Volume 57 Number 32
Produced: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:57:12 EDT
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Avinu Malkeinu prayer (3)
[Michael Poppers Martin Stern Ben Katz]
Gabbai's Handbook
[Ira L. Jacobson]
Hidur Mitzvah - Esrog (3)
[David Tzohar Russell J Hendel Alex Heppenheimer]
kal nidrei? (2)
[Martin Stern Elazar M. Teitz]
Redemption from sins? (3)
[Russell J Hendel David Tzohar Avraham Walfish]
Two meals Erev Yom Kippur/chicken for kaporos
[S.Wise]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Poppers <MPoppers@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 29,2009 at 08:01 PM
Subject: Avinu Malkeinu prayer
In M-J V57#30, Shmuel Himelstein wrote:
> I've been using - on and off - the Sefat Emet Siddur, which is often
> known as the Rodelheim Siddur, which, I believe, was the standard Siddur for
> many German Jewish communities, including that of Frankfurt am Main...
> The instructions preceding the prayer read (in translation):
> "From Rosh Hashanah to Yom Kippur each day after the Shacharit and Minchah
> Shemoneh Esrai, one recites Avinu Malkeinu, except Shabbat and Friday
> afternoon Minchah and the day before Yom Kippur. If Yom Kippur is on
> Shabbat, one recites it on Friday at Shacharit."
>
> Now my question: how about the the fast days? Is it not said then? It
> would indeed seem to me that that is indeed indeed the case, because unlike
> the division we have in my Ashkenazic minhag for the text said on other fast
> days (zochreinu) and that on the Ten Days of Repentance (kotveinu), the
> Rodelheim only shows kotveinu (with a note that at Neila it is chotemeinu).
Yes, that is the case for the communities which used this Siddur (including
KAJ/"Breuer's" in Washington Heights, NYC, where I grew up), and may I add
that saying "Avinu Malkeinu" on any day other than during the Yamim Noraim
is still a bit shocking to me (as is the way in which it's said when it's
said: in KAJ, each and every line was said out loud by the SHaTZ [prayer
leader] and repeated by the tzibbur [[public --MOD], with both saying each line
with tremendous intensity and deliberation, while the minyanim/shuls I've
participated in which say "Avinu Malkeinu" on other days say most of the
lines quietly and, unfortunately, often do not give members of the minyan
sufficient time to say each such line with the intent and intensity it
deserves).
Gut Yuntef and all the best from
--Michael Poppers via RIM pager
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Mon, Sep 28,2009 at 05:01 PM
Subject: Avinu Malkeinu prayer
Shmuel Himelstein <himels@...> wrote:
> Another interesting point regarding the Rodelheim Siddur - it gives two
> different versions of Avinu Malkeinu - Minhag Ashkenaz and Minhag Polin (the
> latter is the one I am familiar with). The difference is basically one of
> the order of the lines.
Today (Yom Kippur) I noticed a further difference between MA and MP that is
somewhat similar to this. The order of the Al cheits also sometimes varies
slightly.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ben Katz <BKatz@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 29,2009 at 02:01 AM
Subject: Avinu Malkeinu prayer
Shmuel Himelstein
> Another interesting point regarding the Rodelheim Siddur - it gives two >
> different versions of Avinu Malkeinu - Minhag Ashkenaz and Minhag Polin (the
> latter is the one I am familiar with). The difference is basically one of the
> order of the lines.
The Goldschmidt machzorim for RH and YK also list 2 version's of aveinu malkenu:
minhag polin (the 1 used in Birnbaum and ArtScroll) and minhag ashkenaz, with a
somewhat different order and 4 fewer verses
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Mon, Sep 28,2009 at 04:01 PM
Subject: Gabbai's Handbook
Mark Goldenberg stated in mail-Jewish Vol.57 #31 Digest:
>. . . comprehensive book of Shul Minhagim that was compiled by our
>Rav, Rabbi Elazar Muskin.
I am impressed. The book is very interesting and can serve as a
basis for similar works in other synagogues.. In certain cases it
seems to state halakhot that are independent of any particular
synagogue. In others, there are customs that do indeed vary.
