Volume 34 Number 71
                 Produced: Wed Jun  6 23:19:17 US/Eastern 2001

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Ashkenazi Qometz: What You Mean "Us" Keemosabi?
         [Michael Frankel]
Baruch HaShem L'Olam
         [Andrew Klafter]
Kayl Maleh Rahamim (2)
         [Ira L. Jacobson, Zev Sero]
oyheiv or oyev?
         [Meylekh Viswanath]
Repetition of Words in Prayer (4)
         [Mark Steiner, David Cohen, Deborah Wenger, Carl Singer]
Rollerblade question
         [Jacob Sasson]


From: Michael Frankel <mechyfrankel@...>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 11:18:01 -0700
Subject: Ashkenazi Qometz: What You Mean "Us" Keemosabi?

Mark Steiner writes: <And it is simply not true that "even semi-careful
ashkenazi leiner today will hit his mappiqs". Go into any chassidishe or
Hungarian shtibl today (the ignoring of non-Litvak Ashkenazi traditions
is fatal here, and believe me, there are more of "them" than "us"). >

And here I thought a moderated list would screen all personal invective.
Since my own hungarian/romanian/transylvanian bona fides are beyond reproach
words cannot adequately convey enormity of distress engendered by this
false imputation of 'Litvak' (sic!) status to me.

[I can only claim that since one grandparent was Hungarian and one
parent is Litvak (and a stepparent who is Yemanite), whatever the Us and
Them I'm probably both. Mod.]

<Modern orthodox readers have "improved" their tradition by studying
"dikduk," but even people like me were never told by the rebbe to
pronounce a mappiq he at the end of a word, nor was I so trained when
studying my Bar Mitzvah parsha.> .

Actually, I was so trained - and nary a Litvak in sight.  I also find
difficult to accept without some documentation the conjecture that current
practice with which I'm familiar all stems from a sort of MO/maskilic
hyper correction to existing ashkenazi practice. However, I will concede
to having been raised as a tinoq shenishboh and not frequenting the normal
shtible environment that my sighter DNA cried out for.  Which raises
an issue of correct factoids on the ground.  I am now curious as to practice
in the chassidishe/hungarian shtiblich.  Do competent leiner's there
indeed systematically miss their mappiqs? Perhaps list members can provide
(anecdotal to be sure) data from their own observations.   

Mechy Frankel				W: (703) 588-7424
<Mechyfrankel@...>		H:  (301) 593-3949


From: Andrew Klafter <andrew.klafter@...>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 00:56:46 -0400
Subject: Baruch HaShem L'Olam

> From: Eli Turkel <Eli.Turkel@...>
> The psak that I have seen is that an Israeli abroad should preferably
> not say Baruch Hashem le'olam. Even a shaliach tzibbur need not say it
> on condition that he can go straight to kaddish and it would not be
> noticeable. However, if people would notice, then as Gerver notes one
> must use the local nuscah.

The reason it is not said in Israel is because this was the psak of the
Vilna Gaon, whose legal opinions were widely adopted for tefilla in Eretz
Yisrael.  This happens also to be the same opinion as the Ba'al HaTanya, R.
Shneur Zalman of Liady, the 1st Rebbe of Lubbavitch.  In the Lubavitch
siddur, the relevant halakhot are briefly discussed just before V'Shamru on
Shabbos Ma'ariv.  (The Ba'al HaTanya and the Gra also poskin not to say
V'Shamru for the same reason they do not say baruch HaShem l'olam--it
constitutes a problematic hefsek.)

I was given the psak NOT to say baruch HaShem l'olam even when I am a
shaliach ha tzibbur, even if the congregation WILL notice.  It seems to me
that the opinion of whether it should be said in Galus will depend on
whether or not one holds that it is a truly problematic hefsek.  If so,
there is little to justify saying it.  If not, it is a question of following
one's own minhag vs. the local community's minhag in tefilla d'tzibura.  It
sounds like the Rabbi who poskined for Eli only considered this to be a
question of personal minhag, and not of problematic hefsek.  BTW, i
frequently doven Shabbos Ma'ariv in my shul and also omit V'Shamru.  Those
who notice don't mind because they are familiar with the reasons, but most
don't notice.
-Nachum Klafter


From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 18:13:34 +0300
Subject: Re: Kayl Maleh Rahamim

David Wachtel <Dawachtel@...> wrote in mail-jewish Vol. 34 #67 Digest:

>I was hoping someone could shed light on the variations in Kayl Maleh 
>Rahamim between the nusach of "al kanfei hashechinah" and "tahat kanfei 

The source is the Shelah, who maintains that "al" is the correct
version, and "tahat" should not be said.

