Volume 41 Number 47
                 Produced: Sat Dec 20 21:34:24 US/Eastern 2003

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

         [Tzvi Stein]
Double Names (2)
         [Rabbi Ed Goldstein, Leo Koppel]
Kollel System
         [Michael Kahn]
Prayer when Time is Short (2)
         [Gershon Dubin, Yehonatan Chipman]
         [Gedalia Walls]
Standing at Vayivarech/Tzedaka
         [Ken Bloom]


From: Tzvi Stein <Tzvi.Stein@...>
Subject: Chanukah

The Sfas Emes learns that one of the reasons why we light Chanuka licht
indoors nowadays instead of outdoors is that in our time, the "outside"
has come "inside".... meaning that outside influences have entered our
home and thus we can do the mitzva just as well inside the house.

That got me to thinking that in our time there could be an opposite
effect at work also... the "inside" can also be found "outside" to an
extent much greater than in the past.  By this I mean that one can
sometimes glimse references to Orthodox Judaism in the most unexpected
areas of popular culture recently.  One example that comes to mind is
Carlos Santana saying "Kadosh Kadosh Kadosh" while accepting an award a
few years ago. Two other examples that I noticed just in the last week
were a reference to the Tshuva movement in the spoof newspaper "The
Onion", and a reference to Kaballah on Saturday Night Live.


From: <BERNIEAVI@...> (Rabbi Ed Goldstein)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 08:46:47 -0500
Subject: Re: Double Names

You left out my favorite...chamor ayzel!  LOL.

Rabbi Ed Goldstein Woodmere NY

From: Leo Koppel <wallyut@...>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 07:00:14 -0700
Subject: Double Names

Alexander Beider has provided lots of research on Ashkenazi personal and
surnames.  If I am not mistaken Paul Wexler has also written on the
subject in the context of attempting to demonstrate Turco-Slavic
linguistic and ethnic origins for Ashkenazim.

Both have researched both traditional Jewish sources and non-Jewish
sources that provide Jewish names.

Beider has also investigated Jewish cemeteries to determine geographic
and diachronic name distribution.

I am dubious of a biblical origin of double names.  If the Talmud is a
good source of common Judean names during the Hellenistic and
Greco-Roman and Early Islamic time frames, naming practices were very
different from earlier and later periods.  No Talmudic double names come
to mind (although the Christian Bible does contain the name Simon Peter
as a translation of a Judean name while both the Hashmonaim and
Herodians used double names).  Talmudic naming practices suggest some
taboos on Biblical names, and few Talmudic names survived in the Middle
Ages.  When we see them today, most of the evidence indicates a
scholarly revival of a long unused name.



From: Michael Kahn <mi_kahn@...>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 23:44:40 -0500
Subject: RE: Kollel System

>Since the point was raised, we should here just remind people that this
>is not how things were "done for centuries."  Even in Volozhin >students
>learned there for some years but normally finished their studies in
>their early 20s.  Afterwards, they usually found jobs such as rabbis >of
>communities or other Jewish professions.  When Rav Aharon Kotler built
>his Yeshiva in Lakewood he was clear that newlyweds would learn for a
>couple of years - 3 or 4 maybe - and then pursue some means of income,
>not fall on the Yeshiva for support. That people would learn for their
>whole lives (or even for 10 years after marriage) and expect to >support
>their family by Hashem's grace (in the hands of the local Yeshiva or
>tzedaka or government socieal welfare program) is mythical.  

We have discussed the issue of kollel numerouse times in
mail-jewish. While I agree that long term kollel was not the norm for
centuries, I was always under the impression that todays learn term
kollel idea was Reb Aron Kotler zatzal's "revolution." Reb Yaakov
Kamenetzky zatzal has a great tape about the history of kollel. He says
the first modern kollel was established in Kovna in the 19th century
(1850's?). Before that, long term learning was done as a personall
choice, not as a movement. For example, Reb Yaakov says that after Reb
Iser Zalman Meltzer got married he and his wife moved into his father in
law's attic where he learned for 12 years where he amassed the
knowledged that made him the Reb Iser Zalman Meltzer that we have come
to revere. Reb Yaakov also says that in the years leading up to WWII
many bochrim would delay marriage in order to learn. For example, Reb
Yaakov says, "I got married at 28 and learned until I was 33 at which
point I took a job as a mshulach for kelm yeshiva." (I think I got the
dates correct.)

