Volume 25 Number 12
Produced: Mon Nov 11 6:19:16 1996
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
"L'dovid Hashem" mincha on Yom Kippur
[David I. Cohen]
30th day of Adar1
[Chaim Shapiro]
Aliyah and Mitzvat Yishuv Eretz Yisrael
[David Kaufmann]
Birds and Swordfish
[Adina and Carl Sherer]
Daf Yomi
[Gershon Dubin]
Definition of Chareidi
[Gershon Klavan]
Did King David sin?
[Binyomin Segal]
English Translations of Slichot
[Rose Landowne]
Macarena
[Mordechai Torczyner]
Shemoneh Esray on Motza'ay Yom Kippur
[Jeff Fischer]
Swordfish Scales
[Jerome Parness]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <bdcohen@...> (David I. Cohen)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 20:13:59 -0700
Subject: "L'dovid Hashem" mincha on Yom Kippur
"L'Dovid Hashem" is recited during mincha on Yom Kippur, it occurred to
me that a possible explanation for its absence is that in general,
during mincha, "l'dovid" follows "aleinu". On Yom Kippur day, "aleinu"
is not said after mussaf or mincha, as the tefilot are considered as
one continuance service. Since there is no "aleinu" at the end of
mincha, "l'dovid" is likewise omitted. It is said in shacharit,
because, in nusach sefarad, "l'dovid" is said after the Yom, before the
Torah reading. (Interesting, where there is a substantial break between
the end of mussaf and mincha on Yom Kippur, many poskim hold that
"aleinu" should be said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Chaim Shapiro <ucshapir@...>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 22:00:25 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: 30th day of Adar1
Adar 1 has 30 days. The standard Adar has only 29. Usually if a
child is born in Adar 1 and his bar mitzvah is not during a leap year, the
bar mitzvah is held on his birthday in the regular Adar. But, what if a
child is born on the 30th of Adar 1 and his bar mitzva is not during a
leap year? Would his bar mitzvah be on the first of Nissan?? A similar
question can be asked about the observance of yertzheit.
Chaim
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <kaufmann@...> (David Kaufmann)
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 09:15:07 -0500
Subject: Aliyah and Mitzvat Yishuv Eretz Yisrael
>From: Perry Zamek <jerusalem@...>
>As for "making Israel in Galut", it was one of the Lubavitcher Rebbeim
>(I don't recall which one), who, when asked whether one should go on
>Aliyah (this was well before the mass Aliyah of the 1920's and 1930's I
>think), said "Mach Yerusholayim Do" (Make Yerushalayim Here). There are
>still some among Lubavitcher chassidim of my acquaintance who believe
>this to be operative even today
I believe it was the Tzemach Tzedek, the third Lubavitch Rebbe
(1789-1866) who, when asked by one of his Chassidim if he should move to
Israel, responded, "Mach do Eretz Yisroel." This concept is explained at
length in various sichos. It certainly is not a blanket rejection of
aliyah; given the history of Chabad in Israel, such a reading is clearly
a misunderstanding. In brief, the statement is in keeping with a long
tradition about attitudes, presented within a Chassidic context.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Adina and Carl Sherer <sherer@...>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 22:57:17 +0000
Subject: Birds and Swordfish
David Charlap writes:
> >2. All I know about the kashruth of birds is that they not be
> >carnivores, i.e. we can eat chickens but not hawks. I'm wondering
> >whether the wingless birds now becoming available (emus, rheas, and
> >ostriches) can be kosher, assuming they're raised and slaughtered
> >properly.
>
> This is a guess, but I think they should be.
>
> D'oraita (according to the written Torah), the kashrut status of birds
> is rather straightforward. There is a list of birds which are
> forbidden, and everything else is permitted.
>
> The rabbis decided (quite rightly, IMO) that not everybody can recognize
> all of these birds. (Especially true today. Translators do not all
> translate the words the same, so we obviously don't know exactly what
> they are.) So they made a general rule that forbids all birds of prey -
> this includes all the birds on the list and makes it easy to always
> determine if a particular bird is OK.
