Volume 36 Number 24
                 Produced: Wed Apr 17 21:54:06 US/Eastern 2002

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Baruch Hu u'Varuch Shmo
         [Joshua Hosseinof]
The Holocaust and Procreation
         [Yisrael and Batya Medad]
Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin
         [Susan Shapiro]
Rav Hirschs Translation of Tehillim
         [Saul Davis]
Tefillin shel Rabbeinu Tam
         [Mike Gerver]
Tehillim translations (book review)
         [Louise Miller]
veSein Brocho
         [Perets Mett]
Yom Tov appeals


From: Joshua Hosseinof <jh@...>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 21:49:38 -0400
Subject: Baruch Hu u'Varuch Shmo

While the vast majority of opinions hold that Baruch Hu u'Varuch Shmo
(BHBS) should not be said if one wants to be fulfill an obligation
through someone else saying the Berachah, there is a minority opinion
that exists even today that says that one can and indeed should say BHBS
and Amen even for those Berachot such as Shofar, Megillah, Shehechyanu
on Yom Kippur, Any Shabbat or Yom Tov kiddush, any Beracha on food where
one person may recite the berachah for other people.  I am referring to
the Tunisian Jews, principally from the island of Djerba (where the
tragic explosion by the synagogue took place last week), as well as the
Libyan Jews who followed the Tunisian practice for all intents and

A lengthy defense of this practice is in the Hagaddah "Higid Le'amo"
published in Djerba in 1982 by the chief rabbi of the Tunisian Jews
Rabbi Bugid Sa'adun.  This practice is also defended and practiced today
(if I am not mistaken) by Rabbi Mazzouz in Israel of Yeshivat Kisse
Rachamim among those who continue the Tunisian traditions.

However one doesn't need to look to the Tunisian Jews to show that this
practice is at least acceptable in the eyes of Halacha.  Both the Rambam
and Shulchan Aruch (O.C. 213:2) state that as long as one listens to a
Beracha that someone else recites, and you have intention to fulfill the
obligation, and the person reciting the beracha has intention to enable
you to fulfill the obligation, then you have indeed fulfilled the
obligation to recite the beracha and perform whatever mitzvah or
activity is associated with it.

Also, see the Mishna Berura 124:22, where he also indicates that even if
you did say BHBS, but you had intention to fulfill the obligation, then
you have indeed fulfilled it, even though this is not the preferred way
to do it.

I am perplexed by those who say that saying BHBS is an interruption to
the beracha, and that the Amen is on the full beracha uninterrupted.
Even if you say BHBS when the reciter says Hashem's name, the Amen still
applies to the full statement of the reciter.  It is a bit of a stretch
to hold that saying BHBS effectively "translates" the berachah to
"Baruch Atah Hashem Baruch Hu u'Varuch Shmo Elokenu Melech...."

I think we have to look and understand the meaning of the principle
"Shomea Ke'oneh" (one who listens is the same as one who answers) - it
is interesting that the principle is not called "Shomea Ke'omer" -One
who listens is the same as one who says.  This seems to counter the
above argument that by answering "Amen" it is as if we said the entire
berachah ourselves, and the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch that both state
that you only need to listen and concentrate for "Shomea Ke'oneh" to
work - with the Amen being a reinforcement of the principle, and a way
for people to apply the principle without the rigorous concentration
that might otherwise be necessary.

We also use this principle if we are still davening the amidah, and the
chazan gets up to the kedushah or kaddish - we stop and listen and
fulfill the obligation through the principle of Shomea Ke'oneh- but we
also don't say Amen in these cases.  According to the logic that saying
BHBS is an interruption, then in the case of one in the middle of the
Amidah during Kedushah one should not listen at all to the Kedushah, but
should continue davening uninterrupted.

Joshua Hosseinof


From: Yisrael and Batya Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 20:34:18 +0200
Subject: The Holocaust and Procreation

If I am not mistaken, someone asked if anyone knew of a link
between loss of Jewish lives in the Shoah and a conscious
act to procreate more Jewish lives as a result.