I'm sorry I don't have the reference before me, but I would think that
you could find it readily on the Bar-Ilan CD.

>To the best of my knowledge, the only reference to "al kanfei hashechinah" 
>is in the  midrash where Moshe Rabbenu is transported for burial four mil 
>between the territory of shevet Reuven and shevet Dan.

In this context, the Sifri on Ha'azinu interestingly states "lo
mesartikha lepedagog . . . ."  Amazing how English got into the midrash

                 IRA L. JACOBSON

From: Zev Sero <Zev@...>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 15:20:39 -0400 
Subject: RE: Kayl Maleh Rahamim

David Wachtel <Dawachtel@...>

> Over Yom Tov, I noticed that the text for "Kayl Maleh Rahamim" was
> recited differently by different people around me depending on the
> siddur they were using. I was hoping someone could shed light on the
> variations in Kayl Maleh Rahamim between the nusach of "al kanfei
> hashechinah" and "tahat kanfei hashechinah". The Artscroll siddurim
> and mahzorim all had "AL" and some other peoples personal mahzorim
> had "TAHAT". 

Many years ago I saw in one of the well-known seforim on the subject
(sorry, I don't remember which one) that the space `under the wings of
the shechina' is reserved for converts, and therefore one should
say `al', not `tachat'; if that is the reason, then it would follow
that when saying a Molei for a convert `tachat' is in fact correct.


From: Meylekh Viswanath <pviswanath@...>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 12:58:08 -0400
Subject: Re: oyheiv or oyev?

Shlomo B Abeles wrote
>I think the worst offenders are those, who instead of "Melech OYHEIV
>Tzedoko Umishpot", say "OYEV" (!)  and similarly instead of "OYHEIV Amo
>Yisroel" - also say "OYEV".

Just wanted to point out that the standard Yiddish pronounciation of a
word like "oyheiv yisroel" is, indeed, "oyev yisroel."  Hence, at least
as far as Yiddish speakers are concerned, this just happens to be a case
of two words pronounced similarly, but with vastly different meanings.
Not necessarily a mistake, just a fact of Yiddish.

Meylekh Viswanath


From: Mark Steiner <marksa@...>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 18:07:37 +0300
Subject: Re: Repetition of Words in Prayer

    A few remarks on repetition during davening:

1.  The repetition of verses during the last chapter of the Hallel is
ancient (it's mentioned in the Mishna Sukka) but no proof that
repetition is a good thing.  The verses in that chapter are doublets
anyhow except for the last few verses, so a custom grew up to double the
singlets and was sanctioned by the Mishna.

2.  Repetition of words where the impression might be given that one is
praying to two deities (modim...modim; shma...shma) is expressly
prohibited by the Mishna.  It is reasonable to extend this to "beh ana
rahetz," and for the same reason.

3.  Repetition of other words COULD be forbidden because (a) the "extra"
words are an interruption (hefsek) and there are places where it is
forbidden to interrupt the prayers with extraneous words; (b) in saying
a verse from Scripture, thus distorting the verse.

4.  As for 3(b), I have heard that Rabbi J. B. Soloveitchik z"l, was
very strict with distorting Biblical verses by repeating words in them,
and he is not usually blamed for the "move to the right."  However, I
have a rule that I only believe things in writing or if I have heard
them from reliable witnesses.  In this case, it is easy to get
witnesses, however, because the Rov gave instructions to the baalei
tefillah in the Maimonides yeshiva which he founded and davened in.

5.  In re 3(a), we have a written teshuva of R. Moshe Feinstein, z"l,
who explicitly states (sorry, I don't have the source at hand) that
repeating a word is not an interruption at all (only an extraneous word
is an interruption, not the same word twice).  He regards the practice
as unseemly (ein ruah hakhamim noha mizeh), but perhaps even R. Moshe
would agree that for a good reason (perhaps to increase devotion in the
context of community singing, where the congregation is used to it) the
unseemliness is overruled.  (This is only a suggestion, particularly
since one should really ask R. Dovd shlita what his father's opinion
really was.)  I believe it is standard practice in yeshivot such as
Ponevez (where I heard this with my own ears, so you can believe this)
that words in the silent shmoeh esreh are repeated, if the worshiper
feels that he has not said them with sufficient devotion.  This
particularly in the first benediction (avot) because the ruling is that
one must repeat the entire shomeh esreh if one fails to recite the first
benediction with devotion/intention [kavvanah].

