Volume 62 Number 37
Produced: Tue, 07 Oct 14 03:41:55 -0400
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Altering Halacha
[Michael Poppers]
Birkat Hakohanim on Yom Kippur
[David Ziants]
Kappel (3)
[Carl Singer Robert Schoenfeld Martin Stern]
Mangled piyutim (5)
[Martin Stern Martin Stern Sammy Finkelman Perets Mett Michael Rogovin]
Precedence of Mourners in Leading Services
[Joel Rich]
Shemittah and Honey.
[Immanuel Burton]
Silent El Maleh Rachamim
[Martin Stern]
Some Yom Kippur liturgy problems
[David Ziants]
Unmarried minor wearing tallis over his head
[Michael Poppers]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Poppers <the65pops@...>
Date: Fri, Oct 3,2014 at 01:01 PM
Subject: Altering Halacha
In MJ 62#36, Sammy Finkelman wrote:
> Another place where Halacha seems to have changed (for many) is the issue of
> sleeping in the Succah....In times past, in Europe, it was cold and maybe
> dangerous and people didn't feel comfortable, and so it was ruled sleeping
> can be avoided....That reason seems now to have become unnecessary. Someone
> else maybe can explain what went on.
I think Sammy is asking why many avoid sleeping in the *sukah*. If so, here are
some thoughts:
-- Some people/families do not have their own *sukah*.
-- In many locales, it can be very cold or overly warm at night.
-- A relative of mine once tried sleeping in his family's *sukah* and got
severely bitten up by whatever bugs were up & about.
In my mind, for whatever reason, this subject is conjoined with many not
lighting the *chanukiah* outside the main door by the doorpost opposite the
*m'zuzah*, and just as I know at least one person living in the USA who lights
outside (using a Plexiglass box, IINM, to shelter the flames from the wind), I'm
sure there are people both in and outside Israel who sleep in the *sukah*. Let
us judge meritoriously those who don't (and/or those who light/display Chanukah
lights at an inside window).
All the best from
*Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Ziants <dziants@...>
Date: Sat, Oct 4,2014 at 06:01 PM
Subject: Birkat Hakohanim on Yom Kippur
It is accepted practice that in the Land of Israel Birkat Hakohanim [aka
Duchaning = relating to the stage at the front of the shul, i.e. The Priestly
Blessing] is said every day (in most parts), and this is indeed the proper
custom and something which was forgotten in the exile because of the troubles
and hardships. It is actually considered a very important part of our liturgy
despite it being omitted in the diaspora except once each Yom Tov
Yom Kippur is no exception, but it is marked in ashkenazi machzorim that it is
not done at Mincha but rather than Neila. At Mincha the verses are said as part
of Elokainu v'Elokai avotainu - something that is usually said when no kohanim
are present, but there would be Birkat Hakohanim if they were. My conclusion
would thus be that Mincha would also be a suitable time because on YK it is
always going to be at Mincha K'tana (Mincha later in the day). So why isn't it done?
I am already going to suggest an answer to this question...
It is a much more appropriate time to have Birkat HaKohanim at Ne'ila, being a
greater period of rachamim (Divine Mercy) and so if we do it at Mincha there is
a bigger chance that it will be too late to do it at Neila because it has to be
done before sunset and Neila might then be too late. So in order to have Birkat
HaKohanim at Neila before sunset, the shatz (prayer leader) leaves out a chunk
of the selichot and makes this up after the repetition before the last (and on
Shabbat like this year the only) Avinu Malkainu.
My question is, is this the only way we can play around with this. I find it a
bit of an anti-climax to go back to selichot after the repetition. If, in any
case, we are adjusting things, would there be anything intrinsically wrong in
starting Mincha a few minutes earlier and having Birkat Hakohanim at Mincha
time) as well? We could still try and make it for Ne'ila - but that might mean
starting Mincha 15 mins earlier, and taking 10 mins longer on Avinu Malkainu to
fill in the time. At least, if it is done at Mincha time, maybe there will be
less pressure for it to also have to be at Neila (for shuls who do not want to
start Mincha earlier).
Obviously, our machzorim developed in the middle ages with the long European
sunset in mind and their custom of not having Birkat Hakohanim in any case. Have
any machzorim been printed yet in Israel, that address the halachic solution of
the precedence of Birkat Hakohanim and the need to adjust parts of he tephilla
to meet this halachic need?