The book states: "Members of YICC who are mourners during the 12
month period of mourning always have precedence for the 'Amud' even
if there is a non-member who has 'Yahrzeit'" for a parent or is in
'"Shloshim.'"
Should that be 12 months or 11 months?
It further states: "The Hazan does not need to take three steps
backwards at the end of the repetition of the 'Amida'."
I think this refers to the case where the "amida" is immediately
followed by qaddish shalem, but not in other cases. Or am I wrong?
It further states at least twice: "If neither the rabbi or assistant
rabbi are present in Shul then the Hazan should only begin repeating
the 'Amida' once there are nine other men besides himself who have
completed the silent 'Amida'".
But I failed to find out what is supposed to happen if either the
rabbi, or the assailant rabbi, or both of them are present.
The Hebrew word Haftara is consistently misspelled so as to include a vav.
I found the following fascinating and wonder if this is an accepted
ruling: "When a Bat Mitzvah occurs, the security gate in the 'Aron
HaKodesh' is quietly closed during the recitation of [Adon
Olam]. This serves as a change of the room from a sanctuary to a
multi-purpose room." My question is about changing the status of the room.
Despite my questions, I think the book is very well done.
~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
IRA L. JACOBSON
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
mailto:<laser@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Tzohar <davidtzohar@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 29,2009 at 04:01 PM
Subject: Hidur Mitzvah - Esrog
Carl asked about no huddur mitzvah after the first day of succot.
According to Ashkenazi poskim (Mishna Brura 35 on Shulchan Aruch 649:5)
Hadar is relevant for the entire holiday of succot. A defect (pigam) in one
of the 4 minim (species) because of lack of hadar, for example a lulav
missing its tip or etrog that has certain kinds of spots or changes in
color, is pasul not only on the first day but on all of succot.
Sephardi poskim (Rambam, Mechaber) disagree and say that hadar is only pasul
on the first day.
See discussion in the gemara Massechet Succa, chapter Lulav Hagazul on
whether hadar applies only to the etrog as is written "pri etz hadar" or
applies also to the other species.
-David Tzohar
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 29,2009 at 07:01 PM
Subject: Hidur Mitzvah - Esrog
Carl asks for thoughts on the idea that there is no requirement to "beautify/go
beyond the minimum(hiddur)" this year in purchasing an ethrog and lulav (Since
the obligations are all rabbinical - only on the first day is their a Biblical
obligation to waive a lulav. Carl argues that there is no requirement of
"beautification/going beyond the minimum (hiddur)" on Rabbinical commandments).
I would respond in three ways. First: Clearly Carl is right that blemishes on
the ethrog do not invalidate it on the 2nd and latter days. But would anyone
argue that to BEGIN (Lechatchilah) one should buy a blemished ethrog. In other
words I would argue that even though blemishes do not INVALIDATE the performance
there is still an OBLIGATION to avoid them.
Secondly, a person can always, even on a Rabbinical commandment, FULFILL
"beautification/going beyond the miniumum (Hiddur)" - however when the
obligations is Biblical there is an OBLIGATION to "beautify/going beyond the
minimum (Hiddur)".
Thirdly: I would argue that this Rabbinical commandment - Ethrog/lulav on the
2nd and latter days is different than other Rabbinical commandments. This
rabbinical commandment commemorates the Temple ceremony. Since "beautification /
going beyond the minimum (hiddur)" was characteristic of the temple so too
"beautification/ going beyond the minimum (hiddur)" applies here AS IT ENHANCES
THE ACT OF COMMEMORATION.
Russell Jay Hendel; Phd ASA http://www.Rashiyomi.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Alex Heppenheimer <aheppenh@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 29,2009 at 04:01 PM
Subject: Hidur Mitzvah - Esrog
In MJ 57:31, Carl Singer <carl.singer@...> wrote:
>One of my sons related a lecture he heard the other day: Al regel achat
>[briefly - MOD]
>Since the first day of Succos this year is on Shabbos and we, of course,
>don't use our Lulav and Esrog on Shabbos ....
