Volume 38 Number 60
Produced: Fri Feb 14 5:48:39 US/Eastern 2003
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
G'dola baTorah
[Harlan Braude]
Halchik reflections on Singles Groups
[Michael Poppers]
Kiddush club
[Jeffrey Aaronson]
Kol Dodi Dofeik
[Ira L. Jacobson]
Mazel Tov and Simon Tov
[Bernard Freedman]
Misheberach for a Sick Person
[Alex Heppenheimer]
Mizmor Shir Twice
[D. Rabinowitz]
Ordering something scheduled to be delivered on Shabbos
[Shmuel Lauer]
Origin of phrase "Shabbat Shalom"
[David Curwin]
Shuttle and Torah
[Sero, Zev]
Stam vs Attribution in the Gemara
[Bernard Raab]
Terach's death
[Danny Skaist]
Tuxedo (4)
[Mordechai Horowitz, Immanuel Burton, Edward Ehrlich, Dov
Teichman]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Harlan Braude <hbraude@...>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 10:09:25 -0500
Subject: RE: G'dola baTorah
In V38#58, Michael Rogovin wrote:
> haRav. Another student asked if one should stand when a G'dola baTorah,
> such as Nechama Leibowitz enters a room. Before the Rabbi could answer,
> I amended the question: should one stand for her husband l'chvodah? The
> answer, after a brief pause, was that well she was "only" learned in
> Torah, not Talmud so he did not need to answer that question.
When she walked into the bais medrash, everyone stood up. I don't think
I could even imagine a person who would have remained seated.
What aspect of kavod haTorah is compromised by the display of such a
simple sign of respect for a teacher that it should make us feel so
discomfited?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <MPoppers@...> (Michael Poppers)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 09:59:31 -0500
Subject: RE: Halchik reflections on Singles Groups
In M-J V38#59, Tzadik Vanderhoof <tzadikv@...> wrote:
> {paraphrasing an article's points}...(1) there needs to be a lot more
> shadchanim
As we learn in Maseches/Pirkai Avos [Tractate/Chapters of the Fathers],
"Emor m'at va'asai harbai." I.e., we (and I include myself in this bit
of mussar!) should go beyond empathy and shouldn't talk so much (in this
case, about matching people up with the object of their desire, be it a
job, a spouse, etc.) and should act on behalf of those people a lot
more. Let's all make shadchanus on behalf of our fellow Jews more of a
priority in our lives and then pray that HaShaim take our hishtadlus
[efforts] into account.
> An example she gave was that in her day, people would often meet for the
> first time at weddings.
I was zocheh [merited] to be the agent through which two good friends of
mine met and married by placing them at the same table for the s'udah
[meal] after my chasnah [marriage]...but there's another tzad [side] to
the discussion of mixed-gender seating, and every community should
follow its hallowed practices.
All the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jeffrey Aaronson <JAaronson@...>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 12:13:50 -0600
Subject: Kiddush club
We are having a problem with Kiddush clubs at out shul. The board
banned them but at least one kiddush club continues to meet during the
haftorah and Rabbi's D'var Torah. The Rabbi is opposed to Kiddush Clubs
in principle but does jot believe that they can be eliminated but
legislation and he will not ban them. Any thoughts or suggestions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 12:34:14 +0200
Subject: Re: Kol Dodi Dofeik
Elazar M Teitz <remt@...> stated:
I think, however, that it is a mistranslation. The word
"kol" has two meanings in Hebrew: "voice" and "sound." The
translation should probably be "the sound is of my beloved,
knocking." This is indicated by (a) the fact that a voice does
not knock, and (b) the ta'amei hamikra (cantillation marks), which
indicate a pause after the word "kol," so that it is not "kol
dodi," which would indeed be "my beloved's voice," but "kol / dodi
dofeik,." which is "the sound of," followed by "my beloved is
knocking."
Actually, I think the meaning of qol in this case is "harken," as in
"Qol, demei ahikha tzo`aqim. . . ." This is reinforced by the trop, as
indicated above.