Shanna Tova,
David Ziants
Ma'aleh Adumim
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Fri, Oct 3,2014 at 12:01 PM
Subject: Kappel
Growing up in my parents home we used the term Kapalosh (phonetically
COP ah lush) to mean a man's dress hat (what in English might be
called a fedora)
With the help of an online translation engine:
English hat
Polish kapelusz
Ukrainian kapelyukh (as pronounced)
This appears to be distinct for the word for "cap"
English cap
Polish czapka
Ukrainian kryshka (as pronounced)
Carl Singer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Robert Schoenfeld <frank_james@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 5,2014 at 01:01 AM
Subject: Kappel
Both my parents A"H and all four of my grandparents A"H and my mother-in-law A"H
were Galitsianers and used the term as a head as in "kiss the keppella" or "a
blessing on your kepella" or (Yiddish)"a brucha on dem keppella" Also the same
usage is in "Fiddler on the Roof".
Gemar Hasima Tova
-- Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 5,2014 at 12:01 PM
Subject: Kappel
Since, as most MJ members will by now have realised, I am of German Jewish
descent, I find strange the attempts by various contributors (MJ 62#35/6) to
derive the word kappel from Slavonic roots. It was certainly the standard
term used by those of us who come from the Germanophone region and seems
almost certainly to be the diminutive of the German word 'Kappe' which,
unsurprisingly, means a 'cap'.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Fri, Oct 3,2014 at 12:01 PM
Subject: Mangled piyutim
Leah S. R. Gordon wrote (MJ 62#36):
> Martin Stern comments (MJ 62#35) on the piyut for R"H "Melech Elyon" -
>
> I don't have an answer for his comments, but it jarred my memory that every
> year, I wonder about the odd juxtaposition of its first line "vayehi vishurun
> melech" ("and there will be in Jeshurun a king") and then we start up with all
> the divine kingship comments. But isn't the first bit about a mortal king?
> Where's the "melech evyon" ("mortal king") to distinguish?
The koteret (heading) "Uvchein vayehi vishurun melech" is a quote of the
verse in Ha'azinu which refers to HKBH as being King when all the leaders of
the Jewish people are gathered together - RH being Hashem's coronation day.
In minhag Ashkenaz the alternate lines starting melech evyon were omitted,
as I wrote in my submission, which explains why they do not appear. If one
wants to see the piyutim as originally written, one can find them at the
back of the Machzor Meforash or in the text of Daniel Goldschmidt's Machzor
(pub. by the Leo Baeck Institute). The former has a very interesting essay
in Hebrew in the introduction about these piyutim and how/why they were cut.
If one looks at the originals one would see that it contrasts the King on
high with the lowly (human) king in consecutive verses. Also that they have
a full alef-beit acrostic between them, something lost in the cut version.
> I'm also bothered because that bit about the king in Jeshurun is something
> that Christians like to quote a lot about their special friend. Was this a
> subtle dig at this practice?
As usual the Christians latch onto a verse and misinterpret it to fit their
theology - that really has nothing to do with us. I doubt if, in this case,
these piyutim were meant as a counterblast to Christian propaganda.
Such anti-Christian polemics certainly do exist as I wrote in a study of
Rabbinic collections of Biblical verses included in the liturgy for this
purpose, A Response to the Missionary Message, reprinted in my book "A Time
to Speak" (Devora Publishing '10 pp. 101-112). Incidentally I noticed a similar
message could be detected in the choice of verses commencing "Zechor Brit Avot",
towards the end of the selichot service before Shema Koleinu. Also some selichot
have veiled references to combat the claims of Christianity and Islam.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Fri, Oct 3,2014 at 12:01 PM
Subject: Mangled piyutim
Eliezer Berkovits wrote (MJ 62#36):
> On a similar note I have often questioned why the Sheliach Tzibbur for Rosh
> Hashana Mussaf appends the word 'Vene'emar' to the phrase preceding it, then
> pauses before reciting the next phrase, as this doesn't seem sensible.
Perhaps the word 'Vene'emar' in this context might be translated "and, in
addition, it says'.
> One Sha'tz I asked told me 'he asked various other Sheluchei Tzibbur and this
> is what they all do, so it must have some basis.' I found this a quite
> unsatisfactory response - all it takes is the first person developing the
> Nussach to make a mistake and they all follow. Any justifications?