>Rambam [Hil.  Talmud Torah Ch. 3, and in Peirush Hamishnayos in
>Avos(???)] is QUITE disparaging of such lifestyles.  Besides, all
>Jewish men commit in their kesuba to support their wives, not be
>supported by them.

We have already pointed out in mail-jewish that Igros Moshe, quoting the
Kesef Mishna paskens unlike this Rambam.

In Europe people not only didn't pursue long term Torah learning. They
also didn't pursue long term secular learning. I think that the fact
that people go on to college, graduate school, and sometimes P.H.D.
programs has sociologically led to a similar acceptance of long term
Bais medrash/kollel learning. Just a thought.


From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 17:51:43 GMT
Subject: Prayer when Time is Short

From: Gil Student <gil_student@...>

<<I would tentatively put the order as follows:

1. The first paragraph of Shema
2. The entire three paragraphs of Shema
3. Shemoneh Esreih
4. The blessings over Shema
5. The morning blessings
6. Parshas ha-Tamid
7. Basic Pesukei de-Zimra (Baruch she-Amar, Ashrei, Yishtabach)
8. The blessings over the Torah
9. Longer Pesukei de-Zimra (with extensive details on what has
10. Longer Korbanos>>

I'd demote parashas hatamid down there with longer korbonos; the
obligation to say any korbonos is very weak.  Likewise, I'd move birchos
haTorah (de'oraisa) up before pesukei dezimra and maybe before birchos
K"Sh as well.

<<This is just my thinking out loud>>

And that's mine <g>.


From: Yehonatan Chipman <yonarand@...>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:00:35 +0200
Subject: Re: Prayer when Time is Short

A few comments about this topic, in v41n40:

1.  About women: Women have a different nusah because they are not
formally obligated to say Shema which is a time-bound mitzvah.  My own
tendency would be to say that that should nevertheless be part of their
prayers (certainly more so than Pesukei de-Zimra) because of the
theological or hashkafah importance of Kabbalat Malkhut Shamayim -- of
accepting and acknowledging Gd's sovereignty.  OTOH, Some Sephardi
poskim in Israel say women should not say Shema at all.

2.  The question was asked,
"What do I do if sunrise is at 7:15, and my first Final Exam is at 8:00am?" 

There is a sugya in the Talmud (4th perek of Brakhot) that explicitly
states that "one who rises early to go on a journey prays (i.e.,
Amidah), and says Shema when the time comes." This implies that there is
definite permission to daven Shaharit early in the event of need --
seemingly, even before first light of dawn, and certainly during the
dawn hour.

In the winter of 1974, when there was Daylight Savings Time in the US in
the winter months to save energy (due to the Mideast oil crisis), Rav
Soloveitchik ztz"l davened at a 7:00 am minyan (the Talner Steibel in
Brookline Mass) that began a full 72 minutes before sunrise.

3.  Siddur Tzahal (Nusah Ahid), published in Israel some years ago
    specifically for the use of soldiers, under the aegis of Rav Shlomo
    Goren ztz"l, has the order of prayer for a soldier going into battle
    or otherwise pressed for time.  I don't remember what, if anything,
    ithas before Barkhu, by way of Birkhot Hashahar and truncated
    Pesukei de-Zimra, but the main "short cut" I remember was:  1) no
    Kedusha de-Yeshiva (i.e. the middle part of Yotzer Hara, which talks
    about the angels reciting Kedusha -- this can be omitted because
    some rishonim say one shouldn't say it anyway without a minyan,
    e.g. Rambam and Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon);  2) Instaed of the middle
    thirteen brakhot of the Amidah, one says the short form, "Havinenu." 

4.  About Birkhot Hashahar: all the brakhot are obligatury, so if you
    omit them at the beginning one has to make them up later.  Two
    exceptions: 1) If one skips Birkhot Hatorah, one fulfils one's
    obligation by saying "Ahavah Rabbah," PROVIDED one learns something
    of Torah immediately after finishing davening.  2) If one skips
    "Elokai Netzor," one is "yotze" by saying "Mehayeh Hametim" (the
    second blessing of Amidah).