IRA L. JACOBSON
mailto:<laser@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <JFreed515@...> (Bernard Freedman)
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 16:54:25 EST
Subject: Mazel Tov and Simon Tov
In my shul we celebrate simchas (Bar Mitzvahs, Offrifs, etc.) by singing
several repetitions of Mazel Tov V'Simon Tov, Yihay lanu v'chol Israel.
It should be for us and all Israel.
But what do these words mean? Maze (mazalim) refers to the
constellations, he stars of the Zodiac. Simon, or sign, refers to the
location of the planets in the Zodiac that is used by astrologers, from
ancient times, to predict the future and to concoct their silly
pseudoscientific horoscopes.
It seems to me that this activity is strictly forbidden in several
places in he Torah. So why do we continue to sing Mazel Tov V'Simon Tov?
Of course, I am sure that only "good luck" is intended, without giving
any thought to meaning of these words.
No wonder Ain Mazel B'Israel! There is no luck in Israel!
Bernard (Chaim) Freedman
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Alex Heppenheimer <aheppenh@...>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 09:17:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Misheberach for a Sick Person
In MJ 38:56, Danny Skaist <danny@...> wrote:
> Chabad does use the "ushpizin 7" in the misheberach for a sick
> person.
In all Chabad siddurim that I know of, the Mi Sheberach for a sick
person omits Yosef and includes Shlomo - same as the other nuschaot
that various posters have mentioned. (It's conceivable that there are
Chabad shuls that use a different nusach, but I've never heard of it.)
Kol tuv,
Alex
[Same response from: Sero, Zev <Zev.Sero@...>. Mod]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: D. Rabinowitz <rwdnick@...>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 04:57:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Mizmor Shir Twice
As some of you have noted the source to repeat Mizmor Shir is not either
because of the Golem or because of the use of the Organ in the Altna
Shul. Rahter, the source is actually a custom that originated in
Jerusalem. This custom is carried on today by some Shepardic
Jews. R. Solomon Rapport (Shir) the Chief Rabbi of Prauge from 1840
until his death in 1867 cites the Jerusalem custom as the reason for the
repetition of Mizmor Shir. He specifically discounts the Golem
story. Furthermore he traces the original settlers in Prauge to a
Jerusalem family. His explaination for this custom appears in his
introduction to Kalman Leiben's Gal Ed printed in Prauge 1856 on pages
LII-LIX.
Though R. Shlomo Shick in his Shu"t Rasban Even ha-Ezer no. 102 does say
that he could not find any sources that link this custom to a Jerusalem
custom, rather as was noted already, it started with the Ari.
dan rabinowitz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <JUSTSAML@...> (Shmuel Lauer)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 15:38:24 -0500
Subject: Ordering something scheduled to be delivered on Shabbos
Is one allowed to order something (online for example) if it is known
that the item is supposed to be delivered on Shabbos?? It seems to be
an "Amira L'Akum" situation. I have heard of other apparently learned
people doing it.
Any ideas??
SHMUEL LAUER
<JustSamL@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Curwin <tobyndave@...>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 20:11:25 +0200
Subject: Origin of phrase "Shabbat Shalom"
Does anyone know the origin of the phrase "Shabbat Shalom"? I couldn't
find it anywhere in the Bar Ilan Responsa CD until this century.
David Curwin
Efrat, Israel
<tobyndave@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sero, Zev <Zev.Sero@...>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 14:57:36 -0700
Subject: Re: Shuttle and Torah
<Friendlyjew@...> wrote:
> since the shuttle carried a torah, if someone saw the shuttle burn
> up. do they have to rip their clothes ( kriah ) like one does for a
> burning torah??
The shuttle carried a Jew, who was much more important than a parchment
Sefer Torah. And the obligation to tear ones clothes when one sees a
Jew die is greater than (and surely the origin of) any similar
obligation when one sees a Sefer Torah destroyed (where did you see this
obligation mentioned?). So the presence of the Sefer Torah neither adds
to nor detracts from the question.
As to whether this obligation applies when one sees it from a distance,
or only if one is in the same place, I have no idea.