This is all too true and the source of many so-called minhagim that have no
real basis. It has been pointed out that the word minhag is an anagram of
gehinnom which certainly applies to ones of such unfounded origins.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sammy Finkelman <sammy.finkelman@...>
Date: Fri, Oct 3,2014 at 02:01 PM
Subject: Mangled piyutim
Eliezer Berkovits wrote (MJ 62#36):
> On a similar note I have often questioned why the Sheliach Tzibbur for Rosh
> Hashana Mussaf appends the word 'Vene'emar' to the phrase preceding it, then
> pauses before reciting the next phrase, as this doesn't seem sensible.
I don't think it's appended to the preceding phrase. It's separated from what
follows. This calls more attention to it (or it would if it weren't recited too
quickly) It's like a colon [:] in print. You usually have a blank line after it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett00@...>
Date: Sat, Oct 4,2014 at 06:01 PM
Subject: Mangled piyutim
Leah S. R. Gordon (MJ 62#36) wrote:
> Martin Stern comments (MJ 62#35) on the piyut for R"H "Melech Elyon" -
>
> I don't have an answer for his comments, but it jarred my memory that every
> year, I wonder about the odd juxtaposition of its first line "vayehi vishurun
> melech" ("and there will be in Jeshurun a king") and then we start up with all
> the divine kingship comments. But isn't the first bit about a mortal king?
> Where's the "melech evyon" ("mortal king") to distinguish?
Vayhi Bishurun melech is in the current sedra; as Rashi points out, it refers to
the Almighty King
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Rogovin <mrogovin118@...>
Date: Sat, Oct 4,2014 at 10:01 PM
Subject: Mangled piyutim
According to notes in the Mesoret Harav Machzor, these piyutim were intended to
be recited responsively like kedushah, not sung in unison. When said
responsively they become a davar shebekidusha, and he felt that was important.
In fact, the Rav was apparently opposed to choirs and congregants singing along
with the hazan. Clearly this view has not carried through like some of his other
changes to the service, such as the reintroduction of slichot in shacharit,
musaf and mincha. Unfortunately, one result of the switch to joint singing
(which I love) and printers who did not seem to understand the poetry, is that
the structure of many piyutim with line pairs has gotten mangled from AB AB AB
to A BA BA ... B, or in some case AB CD EF...YZ to A BC DE... Z or for double
acrostic AA BB CC...ZZ to A AB BC CD...YZ Z
This issues has been discussed repeatedly in MJ in past years (I have raised it
before). v'chol ma'aminim is an example of a mangled double acrostic. v'chol is
not the first line of the line pairs, it is the second line in each pair, even
though most hazanim start with it and end up with an extra line at the end. It
should be obvious given the text and grammar, the double letter pairs, and the
linked theme in each pair, but people go with what they know. After several
years of persuasion, I managed to convince our YK baal musaf to do this one
right (but not the others) only to have another congregant complain that it
sounded wrong. On RH, it was done by a different baal tefila the other way, so
the masses were pleased 2 out of 3 times in musaf, plus all the other piyutim in
musaf and shacharit.
I should also note that one of the leading faculty members of YU's Belz School
of Music confirmed that I was right, and wished me luck in a Quixotic effort to
change things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joel Rich <JRich@...>
Date: Fri, Oct 3,2014 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Precedence of Mourners in Leading Services
Orrin Tilevitz wrote (MJ 62#36):
> In one shul, by policy approved by the rabbi, the rule giving precedence in
> leading services to one mourner over another, say, to one who has yahrzeit
> for a parent over anyone else, applies only to regular attendees at a
> particular minyan, regardless of whether the attendee is a paid member.
> ...
> But is it halachically wrong, given the supervening rule (which we've
> discussed on this list) that nobody may lead services unless he is merutzeh
> lakahal [acceptable to the congregation]?
.......
In the book Nefesh Harav (P135) the following is recorded:
> There is a hierarchy established in Halacha to determine who, of a number of
> vying congregants, has the right to read the Kaddish prayer to honour and
> commemorate a relative who has passed on. This hierarchy is recorded by the
> Magen Avraham, a most celebrated commentator of the Shulchan Aruch.
