Volume 36 Number 27
Produced: Tue Apr 30 6:15:43 US/Eastern 2002
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Berakhah on Falafel balls
[Joseph Mosseri]
Birthday of Rabbi Moshe Chaim Ephraim of Sudilkov?? (Degel Machan
[Ginsburg, Paul]
Extra paragraph break in Shema
[Michael J. Savitz]
Is this water bottle straw muktzah?
[Aliza N. Fischman]
Student Initiative Project One Percent
[Gershon Strauchler]
Tefillin shel Rabbeinu Tam (7)
[Harry Schick, Eli Turkel, Israel Rosenfeld, Fred Dweck, Gil
Student, Barry S Bank, Isaac A Zlochower]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joseph Mosseri <JMosseri@...>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 22:44:32 -0400
Subject: Berakhah on Falafel balls
The berakhah on Falafel balls according to Rabbi Moshe Levi in his
Birkat Hashem is Shehakol. He also quotes Rabbi Obadiah Yosef in Yabia
Omer that the berakhah is indeed Shehakol.
Joey
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ginsburg, Paul <GinsburgP@...>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 09:25:54 -0400
Subject: Birthday of Rabbi Moshe Chaim Ephraim of Sudilkov?? (Degel Machan
I am trying to find the Hebrew birthdate for Rabbi Moshe Chaim Ephraim
of Sudilkov (Degel Machaneh Epraim)
The only dates I know are that he was born in 1748 and that he passed
away on the 17th of Iyar in the (English) year 1800.
Would anyone happen to know his birthdate?
Thank you in advance for your help.
All the best,
Paul W. Ginsburg
Rockville, Maryland
http://www.sudilkov.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael J. Savitz <michaelj@...>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 22:44:37 -0400
Subject: Extra paragraph break in Shema
In many siddurim I have noticed that in the second paragraph of the
Shema ("Ve-haya eem shamoa..."), there is a paragraph break placed
before the last pasuk ("Le-ma'an yirbu yemeichem..."). In some siddurim
this pasuk is even printed in a different size type.
What could be the reason for (some, not all, siddurim) printing it this
way? In the sefer torah there is not a break at this point. And as far
as I know this point is not considered "bein ha-perakim", where certain
interruptions might be permitted that would otherwise be forbidden
during keriat shema.
Please cite sources if possible. Thanks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aliza N. Fischman <fisch.chips@...>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 18:02:17 -0400
Subject: Is this water bottle straw muktzah?
My daughter has a water bottle in the shape of a pineapple. The water
bottle can obviously be used in its regular way on Shabbat. My question
arose this past Shabbat. We were at the table eating luch when my
daughter and my friends' daughter were playing in the play area of the
kitchen. All of the sudden I heard a whistling noise. Two things
popped into my head. (1)My daughter is B"H very aware and very good
about muktzah, so I doubted it was her. (2) Like most parents, I can
recognize just about any "noisy toy" in my house by sound. After a
little while, you recognize the noise each toy makes. I was unable to
identify this whistle though. I went in to see what was going on. It
was the straw from the water bottle! My daughter was playing with the
(seemingly non-muktzah) straw and blowing into it. It was making the
whistling noise I described above. My question is, when separated from
the water bottle, is the straw muktzah?
Thanks for your input,
Kol Tuv,
Aliza Fischman
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gershon Strauchler <Strauchl@...>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 23:42:11 -0400
Subject: Student Initiative Project One Percent
Hello,
I wanted to bring up to your attention a student initiative that is
trying to foster a firmer bond between students in the diaspora and the
state of Israel. The initiative is Project One Percent. Project One
Percent is an attempt to show a strong statement of solidarity through
students dedicating one percent of their summer earnings to victims of
terror. The funds Project One Percent raises are going directly to
families through the Israel Emergency Solidarity Fund- One Family
(Mishpacha Echad). Project One Percent is approved by Hillel and other
organizations that work with students.
In order to extend our reach even further we asking your assitance in
spreading word about this special project. Please send notice of Project
One Percent www. pledge4israel.com to your email list and any other
assistance you could provide.