Please see this excerpt from a posting regarding Shmuel Weiss' mother's
hesped for her fallen son:

      Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 16:12:50 +0200
      From: <hebron@...>

      At Shmuel s funeral, the final speaker was his mother,
      Tzipporah. I would like to read you a translation of what she
      said, standing next to her son s grave:

      At some point at the beginning I asked, What, I won t prepare
      you him anything? And afterwards I understood that if I
      really want to help my child and my other children, I must
      stop worrying, making efforts not to worry. Because
      courageous children need courageous mothers.

      I turn to all the other mothers of soldiers here, and of
      soldiers in battle, if we really want to help our children,
      our soldiers, we must try not to worry. To have faith in G-d,
      and let them fight.

      Today is Holocaust memorial day. I gave birth, thank G-d, to
      three girls and six boys. Six sons, that means six soldiers,
      and that means, and I always knew, that perhaps not all of
      them would return from the army.

      I wanted a large family, because they killed six million of
      ours, and amongst them my grandfather and grandmother, 10 of
      their children and another 40 of my close family, and this
      was my answer to the holocaust, my revenge.

      Also my maternal grandmother lost, in the War of
      Independence, in the space of two months, her husband and her
      son, and there is room for me to learn from her how to deal
      with grief.

      I praise G-d that he gave Shmuel the privilege to fight
      honorably, fully identifying with this Land, and its borders,
      a privilege millions did not have.

      G-d gave, G-d took, May G-d s name be praised."


From: <SShap23859@...> (Susan Shapiro)
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 21:22:12 EDT
Subject: Re: Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin

I'm quoting for the Yalkut Bar Mitzvah, which is a Chabad Book:

The mitzvah of tefillin is mentioned four times in the Torah, and it is
these four Parshiyos that are written on parchment and placed inside the
tefillin. However, there is a difference of opinion as to the order in
which they are to be placed.

According to Rashi, in the tefillin shel rosh (if you were standing
facing a person wearing tefillin) then sarting on the right, the order
1. kadesh
2. Vehaya Ki Yeviacha
3. Shema
4. Vehaya Im Shamoa

According to Rabbeinu Tam, the order is:
1. Kadesh
2. Vehaya Ki Yeviacha
3. Vehaya im Shamoa
4. Shema

In the tefilling shel yad, althrough all four parshiyos are written on
one piece of parchment, the same argument applies.  [Even according to
Rabeinu Tam, the parshiyos must be written in their order in the Torah,
however Vehaya Im Shamoa must be placed inside the tefillin before
Shema. In the tefillin shel yad, a blank space should be left, and then
Shema should be written at the end, and then Vehaya im Shamoah filled in
the blank.  If any of the Parshiyos were mixed up and put in the wrong
place, the tefillin are invalid both according to Rashi and Rabbeinu

The Shulchan Aruch Harav states that the custom is to wear the tefillin
of Rashi, for this is the main opinion. However, since according to
Rabbeinu Tam, the tefillin of Rashi are invalid, with the result that
one who only wears the tefillin of Rashi has never truly fulfilled the
mitzvah of tefillin according to Rabbeinu Tam, a G-d fearing person
should wear both Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam. The AriZal showed how both
opinions are valid, kabalistically.

The Minhag Chabad is to lay both Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam tefillin
starting from the time one first lays the tefillin, that is 2 months
before Bar Mitzvah.

It is the Minhag Chabad to wear Rashi tefillin for the entire duration
of the tefillah, and after the daily protion of Tehillim has been
recited, to remove the Rashi tefillin and put on the Rabbeinu Tam
without a Beracha.

I hope that helps.

******* Susan*******


From: Saul Davis <saul9728@...>
Date: 17 Apr 2002 00:20:31 -0700
Subject: Rav Hirschs Translation of Tehillim

Do not forget that Rav Hirsch wrote in German so if you read an English
or Hebrew edition of his any of his works they are a translation of a
translation. This is bound to cause problems.