6.  We see, then, that the facile labeling certain ideas as a "move to
the right" can be simplistic.

From: David Cohen <bdcohen@...>
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 08:14:54 -0400
Subject: Repetition of Words in Prayer

Some posters have made disparaging remarks, claiming that the
prohibition of repeating words in prayers is some kind of new chumra.
While there us no doubt that the custom of formal European chazzaanut
was to repeat words (and repeat and repeat and repeat) the Briskers were
firmly against this. As the influence of Rav YB Soleveitchik (The Rav)
became more pronounced as his talmidim became the majority of the modern
Orthodox rabbinate in the US, his teaching that it is prohibited to
repeat words, especially when the prayers quote verses of the Tanach,
has become the norm in more and more congregations. Obviously, some of
the older well entrenched melodies (Vayihi Binsoah when taking out the
Torah comes to mind) continue to be sung, with their repetitions.  For a
full discussion of the Rav's position, see, "Nefesh Harav" by Rav H.

David I. Cohen

From: Deborah Wenger <dwenger@...>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 08:16:30 -0400
Subject: Repetition of Words in Prayer

Thought I'd contribute my 2 cents' worth to this discussion:

Ben Katz says:
> I also defy any one to find a shul that can sing "vayhe be-nesoah
> ha-aron" without a repetition.

I've noticed that in my shul, although many (if not most) repeat the
lines "Ki mitzion teitzei Torah" and "Baruch shenatan Torah," there are
a number of people who will just hum along or stand quietly while
everyone else sings. And this is in a shul that's usually pretty
"makpid" about repetition.

However, there's one repetition I've noticed in just about every shul
(including my own) that I've ever attended: When saying "Hodo al eretz
v'shamayim" (see previous discussion on "hodo" vs. "hodu"!), every
siddur I've seen has "Halleluka" written once; however, it is almost
universally repeated - in fact, I can recall only one shul that I've
EVER been to that sings this word only once. I would think that this
would be more problematic than repeating, say, "Bei ana rachitz," since
Hashem's name is part of the word.  Any comments?

Kol tuv,

From: Carl Singer <CARLSINGER@...>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 06:44:47 EDT
Subject: Re: Repetition of Words in Prayer

<<  From: Asher Goldstein <mzieashr@...>
 My "minyan" in Haifa does--or at least used to--make a big deal of this,
 with a lot of tsk-tsking whenever a shaliah tzibbur tried to be a hazan.
 When one of the main anti-repeat leaders left the community and as the
 "minyan" has aged, I've noticed slighlty more tolerance, or at least no
 outright rudeness, whenever there is a guest hazan who does not know our
 custom.  The non-repeating stance is, I presume, one of the reasons we
 were called "the tzaddikim."  >>

In addition to the issues of what may / should / must not be repeated
there is the congregational (before and after the fact) response to same
 -- rules or rudeness, -- the gabbai's role in choosing / informing the
shaliach tzibor, etc.  Although just about everyone would feel that "ooh
Sh'mo, ooh Sh'mo, ooh Sh'mo echad" (and His name, and His name, and His
name is one) is a ridiculous phraseology -- there are preventive
measures that can be taken -- after the fact trantrums (or tisking) does
little other than make someone uncomfortable.

It's not an issue of repeaters / anti-repeaters, to me it's an issue of
how an organization functions within both halachik and social
guidelines.  What agreed to set of "rules" (?) the Rabbi finds
(paskens?) halachikly acceptable for the congregation, and within this
halachik guidance, which the shule (board?) elects.

Kol Tov
Carl Singer


From: Jacob Sasson <jacobsasson@...>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 14:22:56 -0400
Subject: Rollerblade question

 Galina Shuster asks (v34n57) :

 <I'd really like to know if I am allowed to use rollerblades on

Rabbi Ben Tsion Abba Shaul z"l, the late Rosh Yeshiva of Porat Yosef in
Jerusalem, permits rollerblades on shabbat.  Actually, he allows skates
that "go over" the shoes.  Since this would potentially pose more of a
problem, I assume rollerblades would be permitted as well.  You are free
to make your own assumptions.  His responsa can be found in:

  Or Letzion, volume 2, chapter 42, question 2.

Jacob Sasson


End of Volume 34 Issue 71