, for example on weekdays, may have to leave by a certain time
because of other commitments. In my opinion, those who wish to take
longer should consider starting earlier and allowing the tsibbur to
^Ìcatch up¹ with them since, strictly speaking, the obligation of
tefillah betsibbur only applies to shemoneh esreh.
The one reason I find unacceptable is the wish to obliterate any
distinctive traditions in order to be like ³everyone else². In my
opinion, diversity is valuable and, even if a certain ³style² is
currently less popular it should not be abandoned since fashions change
and what may now be unfashionable might become fashionable again at a
later date. If it is destroyed now then it will be virtually impossible
for later generations to revive.
Finally, in line with the general principle of "shev ve'al ta'aseh
adif", I believe the onus lies on those wishing to make changes, and not
on those who oppose them, to justify their proposals.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mordechai Horowitz <mordechai@...>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 10:05:46 -0400
Subject: Re: A plurality of local customs
> From: <FriedmanJ@...>
> Here's is a question--why should anyone want to belong to a congregation
> that doesn't want them anywhere near it? If the minority of people were
> unhappy, after witnessing what happened to Martin Stern because he
> wanted to maintain the status quo, they should have taken a hike with
> him and started their own Ashkenazic congregation. You don't need your
> own a building to daven in it.
>
> Oh, and another thought: with such 'loyal' friends in a community of
> totalitarians like that, who needs enemies?
The congregation doesn't necessarily want him to leave. The non
halachic Rabbi and non halachic board (and if they are disobeying a din
Torah they are not Orthodox Jews anymore than if they through Martin out
for not agreeing to support the "Rabbi" performing gay marriages) wants
him to leave because he insists of halacha.
Additionally people put money into the shul. In my shul I have invested
thousands of dollars in membership and building fund over the years. It
would mean needing to fundraise to hire a Rabbi, buy sifrei Torah,
sefarim if people learn in the shul and a building. I know where I live
home shuls are illegal so they very much will need funds for a new
building as well.
Additionally Non Torah Jews should not be allowed to take over Torah
institutions. I salute Martin's fight against these rebels against
Torah (again once they disobey Beit Din they exclude themselves from the
Torah community)
I'm impressed that he lives in a community where the Beit Din is willing
to force communal Rabbis to adhere to halacha rather than deferring to
them for political reasons. Hopefully the community will take any
action needed to remove these people from the Jewish community.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Meir <meir@...>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 17:32:53 +0100
Subject: Re: A plurality of local customs
> Here's is a question--why should anyone want to belong to a congregation
> that doesn't want them anywhere near it? If the minority of people were
> unhappy, after witnessing what happened to Martin Stern because he
> wanted to maintain the status quo, they should have taken a hike with
> him and started their own Ashkenazic congregation. You don't need your
> own a building to daven in it.
Surely, this is playing into the hands of the "reformers". Why should
Martin and like-minded congregants be coerced into the bother and
expense of starting a new shul. Is this not like telling the occupants
of the birds' nest which the cuckoo has taken over to leave their home?
The reformers would be only too happy to have the so-called
"troublemakers" evicted and to carry on in their own sweet way
> I'm impressed that he lives in a community where the Beit Din is
> willing to force communal Rabbis to adhere to halacha rather than
> deferring to them for political reasons. Hopefully the community will
> take any action needed to remove these people from the Jewish
> community.
Unfortunately, this is not the case. While Beit Din has indeed issued
its ruling, it is either unable or unwilling to see it put into
practice.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Chana Luntz <Chana@...>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 17:44:32 +0100
Subject: RE: Prayer for the Country in UK
David Zants writes:
>Are you sure that we need to spell as "G-d" when we are quoting
>something that has the context of the Xtian concept of diety?
There is a fair amount of source material that one never needs to write
G-d when writing in English, but assuming you are sticking to the
convention (minhag? Humra?) that one does, then I think one certainly
should do so when referring to the English National Anthem. After all
we Jews here in England not infrequently sing the national anthem (as I
also did as a child in Australia before they changed the National Anthem
from G-d Save the Queen to Advance Australia Fair). If this deemed to
be in reference to an Xtian concept of diety, then all of us (all the
way up to the Chief Rabbi and all the choshove rabbonim who have graced
a wedding seudar) might be said to be engaged in Avodah Zara (at least,
as per Tosphos, for us if not for them).
