Volume 29 Number 86
Produced: Tue Sep 21 20:26:56 US/Eastern 1999
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Administrivia - Hoping all had a meaningful Yomim Noraim
[Avi Feldblum]
Break on Rosh Hashana
[Yisrael Medad]
Dikduk: Rule of Nasog Achor
[Rick Turkel]
Etymology of word Pareve
[David and Toby Curwin]
Jewish Name Book
[Jeffrey Bock]
L'Dovid Hashem Ori (3)
[Sid Gordon, Percy Mett, Baruch Schwartz]
Rosh Hashanah on Shabbat
[B. Schwartz]
Vilna Gaon's comment on Sukkot
[David and Toby Curwin]
Zochreinu
[Gershon Dubin]
Web Sites and Halachah
[Jack Reiner]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Avi Feldblum <mljewish@...>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 19:43:32 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Administrivia - Hoping all had a meaningful Yomim Noraim
Hello All,
Just a quick message to all, hoping that everyone had a meaningful Rosh
Hashana and Yom Kippur, and looking forward to another good year with my
extended mail-jewish family!
Avi Feldblum
mail-jewish Moderator
<mljewish@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael Medad <isrmedia@...>
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 23:45:21 +0200
Subject: Break on Rosh Hashana
This year, due to the absence of shofar blowing on the First Day of
Rosh Hashana, the gabaim of our schule in Shiloh, Ramat Shmuel, decided
there would be no break after Shacharit.
One congregant then argued that if there was no break, and
consequently, no opportunity to make Kiddush, the davening would have to
end no later than midday [chatzot hayom] which was 11:38 AM. This
according to Shulchan Arukh, O.H., Para. 584, 1: the Rama's stricture
that "and one extends [the davening] through piyutim and prayers until
midday" based on the Maharil and the Be'er Heitev adds; "midday - at
least, unless it occurs on the Shabbat". The Mishna Brurah there
repeats that and stresses "if it occurs on Shabbat one cannot extend
more than midday".
Now, the usually reason for the break was to make sure that everyone
knew more or less when Shofar blowing was to begin, i.e., after the
break and the drasha. He argued that as the break, from the outset,
should have been to hear Kiddush rather than a Rav or other
distinguished person, then if the break is cancelled then no one speaks
and we get right down to the business of davening.
That's what we did and the drasha was put off until Mincha time.
Oh, and we finished by 11:37.
My questions are:
a) what is the break for?
b) did we do the right/proper thing?
Yisrael Medad
Shiloh
[We don't have any break during davening, but we do have a short dvar
torah, and we finished at about 9:50 first day (but we do start at
6:30). Mod]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rick Turkel <rturkel@...>
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 15:10:21 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Dikduk: Rule of Nasog Achor
Mark (Moshe) Feldman <MFeldman@...> wrote:
>As a ba'al kriyah, I certainly appreciate your examples from chumash.
>In chumash, it's easy to determine whether a word will be nasog achor
>(in response to the following word), since there is generally a dash
>between the two words (which tells you that the two words should be
>read together). In tefillah, however, most siddurim do not provide
>dashes. How do you know when two words should be read together (and
>thereby cause the rule of nasog achor to apply)?
An excellent question, considering that there is essentially no
authoritative text we can examine to glean this information. In
Chumash, even without the maqaf (dash) between words, we can usually
deduce examples of nasog achor from the position of the trop (note) on
the words, which in at least 98% of cases is located on the accented
syllable.
Even those siddurim which provide indications of stress are not
entirely consistent. If I'm not mistaken, the Artscroll, Rinat Yisrael
and Tiqun Meir siddurim all indicate the stress as cited by the original
poster - "u-MEI-vi Lay-la" - but Birnbaum, who also indicates most
non-ultimate accents, does not. I also have an old siddur based on the
British "Authorised Daily Prayer Book" that indicates the stress in
"LAY-la" correctly three times in that same paragraph, but shows no
stress mark on the word "umeivi."
It may be that verb-object combinations should be read together
as one word, as in the example I brought in my previous posting, "LA-tet
LA-nu" (Deut. 26:3, near the beginning of parashat Ki Tavo'). On second
thought, if that were true then there should be only a single stress on
the pair "umeivi-LAYla," but in this case both words are marked for
stress.
In my own personal experience, I've heard many Israelis say
"u-mei-VI" here, and I always have as well. Methinks the application of
nasog achor outside of Tanakh is optional, and possibly even a case of
the imposition of an external "rule" to the tefila (prayer) text. If
this is indeed the case, it's an example of what linguists call a
hyperurbanism, which Webster defines as "a form, pronunciation or usage
that overreaches correctness in an effort to avoid provincial speech."
