Volume 66 Number 02
Produced: Wed, 19 Oct 22 07:27:32 -0400
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
A sukka under a high tree
[Carl Singer]
Additions to shemoneh esrai
[Joel Rich]
Another approach to simchat torah
[David Tzohar]
Eating at other people's homes
[Martin Stern]
Mezonot in the succah
[Haim Snyder]
Minhagei ta'ut?
[Meir Shinnar]
Reusing Hosahnos
[Steven Oppenheimer]
The term 'ultra-Orthodox' (was Secular education at Brooklyn yeshivas)
[Martin Stern]
Whose Hashgacha Does It Have?
[Meir Shinnar]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 16,2022 at 09:17 AM
Subject: A sukka under a high tree
In response to David Ziants (MJ 65#98):
Many years ago we lived in a city without an Eruv. My wife wore a bracelet with
a key "charm" on it. Someone told her that this is carrying and thus
inappropriate for Shabbos. Her response was "WHO ASKED YOU!"
If after you've chosen to consult with your Rav and you are satisfied with
the situation -- done, sof, fini. Nobody else's business.
Carl
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joel Rich <joelirarich@...>
Date: Wed, Oct 19,2022 at 01:17 AM
Subject: Additions to shemoneh esrai
When you add to the shmoneh esrai, do you articulate words or just think
thoughts? (e.g. do you actually say the words, please send a refuah shleimah
for Avraham ben Sarah, or do you simply think those words or about that
individual??
KT
Joel Rich
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Tzohar <davidtzohar@...>
Date: Tue, Oct 18,2022 at 06:17 AM
Subject: Another approach to simchat torah
Ashkenazi communities especially chassidim have a custom of making "LeCHaYiM" on
an alcoholic beverage before and during the HaKaFoT. It seems that they have
applied the custom of CHaYaV INiSH LiVeSSuMai (one is obligated to get
intoxicated) from Purim. As ChaZaL said "AiN SiMCHA BLI BaSaR VeYaYin" (there is
no joy without meat and wine". The beverage in Ashkenaz was schnapps, i.e.
distilled liquor usually whisky, brandy or slivovitz; all approximately 80%
alcohol. After seven shots of schnapps there is a lot of SiMCHA!!!
BTW since about 15% of Ashkenazim are genetically allergic to alcohol they are
of course not required to drink.
PiTKA TaVA VeSHaNAH ToVAH to all.
R'David Yitzchak Tzohar
Yerushalayim
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Wed, Oct 19,2022 at 07:17 AM
Subject: Eating at other people's homes
Yisrael Medad wrote (MJ 66#01):
> Martin Stern wrote (MJ 65#99):
>
>> Yisrael Medad wrote (MJ 65#98):
>
>>> The only awkwardness I have come across is Chabadniks demanding their
>>> shechita for the meat...
>>
>> I consider making such a demand the height of bad manners. The correct
>> approach should be to say they must decline the invitation because they only
>> eat that particular shechitah. Of course, if the prospective host volunteers
>> to use the desired shechitah, that is another matter but, whether that would
>> satisfy the guest is another matter ...
>
> I am not sure. I would think it depends on the social solidarity the community
> display. Or among relatives. In a sense, it is similar, but not fully, to a
> request to be served vegetarian food. I have been at a Seder of my sister
> whose nephew on her husband's side was a Chabadnik and he had a separate
> table. Some of the food he brought himself and some he ate from my sister's
> kitchen.
I think that there is a big difference between family members whose
idiosyncrasies are known to both sides and an invitation to a relative stranger.
It was to the latter that I was referring and whom I was considering a 'demand'
to be 'the height of bad manners' which should be rephrased as saying 'they only
eat that particular shechitah' and leaving it to the prospective host to
volunteer to provide it or withdraw the invitation. This would apply equally to
any special dietary requirement, whether necessary because of health reasons
e.g. lactose intolerance, or personal preference e.g. veganism, not just
religious stringencies.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Haim Snyder <haimsny@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 16,2022 at 04:17 AM
Subject: Mezonot in the succah
Martin Stern (MJ 65#99) seems to postulate that one must eat mezonot in the
succah in order to make the bracha LeiSheiv Basuccah.
In Maaseh Rav (218), the Vilna Gaon states that one must make this bracha every
time he enters the succah on Succot, even if he goes in 100 times. He does not
make it dependent on eating, just entering because it is Succot.
Therefore, even if you ate an apple and said the bracha, you have on whom to
rely that your bracha was valid.
Further, if you went in to sleep you could make the bracha.
Haim Shalom Snyder
Petah Tikva
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Meir Shinnar <chidekel@...>
Date: Sat, Oct 15,2022 at 08:17 PM
Subject: Minhagei ta'ut?
I am late at getting to this.
Several people commented on the fact that the way many piyutim are actually said
is not the way that they were printed, or meant to be said.
This is an old complaint, and I know Daniel Goldschmidt, z"l, in his machzor
complains of this.
However, I recall reading that Rav Soloveitchik held that the way that it is
done (or was done - some modern changes may affect the answer) IS the correct way.
The issue is how we deal with responsive tefillot (prayers). Many tefillot
consist of the cantor asking for a response from the congregation - and the
congregation responding.