Saul Davis


From: <MJGerver@...> (Mike Gerver)
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 04:29:06 EDT
Subject: Tefillin shel Rabbeinu Tam

Harold Greenberg writes, in v36n23,

> The article on TEFILLIN in the Encyclopedia Judaica is too long to
>  reproduce here.  It says that Yigael Yadin found Tefillin in the caves
>  at the Dead Sea that "did, however, reveal one important point, namely
>  that the difference of opinion between Rashi and his grandson Jacob Tam
>  as to the order of the scriptural passages did not originate with them,
>  but they transmit different traditions which go back to the first
>  century at least, both systems being found among those fragments, and
>  both were therefore in use concurrently.

When I first heard about this, it occurred to me that there is another
possible interpretation of the evidence. Maybe at the time of the Dead
Sea scrolls people didn't think it mattered what order the parshiot were
written in, so they just wrote them in any order. Only later, perhaps as
late as the time of Rashi, did people decide that the order was
significant, and that's when the different traditions of Rashi and
Rabbeinu Tam tefillin developed.

I admit that the idea of Jews not thinking it mattered what order the
parshiot were written in, and not arguing about it, doesn't sound
plausible.  But aside from this sociological observation, can anyone
present evidence to shoot down my theory?

Mike Gerver
Raanana, Israel


From: Louise Miller <daniel@...>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 22:27:20 -0700
Subject: Tehillim translations (book review)

Re: Discussions of tehillim translations into English, I'd like to put
in a good word about the new Artscroll Linear Tehillim.

The type face is large and clear, even in the pocket-sized version, and
the unusual word for word translation makes it very easy to read the
Hebrew while glancing at the translation.

We are all urged to recite Tehillim daily in these difficult times, and
the folks at Artscroll have put the appropriate pages up on their Web
site in downloadable formats.  A kindness to be sure, as well as good

Louise Miller
La Jolla (San Diego,) CA


From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 15:50:48 +0100
Subject: veSein Brocho

With regards to the ruling of the poskim not announce veSein Brocho on
the first weeknight of Chol hamoieid, in the shtibl where I davened this
year on motsei shabbes chol hamoieid the gabbe announced before maariv
"Everyone should daven from a sidur", thus getting the message across
without actually saying it.

Perets Mett


From: Anonymous
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 00:48:20 EDT
Subject: Yom Tov appeals

Less than a year ago I moved into my current community to start a new
job.  While I enjoy most aspects of communal life here, and in
particular the congregation in which I most regularly daven, I have
found some local practices regarding yom tov appeals very disqueting.

This past Yom Kippur, for example, I was prepared for the yizkor appeal
to be couched at least partly in the form of a harangue.  However, I was
not prepared to hear the deliverer of said harangue presume more or less
categorically that people who did not contribute huge sums of money were
instead frivolously spending those dollars on expensive vacations to
Europe or other similarly misplaced priorities.

Similarly, on the last day of Pesah I davened in a place other than my
"usual congregation."  Several days after Pesah ended, I received a
letter saying that, "According to [the congregation's] attendance
records, [I was] not present for the yizkor appeal.  Please send in a
contribution promptly."

The congregation in question is a *wealthy congregation*.  However, not
all members could by any stretch of the imagination be considered
wealthy.  My own socioeconomic standing would fall at the low end of the
distribution for the congregation as a whole.  At the same time, like
many people, I have many demands of similar levels of halachic priority
placed on me for tzedaqah contributions.  I do my best to balance these
competing priorities as I donate.  However, while my middot (attributes
of character) may be sorely lacking, I was quite bothered by the extreme
aggressiveness with which these appeals were approached, so much so that
I felt more than a little reluctance to respond with yet another check.

Information, including citations to sources, concerning the boundaries
between acceptable and unacceptable practices for soliciting tzedaqah in
general, and congregational appeals in particular, would be most


End of Volume 36 Issue 24