>AND since the concept of Hiddur Mitzvah [adornment of the commandment -MOD]
>applies only to the first day THEN
>it doesn't apply this year.
>Any thoughts?
First of all, whether hiddur mitzvah applies only on the first day or on all
seven days is disputed between the Rambam and the Rosh (cited in Mishnah Berurah
649:35), and then in turn between the Mechaber (R' Yosef Caro)and the Rema
(Orach Chaim 649:5). Ashkenazim, as usual, follow the Rema's opinion.
Shulchan Aruch Harav (649:19) summarizes that according to this view, there are
ten situations in which the Four Species would be invalid for the first day but
would be fine for the rest of Sukkos. Two are related to the criterion of
"lachem" (that the Four Species must belong to the one who uses them - so for
example, one may borrow someone else's lulav and esrog on the other days), and
the other eight are various cases where some of the substance of one of the
Species is missing (e.g., a hole in the esrog). But in all cases where the
problem is a lack of hiddur (e.g., boils on the esrog, missing pitam, etc.),
then according to the Rosh and the Rema, they would indeed be invalid on all
seven days -unless no better ones can be found.
Second, there are opinions that outside of the Land of Israel the second day is
treated like the first for this purpose, and so all of the invalidating criteria
("lachem," missing substance,and lack of hiddur) apply then too. The Mechaber
(649:5) rules that if the only available Species have one of these problems,
they should be taken on the second day without reciting the blessing.
Finally, there is something I read (if I recall correctly, it was in one of R'
Paysach Krohn's books) in the name of R' Shalom Schwadron zt"l, that to buy a
set of Four Species that is invalid for the first day but valid for the rest of
Sukkos, indicates a lack of belief that Moshiach can come at any moment, even
before Sukkos. For in that case, we would indeed take the Four Species on the
first day of Sukkos that occurs on Shabbos, in the Beis Hamikdash (Rambam,
Hil.Lulav 7:16).
Kol tuv,
Alex
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Mon, Sep 28,2009 at 05:01 PM
Subject: kal nidrei?
On Sat, Sep 26,2009, Alex Heppenheimer <aheppenh@...> wrote:
Subject: kal nidrei?
> Minchas Shai to Daniel 6:1, who in turn quotes R'
> Menachem di Lonzano's statement that the kamatzim in the words "Daryavesh"
> (Darius) and "sarchaya" (officers) are to be pronounced likea patach. This
> would mean that they are treated like kamatzim gedolim, even though they are
> followed by silent shevas (unlike in Hebrew); by that logic, then, it may well
> be that the kamatz in "kal" is also katan in Hebrew but gadol in Aramaic.
The Sefardi, as opposed to the Teimani, tradition is that the rule in Hebrew
that a long vowel cannot exist in a closed unaccented syllable does not
apply in Aramaic or, conversely a sheva after a long vowel must be a sheva
na. This would explain the Minchat Shai's comment on the words in Daniel but
seem to undermine the logic of the 'proof' for the word kol or kal under
discussion.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Elazar M. Teitz <remt@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 29,2009 at 12:01 AM
Subject: kal nidrei?
> I found a short answer on this at http://www.yeshiva.org.il/ask/?id=24277. The
> author, R' David Chai Kohen, writes that this is correct, and that his tradition
> is that there is no kamatz katan in Aramaic. He therefore says that words such
> as "kal" or "alma" should indeed be pronounced (in the Sephardic or
> Israeli pronunciation) as though they were written with a patach.
If the "alma" referred to is the equivalent of the Hebrew "olam" or
"ha'olam," it is irrelevant to this discussion, since even those who recognize a
kamatz katan in Aramaic would consider this a kamatz gadol. Whenever the word
appears in Nach, it has a meteg, which generally would indicate that the
ayin-kamatz is an open syllable and the following sh'va is na, so that the
kamatz is gadol. The same is true of "almaya." Indeed, I have never heard a
grammatically knowledgable S'faradi say "olma" or "olmaya" in Kadish, though the
overwhelming majority "d'chol beit Yisrael," with a kamatz katan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 29,2009 at 07:01 PM
Subject: Redemption from sins?