>
> With respect to ostriches, I think some don't permit them. I seem to
> remember one Torah-translator actually translating one of the forbidden
> birds to "ostrich" (but I may just be remembering wrong).
The Gemara actually gives four signs regarding which birds are tahor
(pure, i.e. allowed to be eaten). The Mishna in Chulin 59a says that
any bird that is "dores" (commonly translated as birds of prey but
actually a three-way argument between Rashi, Tosfos and Rabbeinu
Gershom as to what it means. Rashi says that it "holds its food
with its nails and picks it up off the ground". Rabbeinu Gershom
learns that it means that the bird catches its food from the air.
Tosfos (printed on 61a) says that it crushes its prey and does not
wait until it dies to eat it) is tameh (impure) and cannot be eaten.
But the Mishna goes on to talk about three additional signs and says
that any bird that has all three of them is tahor.
1. Etzba Yeseira - Rashi understands this as an extra finger behind
its fingers. The Ran (page 20b in the Ri"f pages at the back of the
Gemara) learns that this means a finger that is longer than the
others.
2. Zefek - The bird has a crop.
3. Kurkevono Niklaf - The craw peels easily.
In the end, however, we do not eat birds today unless we have a
mesora (tradition) that they are Kosher birds. See Rav Yitzchak in
the Gemara Chullin 63b ("ofe tahor neechal bemasores"; a pure bird is
eaten based on a tradition). I don't think we have such a mesora
about any of the birds cited above (but I could be wrong about that).
> >3. I've heard mixed opinions on whether swordfish is kosher. If it's
> >not, why not?
>
> The problem here is that a kosher fish must have scales and gills. A
> swordfish loses its scales sometime during its life cycle. Some hold
> that because it once had scales, it's kosher. Some hold that because it
> doesn't have them all its life, it's not.
I don't think this is the reason. The Gemara in Chulin 66a-66b says
that if a fish does not have them now but will have them later, or
has them now and will shed them later, then it is Kosher. Although I
think what you wrote above is the popular explanation, the Gemara
seems to contradict it. I suspect that the explanation our moderator
gave in response to the next letter (see below) is the correct
answer:
> [I'm pretty sure that nearly all major Poskim hold swordfish to be
> non-kosher. The issue as mentioned by others is that the scales of the
> sordfish is of a different variaty than other fish and is not considered
> to what is required by Halacha. MOd.]
-- Carl Sherer
Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.
Thank you very much.
Carl and Adina Sherer
<sherer@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <gershon.dubin@...> (Gershon Dubin)
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 96 09:06:00 -0400
Subject: Daf Yomi
Hello,
Does anyone know of a website which has images corresponding to
the descriptions in the current Daf Yomi, perek Eilu Traifos?
Gershon
<gershon.dubin@...> |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gershon Klavan <klavan@...>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 16:01:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Definition of Chareidi
>From what I was told, the first usage in the State of Israel of the term
"chareidi" was by the OU (back when they were the Union of Orthodox
Congregations of the United States and Canada.) The name printed on their
(imported) hechshairim in Israel was "Ichud Hakehilot Hachareidiyot
ShebaAmerica." Only later (after the "chareidim" took over the term
"chareidi") did they switch the term to "Orthodoxiyot".
Imagine that - the first chareidim were modern orthodox.