But I think rather what all of us understand by this is that we are
indeed asking Hashem to save the Queen - who as head of state, is the
one deemed responsible for all the acts of government, despite the fact
that she, by convention, only acts on the advice of her ministers (and
primarily her "prime" minister). Those old enough to remember the
Constitutional Crisis in Australia in 1975 will remember that this was
occasioned by the Governor General (the Queen's Representative in
Australia) *not* acting on the advice of the duly elected Prime
Minister, but that instead he sacked the current Prime Minister,
appointed the Leader of the Opposition as caretaker Prime Minister, and
then acted on his advice instead (to call another election within a year
after the previous one). The last time there was independent action by
the sovereign in the UK was, I believe, by Queen Victoria in the late
1800s, but technically the potential remains.
Regards
Chana
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <FriedmanJ@...>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 08:50:14 EDT
Subject: The Quest for Authenticity by Michael Rosen
I have been often attacked on this list for my posts--esp. those that
honestly describe present conditions in the community. Perhaps it would
be helpful for some members of this list to read The Quest for
Authenticity--the Thought of Reb Simcha Bunim by Michael Rosen.
I cannot help my genetic make-up--I am a direct descendant of the
Yehudi, Reb Simcha Bunim, and Menachem Mendel of Kotsk.
And I, like Reb Simcha Bunim, who was persona non grata to those rebbes
who wanted their chassidim to worship them and only them, suffer from
something called malignant honesty.
His enemies, the wonder rabbis and misnagdim who demanded total
compliance and reliance on them from their chassidim and followers (in
this the misnagdim and other chassidic sects were unified) went so far
as to try to get the chief of police of Siedlice (where my mother was
born, and where my grandfather, the Parcewer Rebbe, had his shtele,) to
arrest his followers because they were too independent and threatened to
attract followers away from their own "hero"-worshipping cults.
Like Menachem Mendel of Kotsk said, "Anyone who performs a mitzvah whose
ego is involved, is like one who worships idols. There is no difference
between one who worships idols and one who worships himself."
The Yehudi (der yid a hakodesh), Reb Simcha and his descendants and the
Kotsker followed the chassidism of Przysucha, (the Pshiskha, to those of
you who are challenged by Polish spelling). To put it in a nutshell, as
Rosen does, this philosophy boils down to this:
"It simply refused to accept anything that smelled of falseness and
self-deception, be it honor due a zaddik or a particular religious
practice. Przysucha equated pretension and self-deceit with idol
worship."
I didn't say it, but I know that what they said was correct--way back in
the 1780s--when the American and French revolutions rocked Europe to its
foundations.
Individuals mattered. Making a living mattered (Simcha Bunim was a
pharmacist (until the Russians took his license away--and those of other
jewish professionals) went to the theater and did many things that
others said was enough to put him in cherem. But he was no fool and
understood that taking personal responsibility and acting responsibly in
the world for ALL Jews was much more important that turning the chumrah
of the month into the latest facet in the avodah zorah of shtus.
I just wonder who and how the community made today's "gedolim" into
gods--those whose words must be taken as if they themselves were created
in Sinai. I know some of these "gedolim" since they were kids. They
were con artists then, and they are con artists now. Follow them blindly
at your own risk.
(like telling everyone they have to run to the banks and anyone they
ever signed a contract with and sign their names in Hebrew. (Oh, and
come to think of it, doesn't it follow from that base stupidity, that
following the "new rules" also means that women can't sign contracts,
act as witnesses on contracts, or even have bank accounts??!!!!)
Jeanette Friedman, a Pshiskher einekel
As der Yid Hakadosh said, "There are no rules in the service of Hashem,
and this itself is no rule."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jack Wechsler <wechsler@...>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:32:00 +0000
Subject: Royal Family - UK - Carved in Stone
I too had the dubious pleasure of sitting next to a wall with an
enormous Matzevah with the prayer for the royal family on it .There was
one difference in that the second section after the reading of the names
i.e. Queen Elizabeth, Elizabeth the Queen Mother, Philip Duke of
Edingburgh, was the composition of Sadaah Gaon's prayer for the
Diaspora. As far as know the shul (Adass Yisroel in Queen Elizabeth's
Walk in London ) made the stone when George was alive and when he died
they stuck on top of the names an update of white marble.
Jack Wechsler
<wechsler@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 56 Issue 39