>
> The Sha'agas Aryeh was approached to resolve a dispute that had arisen between
> congregants who both claimed that according to the established hierarchy each
> one should be granted the privilege of reciting the Kaddish. He directed them
> to draw lots.
>
> One of the combatants questioned this method; "Surely this is not the way
> Halacha is determined. There must be some type of investigation, analysis and
> proof brought to show which of us has the priority over the other."
>
> The Sha'agas Aryeh asked in response, "And how do you think that this
> particular sequence was established in the first place? Well, we are just
> following the same procedure that the Magen Avraham used to establish the
> hierarchy that he recorded."
I would add that the amud does not belong to anyone other than the congregation
and they could determine not to give it to any "chiyuvim" if they so desired
GCT
Joel Rich
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Immanuel Burton <iburton@...>
Date: Fri, Oct 3,2014 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Shemittah and Honey.
I have been given to understand that bee's honey is kosher because it is
essentially flower nectar, and not actually a bee product. If honey is
derived from flowers, would the laws of Shemittah apply to Israeli
honey? If they do not, then how does one have it both ways, i.e. honey
is kosher because it's a plant product, but exempt from the laws of
Shemittah?
Gemar chasimah tovah to all.
Immanuel Burton.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Fri, Oct 3,2014 at 12:01 PM
Subject: Silent El Maleh Rachamim
Orrin Tilevitz wrote (MJ 62#36):
> In my shul, when someone needs El Maleh Rachamim recited, following layning
> the gabbai takes the sefer torah and recites it aloud. This procedure makes
> sense to me; Sefaradim call it an "azkara", which implies something said
> aloud. Where I davened today, the two yahrzeits in turn took the sefer torah
> and recited it (I assume; it was inaudible) silently. Any basis for this?
Such inaudibility seems to be all too common. I often ask why the gabbai in
many shuls wants us not to know for whom a Mi shebeirach is being recited.
It would be far better if we know who is sick, or who has just had a baby
and whether it is a boy or girl, but the prevalent custom is unfortunately
otherwise.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Ziants <dziants@...>
Date: Sat, Oct 4,2014 at 06:01 PM
Subject: Some Yom Kippur liturgy problems
Our Ashkenazi machzorim are obviously built with in mind that Mincha will be
straight after Musaph, and after Mincha there would (or might) be a break until
Neila.
Here, in Israel, the reality is different. Generally the break is after Musaph,
and one would come back to shul for Mincha. Similar to Rosh Hashanna but on YK
Musaph finishes a bit later and Mincha starts a bit earlier and there is just
sleeping in the break - no eating <smile> .
So is there any intrinsic reason, why we shouldn't be saying Ashray and Uva
l'tzion before Mincha and not before Neila?
Also should we not be saying Alainu after Musaph like at any other time. Rosh
HaShanna included - so to answer that it is part of Musaph does not seem to be a
valid excuse.
I know I brought these questions up a number of years ago - but am wondering if
there are any fresh responses.
David Ziants,
Ma'aleh Adumim, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Poppers <the65pops@...>
Date: Fri, Oct 3,2014 at 01:01 PM
Subject: Unmarried minor wearing tallis over his head
In MJ 62#36, Isaac Balbin noted:
> In respect of the issue of an unmarried minor wearing a tallis over his head,
> this is not a problem as it is called Atifa (wrapping of the head) and one is
> obliged to do that when one is called to the Torah, for example. If one wears a
> hat, then the hat suffices. This is the Psak (decision) of Mori VRabbi (my
> teacher and Rabbi) Rav Hershel Schachter the Rosh Kollel at YU and Posek
> (Halachic decisor) of the OU.
If he understands how to do so, a minor is obliged to perform *atifa*, period!
-- see BT Sukah 42a and, on how to fulfill via a *talis qatan*, OC 8:3 (URL:
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=49623&st=&pgnum=26).
We might be segueing into the "Altering Halacha" thread in wondering how many
young men who know how to be *misateif* actually perform *atifa* with a *talis
qatan* (and I have long argued that young men in general should be wearing a
*talis gadol* for davening at least from when they become Bar Mitzva -- see MB
17:10 [p.57 at the above-mentioned URL] -- which, inter alia, would allow them
to easily perform *atifa*).
All the best from
*Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 62 Issue 37