Yours Truly,
Gershon Strauchler
<info@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <Harry459@...> (Harry Schick)
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 22:58:37 EDT
Subject: Re: Tefillin shel Rabbeinu Tam
The Arizal mentions that Rashi tefillin are for a tikun of Olam Hazeh
and Rabennu Tam are to connect us to Olam Habah--this can be found in
his sefer Etz Chaiim-the reason for this comes from his understanding of
the order of the parshios and how they correspond on one level to the
YKVK and also how they represent levels of creation and their sequence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eli Turkel <turkel@...>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 09:16:20 GMT
Subject: Re: Tefillin shel Rabbeinu Tam
<Well, it's been a while since my probability classes, but aren't
there 24 different ways to arrange 4 parshiot? Why would Yadin have
found *2* arrangements, and not a dozen or more, if people were
arranging them randomly in the batim? >
My understanding is that other combinations were found including
parshiot that we don't include today in tefiilin. It is clear that at
least among the general population there was no fixed text and/or order
for the tefillin. Of course what we have no way of knowing is to whom
the tefiilin belonged. It would make a big difference if the tefillin
belonged to an am haaretz or to a talmid chacham.
A similar phenomena occurs in Chanukah. Josephus associates lights and
torches with Chanukah but says he does not know why and makes up his own
reason. Hence, it is clear that the general population was not familar
with the "pach hashemen". Today every kid in first grade knows the
story. In the days of the end of the second Temple only small circles
were aware of the origins of Chanukah.
Similarly with Tefillin many different groups may have had different
customs about which parshiot are included and their order. However,
halacha follows the Pharisee interpretation and not others. Hence,
archaeology does not prove anything about halacha but only about common
customs of the day.
Eli Turkel, <turkel@...> on 04/29/2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Israel Rosenfeld <israel.rosenfeld@...>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 15:05:18 +0200
Subject: Re: Tefillin shel Rabbeinu Tam
> From: <MJGerver@...> (Mike Gerver)
> 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.
AFAIK, the argument between Rashi Hakadosh and Rabbeinu Tam
is a repeat of the argument between the Babylonian Talmud and
Jerusalemite Talmud; i.e., Rashi Hakadosh decides like the TB
Rabbeinu Tam decides like the TY.
We decide according to Rashi Hakadosh because Bavli was written
later than the TY and because his tefilin were found by the grave
of Yechezkel Hanavi (SA OC 34 in Be'er Hagolah Aleph).
People who follow the Ari Zal's customs (Sephardim and Hassidim)
wear both.
Mekubalim wear both at the same time (best),
some switch between Shmoneh Esreh and Chazarat
Hashatz (to fit the heavenly worlds as described by the
Ari Zal), and some switch after Shacharit (I think the aim
is a little humility - not to act like a REAL mekubal).
Behatzlacha raba.
Yisrael
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Fred Dweck <fredd@...>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 17:37:53 -0700
Subject: Tefillin shel Rabbeinu Tam
It might interest the readers to know that the Zohar says, specifically,
that "Tarvaihu itsterichu" (Both are required.) The Ari Z"L in Shaar
Hakavanot says clearly that both are correct and that they should be
both worn TOGETHER! So much for all of the previous arguments.
I try not to write here often, as the moderator is prejudiced against
me, but this needed clarification. That's all I have to say!
Rabbi Fred (Yeshuah) E. Dweck
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gil Student <gil_student@...>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 12:01:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Tefillin shel Rabbeinu Tam
Andrew Klafter wrote:
>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.
R. Reuven Margoliyos writes something similar to this in his footnotes
to Shu"t Min HaShamayim, #3. I wasn't convinced by it but, kedarko
bakodesh, he brings many sources to try to prove his view.
Gil Student
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Barry S Bank <bsbank@...>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 18:00:08 -0500
Subject: Tefillin shel Rabbeinu Tam
Shimon Lebowitz <shimonl@...> writes: "Well, it's been a while
since my probability classes, but aren't there 24 different ways to
arrange 4 parshiot? Why would Yadin have found *2* arrangements, and not
a dozen or more, if people were arranging them randomly in the batim?"