Hope this helps. Ketiva vechatima tova.
Rick Turkel (___ _____ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ ___
<rturkel@...>)oh.us| | \ ) |/ \ ein |navi| be|iro\__) |
<rturkel@...> / | _| __)/ | ___) | ___|_ | _( \ |
Rich or poor, it's good to have money. Ko rano rani | u jamu pada.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David and Toby Curwin <curwin@...>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:06:44 +0200
Subject: Etymology of word Pareve
Does anyone know the origin of the word "pareve"?
David Curwin
Kvutzat Yavne, Israel
<curwin@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jeffrey Bock <ilduce@...>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 07:23:18 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Jewish Name Book
Someone on the list was looking for a book regarding naming children. A
fairly comprehensive (though slim) volume is "What's In a Name" by Rabbi
Y.Z. Wilhelm, copyright 1998 (translated from the Hebrew original, "Ziv
Hashemot") published by S.I.E. Publications.
Tha back cover describes it as covering "Laws and Customs regarding the
naming of children and related topics." It has complete footnoting of
sources, and covers most issues.
Jeffrey N. Bock (<ilduce@...>)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sid Gordon <sgordon@...>
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 09:57:49 +0200
Subject: L'Dovid Hashem Ori
In response to my query about saying L'David Hashem Ori V'Yishi (LDHOVY)
three times, Yisrael Medad wrote:
> Obviously the Chazan has not said it at Mincha if he recites
> it at Ma'ariv so he's not saying it thrice. The congregant, if he's
> recited it at Mincha will also not repeat, so he's not said it thrice.
and our Esteemed Moderator tried to help out by saying the problem was
combining different halachic days (Mincha and Maariv being on different
days).
But what I'm specifically asking about is the idea of a particular
person (chazan or congregant) *always* saying it three times (especially
if he davens Mincha and Maariv at the same shul every day). This, as I
said, is the practice at our shul, based on a psak of the local rav
hashchuna, where the nushach may change from tfila to tfila. Suppose
you personally daven sfarad and you've already said LDHOVY at mincha,
and you are davening at a minyan which is saying it at the subsequent
maariv. Do you stand there with a smug look on your face with a smile
that says "I already said it", while everyone else is daevening? Do you
immerse yourself in a quick mishna for the 30 seconds or so it takes for
everyone else to finish LDHOVY? Or do you say, well another kapit'l
t'hilim can't hurt, and I don't want to be "poresh min hatzibur", so you
say it again. I think the last choice is probably the best, but as I
asked before, I wonder if there is some specific (kabbalistic?) reason
for saying it twice, and not three times, and for saying it davka at
mincha/maariv since most of the other day-related t'hilim we say (e.g.,
borchi nafshi, or the perek said in the house of mourning) are said only
at shacharit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Percy Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 14:17:19 +0100
Subject: L'Dovid Hashem Ori
Sid Gordon <sgordon@...> wrote:
> The daveners in our shul (like many in Israel) are about equally
>divided between nusach ashkenaz and nusach sfarad. The practice for
>many years (based on a psak received then) is that since there is no
>clear majority, the shaliach tzibur determines the nusach. The problem
>this time of year is whether "l'david hashem ori" is said at mincha or
>at maariv. The practice (also supposedly based on a psak from the LOR,
>though I don't know this first hand) is for everyone to say it at both.
>The justification I often hear for this is "it never hurts to say
>another perek of t'hilim (chapter of Psalms)".
Firstly, the different minhogim of saying l'dovid at mincha or maariv
has absolutely nothing to do with Nusach Ashkenaz of sfard. This is just
a misconception which has been given greater credence by a few modern
publishers of sidurim such as Artscroll.
I well remember davening in my youth from a Yomim noyroim machzor ( I
daven nusach sfard) which had l'dovid after maariv, although the minyan
where I davened said it after mincha.
In fact l'dovid during Elul and Tishrei is a very recent custom which
can be found in neither the Shulkhon orukh nor the R'mo. It has very
many variants.
The first question is the mincho/maariv one. The custom in Germany,
(Congress) Poland and Lithuania was to say it at maariv, whereas in
Galicia (East and West), Volhynia and the Russian parts of Lite it was
said at mincha. The Mishno Bruro (who davened Nusach Ashkenaz) quotes
the custom of saying it at mincha. On the other hand the Polish chasidim
(nusach sfard - hence my erstwhile machzor from Warsaw) said it at
maariv, and still do so to this day.