The question is - does the cantor respond as well, and if so, does he respond
with the congregation or separately? I can't think of an example where the
cantor does not respond. However, for when he responds - I have seen different
customs depending on the prayer.
For barchu - the congregation responds Baruch HaShem hamevorach- I have always
heard the cantor say Baruch HaShem hamevoarch after the congregation.
For keduhsah, for example - when the congregation answers kadosh kadosh kadosh -
I have heard the cantor both say with the congregation, and heard him say it
after the congregation is finished.
The Rav held that the cantor should ALWAYS respond AFTER the congregation has
finished.
The piyutim in question are of the structure that each stanza consists of a
strophe and an antistrophe - which is an expansion or response to the strophe.
Those who hold the common custom in error would say that the poem should be
recited verse by verse - which makes poetic sense.
However, the Rav held that these poems are to be viewed as responsive liturgy -
with the antistrophe the response to the strophe.
Therefore, it is proper for the cantor - after the community finished its
response to his strophe - to recite the response - and then start the next
strophe. (Just like in Kedusha, the cantor would say kadosh kadosh kadosh and
then start az bekol) This is precisely the minhag that is being objected to.
The following is not from the rav, but from me.
Several changes have occurred that obscure this structure - and therefore make
it less intuitive.
A) In most communities today - for many responsive prayers - such as kedushah -
but especially these poems - the community says not only the response - but the
prompt for the following response. This obscures the prompt - response structure.
B) In many communities, for some of these poems, they are sung communally
together by the cantor and the community. This destroys any responsive nature
of the poem - and makes the poetic structure seem problematic. The Rav was
opposed to such communal singing of responsive poems.
C) I dont know if truly traditional Nusach for these poems would have preserved
some of the distinction - because in many of today's melodies, the strophe
(prompt) is sung as the natural continuation of the previous antistrophe rather
than as a new beginning.
For what Michael Rogovin stated about praying at home - as there is no communal
response, going back to the original poetic structure makes sense - although
some may miss the traditional melodies.
Meir Shinnar
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steven Oppenheimer <steven.oppenheimer@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 16,2022 at 11:17 AM
Subject: Reusing Hosahnos
My Shul ran out of Hoshanos (aravos) for sale to be used on Hoshana Rabba at the
end of the hakafos. The question arose as to whether it is permitted to reuse
the aravos bundle.
Among others, Shevet Halevi (chelek 2, Y.D. end of siman 58), Rav S Z Auerbach
(Halichot Shelomo, (12:6:10) and Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky (Kovetz Halachos, Chap.
43 siman 2) permit lechatchila as long as leaves remain. Rav Kaminetsky
emphasized "lechatchila mamash".
Steven Oppenheimer, D.M.D.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Wed, Oct 19,2022 at 07:17 AM
Subject: The term 'ultra-Orthodox' (was Secular education at Brooklyn yeshivas)
Perry Zamek wrote (MJ 66#01):
> Prof. Levine (MJ 65#98) asks for the views of members regarding secular
> education in Orthodox Jewish schools (perhaps ultra-Orthodox would be a better
> label?).
I think we should avoid using the term 'ultra-Orthodox', which tends to be
pejorative, and often means little more than observant as opposed to merely
being a member of an Orthodox shul but minimally so like the proverbial 'three
times a year Jews' who were fairly common in previous generations.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Meir Shinnar <chidekel@...>
Date: Sat, Oct 15,2022 at 09:17 PM
Subject: Whose Hashgacha Does It Have?
Professor Yitzchok Levine wrote (MJ 65#98):
> Recently a frum woman sent her son-in-law to buy bread. He brought back a loaf
> from a "kosher" bakery in Brooklyn. When I asked her, "Whose supervision does
> it have?" she replied, "I have no idea." She was comfortable with her lack of
> knowledge.
>
> I know that this bakery is used by many in the Orthodox community in Brooklyn.
> However, it is not under a supervision that I personally use.
>
> I cannot understand how anyone can buy anything without knowing whose
> supervision the product has.
We have been on this ground before. RYL is entitled to his chumrot for his
personal behavior, as long as they don't affect others.
However, I would like him to provide one major posek who argues publicly that if
I know that my observant community eats from a certain place that has a
hashgacha, I am not allowed to eat there until I investigate it.
I have provided poskim, such as Rav Feinstein, who believe eid echad ne'eman
beissurim [one reliable witness is believed in ritual law] applies to hashgachot
I would argue further. RYL has given the list of hashgachot that he trusts -
and has argued that the others are not reliable. Whether he chooses to eat a
hashgacha is his business. However to declare other hashgachot unreliable has
significant halachic issues of being motzi laaz [defamation] and choshed
biksherim [suspecting the righteous of evil doing] - and mail-jewish is being
party to this by allowing him to spread unsubstantiated rumors.
I would think that the rumor spreading is far more halachically problematic -
and lashon hara [gossip] is problematic for both the one who talks and the one
who listens or spreads it - than those who follow the Shulchan Aruch that eid
echad ne'eman beissurim.
I would add that the only evidence adduced by him is a statement of an anonymous
rav from a competing hashgacha who is nogea' badavar [has a conflict of interest]
- and does not name any specific hashgacha for which this is a problem. If I
have to choose an anonymous conflicted rav with general complaints and the
Shulchan Aruch - I will choose the Shulchan Aruch
Meir Shinnar
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 66 Issue 2