Zev Sero
<zsero@...>
[Similar response from: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>. Mod]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bernard Raab <beraab@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 13:00:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Stam vs Attribution in the Gemara
>From: Ben Katz <bkatz@...>
>The origin of the shakla vetarya of the gemara is debated. The
>"yeshivish" answer is that it was put in by Ravina and Rav Ashi, the
>traditional editors of the gemara....Many moderns, including Rabbi Dr.
>David Weiss HaLivni, feel that this means that all stam gemara is from the
>saboreic period (although he seems to call them stamaim).
Considering that the Gemara was developed over 300 years it is miraculous
that any attributions were preserved at all. In this very issue of Mail
Jewish (v38/#55), two of my previous submissions were reproduced for
comment: One without attribution at all (by Shalom Carmy) and one
misattributed (to poor Shayna Kravetz, who was probably appalled) by Ari
Trachtenberg. And this in an era of written communication and *easy*
storage, retrieval and reproduction, and with the comments less than a week
old! (No apologies necessary folks; neither comment was worth preserving
beyond the moment.)
This should serve to reinforce our appreciation of the Gemara as a unique
work of art and scholarship.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Danny Skaist <danny@...>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 12:54:53 +0200
Subject: Terach's death
> From: Avi Rabinowitz
> (according to Chazal the Torah took the extreme step of making the
> story deliberately misleading about Terach's death, implying it was
> before Avram left)
You are referring to the upsidedown nun (which does not exist).
The Torah reports the deaths and burials of both Avraham and
Yitzchak long before they actually happened, so this is not by any means
an "extreme step". Which is why the perush is on the nun and not on the
story.
danny
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mordechai Horowitz <mordechai@...>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 21:38:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Tuxedo
> Honestly, why don't we say it already: a tuxedo is a goyish looking
>article of apparel.
And what makes a suit Jewish? I doubt Moshe Rabbeinu wore one. Or a
black hat, or a streimel for that matter. He didn't even wear a kipa.
[Same basic response from a number of people, including:
Ben Katz <bkatz@...>, Bernard Raab <beraab@hotmail.com> as well as
the other three included below. Mod.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Immanuel Burton <IBURTON@...>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 11:00:46 +0000
Subject: RE: Tuxedo
In mail.jewish v38n59, Elan Adler wrote:
>Besides, penguins do not have fins and scales.
Seeing as pengiuns are birds and not fish, what's the relevance of fins and
scales? If none of the birds listed in Parshat Shemini as being forbidden as
food is actuallya penguin, then that would mean that penguins are in fact
kosher! Any thoughts on this?
As an aside, when I once mentioned that a black-tie wedding would be quite
nice, I was rather firmly told, "Frum people don't dress like that". I also
remember being told in primary/junior school that wearing jeans counts as
chukas ha'goy and that it is forbidden to wear them. So, who designed the
first double-breasted suit?
Immanuel Burton.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Edward Ehrlich <eehrlich@...>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 23:15:53 +0200
Subject: Tuxedo
Is a tuxedo any more goyish looking than a necktie? I think we adapt
standards of formality from the general culture. I always wear a jacket
and a tie when going to Shabbat services in the United States, while I
don't wear either in Israel.
Ed Ehrlich <eehrlich@...>
Jerusalem, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <DTnLA@...> (Dov Teichman)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 10:16:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Tuxedo
What makes an ordinary suit and tie any less "goyish" than a tuxedo?
Unless you dress Hassidic, most of the orthodox world dresses just like
gentiles to some extent. There is alot of flexibilty in what is defined
as "dressing goyish." The Minchas Elozor, for example, held that wearing
a necktie is forbidden (i assume mideoraysa) because it serves no
function other than to resemble goyish fashion. I dont think that is the
commonly held opinion, but the point is that the definitions are not
clear, and I dont see how tuxedos are any more goyish than ordinary
suits or ties.
Dov Teichman
[Could you send in the citation for the Minchas Elozor, as I am very
makpid to follow that opinion, i.e. that it is forbidden to wear a
necktie. I do hold that it is permitted to wear one on Yom Kippur, as it
is a fulfillment of "and you shall afflict yourselves" and wearing a
necktie is clearly an severe affliction. Mod.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 38 Issue 60