The next question is where in the t'filo it should be added. Nusach
ashkenaz naturally puts it at the end, since even the shir shel yom does
not merit being said before Oleynu. Some adherents of Nusach sfard also
adopt this custom; so at weekday shacharis in Elul it is said after
blowing the shofar. Other customs say it before the first kadish
following shmone esrei (minahg Ryzhin0; after that kaddish (minhag
Chabad); and , in the case of shacharis, immediately after the shir shel
yom (minhag Belz). No doubt I have missed out a few. In Bobov it is not
customary to add l'dovid in Elul, and many oriental communities say it
the whole year round.
The suggestion of saying it three times a day seems strange , since that
is clearly not the custom. But just following the shliavch tsibur won't
work either because the shats for mincha and maariv may have two
different customs. Maybe this is an issue where the community should
make a decision one way or the other.
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Baruch Schwartz <schwrtz@...>
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 20:26:20 +0300
Subject: L'Dovid Hashem Ori
Sid Gordon comments, rightly in my opinion, that the recitation of
Ledavid Hashem Ori at Minha in Nusah Sefarad and at Arvit in Nusah
Ashkenaz can cause confusion in a congregation that goes according to
the "hazzan's choice" system. I agree that simply instructing the
worshipers to say it at both services is not an appropriate solution,
for the very reason Sid states so well: "certain t'hilim, having become
part of the liturgy, have a certain status, which is lessened by saying
them 'too much' or 'not at the proper time'".
Actually this is only one of the arguments--and there are many, many
more--that can and should be raised against the unfortunate practice of
many "mixed" congregations of allowing the sheliah tzibbur to determine
the nusah at each service.
What I would really recommend is for the congregation to decide once and
for all to adopt one nusah, either by majority vote or by historical
decision (who were the founders?), and what better time could there be
for such a resolution than during Elul?
Short of that, I suggest that you decide that Ledavid Hashem Ori is said
by the congregation, and followed by kaddish, only once. Those who wish
can of course add it privately at the other service. Just announce it,
or put up a notice, and everyone will get used to it quickly enough.
From experience I can also predict that it will probably also prove
necessary for you to announce a few times that the people who choose not
to say this psalm with the congregation are requested to remain in place
and not to leave the synagogue while it, and the following kaddish, are
being said.
Ketivah vahatima tovah.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: B. Schwartz <schwrtz@...>
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 20:33:46 +0300
Subject: Rosh Hashanah on Shabbat
I was asked by a congregant, in preparation for Rosh Hashanah which
falls on Shabbat, whether it is proper to say le-eyla le-eyla in the
kaddish recited by mourners on the first night of Rosh Hashanah
following Mizmor Shir Leyom Hashabbat and Hashem Malakh, or whether,
since this kaddish precedes Barchu, it is preferable not to say le-eyla
le-eyla. I had never heard this issue brought up anywhere; the mahzorim
of course all have le-eyla le-eyla but they may simply be reprinting
what they have elsewhere. We can all hypothesize sevarot, but can anyone
refer me to any authoritative written sources on this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David and Toby Curwin <curwin@...>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:00:22 +0200
Subject: Vilna Gaon's comment on Sukkot
I read in a newspaper column last year that Elie Wiesel once
quoted the Vilna Gaon as having said that the holiday of Sukkot
is the most difficult to keep because of the mitzva of simcha.
Does anyone know the source of that quote?
Thanks,
David Curwin
Kvutzat Yavne, Israel
<curwin@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 23:18:47 -0400
Subject: Zochreinu
Does anyone know the origin of the custom to repeat the insertions
"zochreinu lechaim", "mi chamocha" etc. when the sh"tz repeats Shemone
Esreh?
Gershon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jack Reiner <jack.reiner@...>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 13:52:16 -0500
Subject: RE: Web Sites and Halachah
>and am concerned with possible use of the site on Shabbat. The ASCENT
>site, for instance, http://www.ascent.org.il contains the following note
>on its home page: "Please take some time to look through our site (but
>not on Shabbat!--Fri. sunset till Sat. nitefall)". Other sites, however,
>do not include such a message. I welcome thoughts on the subject.
When I set up our shule's web site almost 3 years ago,
http://www.JewishNewOrleans.com, I did not think to ask our rabbi about
this, nor did he mention it on his own.
A parallel situation would be kosher food bearing a label that says
"Please do not cook me on Shabbos." I have never seen such a label and
I doubt that I ever will.
Yet, the idea that non-observant Jews may feel Jewish by cooking kosher
hot dogs on Saturday afternoon, or especially a kosher chicken after
sundown Friday night, seems more likely than surfing the web looking for
Jewish web sites on Shabbos.
Jack Reiner http://www.CreativeInternet.com <jack@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 29 Issue 86