In the siddur of the Vilna Gaon there is a report of the Gaon having
been asked why he doesn't put on the t'fillin shel Rabbeinu Tam. He is
said to have responded that since he wears t'fillin the whole day, and
everyone agrees that t'fillin shel Rashi are the ikkar, if he took off
the shel Rashi to put on the shel Rabbeinu Tam, he would be replacing
the ikkar with that which was not ikkar -- which, he said, makes no
sense. Then the Gaon is said to have continued that the question is why
anyone puts on t'fillin shel Rabbeinu Tam. And the answer, he said, was
suppossedly to be yotzay l'chol ha-deot. But, he went on, if you take
account of all of the machlokot and all the statistical permutations and
combinations, one would have to put on 52 (or 54?-- I don't have the
siddur in front of me and am repeating this from memory) sets of
t'fillin in order to be yotzay l'chol ha-deot!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Isaac A Zlochower <zlochoia@...>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 01:28:26 -0400
Subject: Tefillin shel Rabbeinu Tam
The subject of the various traditions for the placement of the 4
parshiot in the head tefilin is both facinating and complex. The
following does not treat the subject adequately, but attempts to give a
broader picture than what has been recently cited in this forum.
The primary sources include T.B. Menachot 34b, Rashi and Tosfot there
(Tos., "Vehakoreh"); Rambam, Hilchot Tefilin 3:5, Ra'avad and Kesef
Mishneh there; Tur, Orach Chaim 34:1 and the Bet Yosef there. Reading
the Gemara, Rashi, Tosfot, and Rambam will quickly disabuse you of the
notion that Rashi and Rabbenu Tum innovated the order of the parshiot
that is conventionally attributed to them, and that theirs are the only
2 orders that have been used. Rabbenu Tam uses Rav Hai Gaon in
Babylonia (Pumbeditha) as the authority for his order of the parshiot
and his interpretation of the Gemara, while Rashi in northern France and
the Rambam in Egypt have the same order. The Ra'avad in Provence
(southern France) has an order which is the mirror image of Rabbenu
Tam's, and the ancient instruction booklet for soferim (Shimushei
Rabbah) cited approvingly in Tosfot has an order that is identical to
Rashi or is its mirror image. Thus, there are at least 3 different
arrangements of the parshiot that have been used by the Rishonim. The
Kesef Mishne (R' Yosef Karo) on the above Rambam is very instructive.
He quotes a responsum of the Rambam to the sages of Luniel (in southern
France) about the order that he advocates in the Mishne Torah which is
different than the traditional order in their region. He replies that
the order in Luniel is the same as the order used in Spain (his
birthplace) and the order that he followed for many years. However, in
his short stay in the Holy Land, he discussed the matter with the sages
there and they convinced him that their tradition was more reliable. He
also concluded after studying various manuscripts that the Gemara in
Menachot did include a phrase at the end ("vehakoreh, koreh kedarko")
which he felt clearly indicated that the order of the placement of the
parshiot was the same as their order in the Torah. He therefore
advocated that tradition and that reading of the Gemara in his Mishne
Torah. He also changed his tefilin to follow the order of the sages of
the Holy Land (he didn't know about Rashi and the practice in northern
France and Germany) and told the sages of Luniel to follow suit. As
aresult, that order became the generally accepted order of the parshiot
throughout the world. The retention of the order of the Gaonim, Rav
Sherira and his son, Rav Hai, as an accepted second order is,
apparently, due to the influence of the Zohar which rationalizes both
orders.
As an aside, the view of the Gaonim is likely based on an ancient
tradition in Pumbeditha. It is of interest, therefore, that Abaye, a
much earlier head of the yeshiva of Pumbeditha is the Amora in Menachot
34b who says that switching the inner parshiot (i.e. Shema and Vehaya)
don't matter.
Yitzchok
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 36 Issue 27