5.  True, the MINIMAL Pesukei de-Zimar is Barukh Sheamar, Ashrei, and
    Yishtabah (i.e., blessing before and after, and the most essential
    psalm), but unless one is super pressed for time the preferred short
    version also includes Psalms 148 and 150, which are what Rashi on
    Shabbat 115b (as well as Ran and Maharsha) consider most essential.
    I used to daven regularly with Rav Yeshayahu Wohlegemuth, a
    substantial talmid hakham who for many years was close to the Rav
    ztz"l, and when he came late to minyan at the Maimonides School,
    where we both taught, he would say those three psalms with their
    brakhot, even if he started after Barkhu.

6.  The question was asked: <<The consideration that my list doesn't
address is the question of what to do if you arrive late on Rosh Chodesh
or Chol HaMoed (when we say Hallel and Musaf). Should one work to daven
Musaf at the same time as the congregation by omitting things after the
Shacharit Amidah?>>

   Actually, the only thing of real substance after Shaharit Amidah is
   Hallel, which is not absolutely connected to Shaharit, so you can say
   it after Musaf if necessary.  Likewise, ashrei and uva letzion, psalm
   of the day, etc.  However, there is a special rule that it's
   preferable to say Hallel with the congregation, especially on Rosh
   Hodesh, so if you start saying Pesukei de-Zimra and they are at
   Hallel, you should say Hallel with them (answering Amen to the
   hazan's blessing but not saying it yourself), and then finish your
   private Pesukei de-Zimra, Yishtabah serving as closing blessing both
   for PZ and Hallel.  If you do that, you can then say the rest of
   Shaharit-- Shema, blessings, and Amidah--while they're reading the
   Torah, and be able to join them for Musaf.

    Jonathan Chipman


From: Gedalia Walls <gedaliawalls@...>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:56:12 
Subject: re: Shaatnez

I was reading Gil Students' message about shaatnez and the main problem
with the argument is that we are mixing two very different issues.

Treifos of an animal challenges it's brand new chezkas kashrus (status
quo of acceptability) after shechita (kosher slaughter). There, the
question is whether or not I have to "burden" myself with looking for
other issues in the animal. The chochmas adam I qouted last time uses
the leniency of tircha (burden) only in respect to treifos.

Regarding a garment, the opinion of the Rambam (which is also the
opinion of the Shulchan Oruch and Rema) as found in his peirush
ha'mishnayos to Kilayim 9:7, says that the garments for which the mishna
requires testing is only for the stitching, not the actual garment, and
that seems to be the opinion that is held in Yoreh Deah 302:1 & 2. A
plain wool garment (302:1) only needs an examination if WE KNOW that a
thread of linen was woven into it. However, regarding the stitch work
(ibid. 2) that always requires checking.

In our days, however, things have changed. As I learned from R' Shochet
in Lakewood, you can't just look at the garment because there is always
blending and mislabeling (which I have experienced myself) so even a
garment that looks like wool may still present a problem.

On a side note: according to the RA"V and the Tiferes Yisrael on the
mishna (ibid), the garment had to be checked, not just the stitches.

Linen, even today, is regarded as an effective reinforcement and is
still used in hand-stitching (even if it is more expensive). As a
result, the halacha in 302:2 doesn't change (and look at the Shach). It
only changes in the situation noted in Aruch Hashulchan 302:18 (the end
of the simon).

It has nothing to do with matzui or eino matzui.

Kol tuv
Gedalia Walls


From: Ken Bloom <kabloom@...>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:08:37 -0800
Subject: Re: Standing at Vayivarech/Tzedaka

Akiva Miller wrote:
> Someone wrote <<< He suggested that the reason for standing at "vyvarech
> David"-standing for the people who gave tzedaka at that point, >>>
> I've heard this from many sources, but don't we stand at that point on
> Shabbos as well? If so, why?

The Orot Sephardic Weekday Siddur (p114) cites Kaf HaHayiim 51,43 and
the Siddur of Rabbi Yaakov Emden, saying:

The first letters of the first four words of this section spell
*vav-daled-alef-yud*, which has the gematria of *alef-hey-yud-hey*, one
of God's names.  The first four letters of the words "Atah hu hashem
elokim" spell *alef-hey-yud-hey*. Hence, we stand from
*alef-hey-yud-hey* to *alef-hey-yud-hey* in deference to God's name.

So accordingly, their reason has nothing to do with people giving
Tzedkah. I don't recall whether the Orot Sephardic Shabbat Siddur gives
the same reason (it's in a suitcase right now), but I do recall that it
directs us to stand on Shabbat too.


End of Volume 41 Issue 47