Martin asks about the meaning of "redemtion from sins" (P130-08). He argues that
"atonement of sins" would be more accurate.
Rabbi Yissachar Frand in his annnual Lecture on the Sabbath of Repentance
(Shabbath Shuvah) pointed out that sin has two aspects: 1) The liability for
punishment because of transgression and 2) the damaging effect on the soul.
Here is a simple example (My own). A teenager joins a gang and robs people. He
can "atone" for his sin by repaying the people he robbed double. But after
achieving this atonement on PAST sins he still has the problem of being
"involved" with the gang. The gang adversely affects his capacity for FUTURE
behaviors.
So too, if Israel sins and is exiled the pain of exile atones on the PAST SINS.
But Israel now has the additional problem that it is "involved" in a non-Jewish
culture, making FUTURE spiritual progress difficult.
Thus Israel and the individual needs both ATONEMENT on sin and REDEMPTION from
spiritual involvement with bad associations.
Russell Jay Hendel; Phd ASA http://www.Rashiyomi.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Tzohar <davidtzohar@...>
Date: Mon, Sep 28,2009 at 06:01 PM
Subject: Redemption from sins?
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>:
> It struck me that the verse (Ps. 130,8) "veHu yifdeh et-Yisrael mikol
> avonotav - and he will ransom Israel from all their sins" is difficult to
> understand. How can someone be 'ransomed' from his sins? Surely a more
> appropriate word would be 'vayekaper'[atone - MOD]. Can anyone explain?
The definition of the word 'pidyon' according to the Evenshoshan dictionary
is 'kofer' therefore 'yifdeh' et kol avonotav is another way of saying
'veyhchaper' al kol avonotav. I think the problem here is not the Hebrew
word but the translation. Rav Sacks in the new Koren English translation
translates 'vayifdeh' not as ransomed but as redeemed. I think that ransom
is a mistranslation because another meaning of 'pidyon' is ransom as in
ransoming a captive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Avraham Walfish <rawalfish@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 29,2009 at 03:01 AM
Subject: Redemption from sins?
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
> It struck me that the verse (Ps. 130,8) "veHu yifdeh et-Yisrael mikol
> avonotav - and he will ransom Israel from all their sins" is difficult to
> understand. How can someone be 'ransomed' from his sins? Surely a more
> appropriate word would be 'vayekaper'[atone - MOD]. Can anyone explain?
First, I'd like to remark on the translation of "yifdeh"as "ransom". Even
though BDB has only this translation for all occurrences of p-d-h, the newer
Kadari biblical dictionary notes that this root - like the word "ga-al" (and
like the English "redeem") often means to free, to extricate. Regarding the
use of this verb in Tehillim 130:8 (and the previous verse, in the noun
form "pedut"), Meir Weiss explains (Emunot Vedeot Bemizmorei Tehillim, pp.
176-7) that the Psalmist refers to a more far-reaching concept than
atonement - or forgiveness (seliha), which was mentioned earlier in the
psalm. He views sin as a state in which he is ensnared (or - I would add,
based on the metaphor of "mima-amakim" in the first verse - in which he is
drowning), and from which he needs to be redeemed/extricated.
Avie Walfish
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: S.Wise <Smwise3@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 29,2009 at 12:01 AM
Subject: Two meals Erev Yom Kippur/chicken for kaporos
My father in law and brother in law both follow the custom of eating two
meals erv YK--one before noon and the seuda hamafeskes. I didn't grow up with
that custom and the mishna berurah doesn't mention it. So where does it
come from. I disagreed with my btother in law that the first seudah is
mitzvah--the mitzvah is to eat more erv Yok Kippur, not necessarily a meal.
Also, does anyone know the actual source of the barbaric custom of
shlugging kaporos with a chicken? Every year there is some news story about the
mishandling of the birds. Why was this instituted and why with a chicken?
S.Wise
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 57 Issue 32