Gershon Klavan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <bsegal@...> (Binyomin Segal)
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 15:51:03 -0500
Subject: Did King David sin?
i think the confusion about dodid hamelech's "sin" (or for that matter
the "sin" of reuven and perhaps others) comes from an imprecise use of
the word sin.
a sin can mean "a bad thing" or it can have a more precise definition:
sin can mean a violation of a specific Torah or Rabbinic precept.
the Talmud tells us that Hashem holds those that are close to Him to a
higher standard (see for example yevamos 121b). This does _not_ change
the precise definition of sin - there is one Torah and only one
Torah. But it DOES change the first definition. (For a more complete
look at this a study of the laws of chilul Hashem would provide
examples)
The gemara when it tells us Dovid Hamelech did not sin is referring to
the precise definition - Dovid did not violate the Letter of the
Law. And that is why the gemara discusses the fact that soldiers in
Dovid's army divorced their wives before leaving for battle. The gemara
is explaining how it is true that Dovid avoided the letter of the law.
of course one might wonder why then the navi portrays the story as if
Dovid did in fact sin. i would suggest that the Torah is more concerned
with MORAL truth than with historical fact. the torah tells us the moral
truth - dovid sinned. He was held to a standard under which what he did
was a "bad thing" The gemara is merely clarifying the historical
information.
if one wants some support for this theory a look at the story of Yericho
& Ay in Yehoshua may be helpful. one person violates the law and takes
spoils from yericho. yet Hashem tells Yehoshua that the PEOPLE took. And
yehoshua understands that to mean that 1 person took! The historical
fact was that 1 person took - yet every person beared some moral guilt
for contributing to a society that allowed a person to violate that law.
hope that helps
binyomin
<bsegal@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rose Landowne
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 08:41:54 -0400
Subject: English Translations of Slichot
Does anyone know where I could obtain English translations of the
following slichot, said during the Yom Kippur davening, which are not
included in most machzorim:
1. Boker m'falti Kayli Tzur
2. Akhapra pnai Melech Rav
3. Im yosifim anachnu l'amod
4. Et habrit v'et ha chesed
5. Yachbienu tzel yado
6. Emunim bnei maaminim.
I know I'm starting early, but it would be nice to have them for next year.
Rose Landowne
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mordechai Torczyner <mat6263@...>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 09:27:07 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Macarena
> From: <Michael_Lipkin@...> (Michael Lipkin)
> Everyone has probably heard of "The Macarena". In case not, it's a
> Spanish song with a strong beat to which there is an exremely popular
> line dance. The dance and song have become popular at Jewish simchas.
> "The New York Times" recently published a translation of the song. I
> was pretty taken aback to see what many frum Jews have been dancing to.
Rav Herschel Schachter, speaking at the Hausman-Stern Teshuvah
Derashah in YU a few weeks ago, came out very strongly against the
introduction of the Macarena to simchas.
WEBSHAS! http://www.virtual.co.il/torah/webshas & Leave the Keywords at Home
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <rabbi_gabbai@...> (Jeff Fischer)
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 07:14:28, -0500
Subject: Shemoneh Esray on Motza'ay Yom Kippur
I heard this topic being discussed in our shul Yom Kippur night and I
wanted to get other people's answers.
On Motza'ay Yom Kippur, we say the regular weekday Shemoneh Esray
with Ata Chonantanu. How come we say the b'racha of Selach Lanu if
we just finished an entire day of selicha ulchapparah and fasting?
Why not skip it?
Jeff Fischer - Gabbai of Young Israel of Passaic
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jerome Parness <parness@...>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 16:53:55 EDT
Subject: Swordfish Scales
Re: the controversy or lack theoreof regarding swordfish scales.... as a
point of information, there are two types of fishscales: 1)epidermal and
2)dental. The former are found on all true bony fish (Piscidae), the
latter on the cartilagenous fish of which kites, rays and sharks are
examples. Only the former are kosher. Dental scales are so called
because of the dentine contained in them and are more closely related to
teeth than to true fish scales. Moreover, I believe that halachically,
if the fish comes from a family that has epidermal scales and have "lost
them over evolutionary time", unless we have a tradition that they are
kosher (i.e., some forms of carp or goldfish), they are not considered
kosher either. If my memory serves me correctly (it's been twenty years
since I practiced marine biology), swordfish have dental scales, while
sturgeon evolutionarily lost their scales and we have no tradition that
they were ever kosher.
Jerome Parness MD PhD <parness@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 25 Issue 12