Volume 42 Number 90
Produced: Thu Jun 3 5:29:15 US/Eastern 2004
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Bameh Madlikin and Hassidic custom (3)
[Seth Mandel, I. Balbin, Perets Mett]
Biblical Source for Duchaning Everyday (2)
[Russell J Hendel, Avi Feldblum]
Duchaning outside of Eretz Yisrael (2)
[Dov Bloom, Yisrael and Batya Medad]
Not Duchaning on Shabbat (was Duchaning outside of Eretz Yisrael)
[Dani Wassner]
Shiddach Dating Rules
[Anonymous]
A Social approach to Bameh Madlikin--Helping people
[Russell J Hendel]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Seth Mandel <sethm37@...>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 21:04:35 +0000
Subject: RE: Bameh Madlikin and Hassidic custom
The issue that needs to be added here (that Dr. Chalamish does not
address, because it is not the subject he is discussing), is that
k'gavna did NOT substitute for Bameh Madliqin. To say Bameh Madliqin
was not only the custom of some; it was the custom of _all_ Jewish
communities, Ashk'nazim, S'faradim, Teimanim, and was instituted in the
times of the G'onim. As a custom of k'lal Yisroel, it is binding on
all, and so is recorded in the S.O.
However, there were differences between communities about when on Friday
night Bameh Madliqin was said. S'faradim said it immediately after
minha, before they said Mizmor Shir l'Yom haShabbos. Ashk'nazim did not
say Mizmor Shir, but went directly from Minha to saying bar'khu, and
said Bameh Madliqin after 'Arvis (which is where it is printed in all
the old Ashk'naz siddurim). Saying Bameh Madliqin before 'Arvis is a
very recent custom among Ashk'nazim, and was not done at the time that
Chasidus developed.
So Chasidim started saying k'gavna, but that was before 'Arvis, and did
not at the same place in davening that Bameh Madliqin was said. The
question is, then, why did they stop saying Bameh Madlqiin?
The answer to that is that Bameh Madliqin was said right when the Sha'Tz
said qiddush; in many communities in Ashk'naz, it was said concurrently.
Chasidim abandoned the saying of qiddush in shul, probably because they
woiuld accompany the rebbe and stand around his shabbos tisch, where he
would say qiddush. When they dropped the old custom of saying qiddush
in shul, they dropped saying Bameh Madliqin.
Seth Mandel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: I. Balbin <isaac@...>
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 10:39:39 +1000
Subject: Re: Bameh Madlikin and Hassidic custom
> From: <Phyllostac@...> (Mordechai)
> Finally, perhaps this substitution of the old Mishnaic recitation of
> 'bameh madlikin' with the new recitation of the Zoharic 'Kigavna' by
> the Hassidim can be seen as paradigmatic of the Hassidic movement in
> general, in which they at times granted themselves permission to
> replace venerable customs with what they viewed as more 'spiritual'
> newer ones and in which the Zohar was venerated over the Mishna and
> Talmud.
Perhaps a less adversarial approach is also more plausible. Namely,
that Bameh Madlikin's insertion was (if my memory serves me correctly)
designed to delay the davening to accomodate those who were a touch late
and wanted to be Mekabel Shabbos with Borchu together with the
congregation. The "Shloshe Dvorim Zarich Odom Lomar ..." would fit in
beautifully in the context.
Chassidim generally daven later anyway. This was consistent with them
allowing Mincha to be davened later. (Less relevant, but a contributor
is Mazal Madim (appearance of Mars) which delays Kabollas Shabbos
T'filla for some Chassidim). As a consequence, the "filler" of learning
some Mishnayos wasn't as relevant ---their Mincha started later.
Furthermore, I would surmise that they felt that for Chassidim, the
"Shloshe Dvorim ... of "Isaartem, Eiruvtem, Hadliko Es Haner" is at the
level of a "given" and that the "next level" is to meditate about the
Romemus (exaltation) of Shabbos through some Zohar. Toras HaNistar was
considered perhaps as a better "filler" in that context. It could be
said that rather then the Zohar being venerated *over" the Mishna and
Talmud, Chassidism infused the liturgy with Toras Hanistar where
"possible" or "feasible". In general, Chassidim focus less on "Nigleh"
--- Mishna and Talmud on Shabbos.
PS. I say Kigavna because my father does, and his father did. There is
even an implied "hierarchy" amongst non Chassidim in terms of what you
should do/say as a "filler". On Rosh Hashonoh when Minhag Yisroel is to
say Tehillim in the afternoon, Rav Moshe Soloveitchik Z"TL pulled his
son Rav Yoshe Ber Z"TL aside, and allegedly told him that this was "not
for you" and instructed him to learn Gemorah Rosh Hashono instead ... I
think another version of this story was Yoma and Yom Kippur.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Subject: Re: Bameh Madlikin and Hassidic custom
Seth Mandel wrote:
> The answer to that is that Bameh Madliqin was said right when the
> Sha'Tz said qiddush; in many communities in Ashk'naz, it was said
> concurrently. Chasidim abandoned the saying of qiddush in shul,
> probably because they woiuld accompany the rebbe and stand around his
> shabbos tisch, where he would say qiddush. When they dropped the old
> custom of saying qiddush in shul, they dropped saying Bameh Madliqin.
That may well be a plausible explanation of the reason why chasidim
stopped saying Bameh Madliqin, but let us be clear as to the correct
reason why chasidim stopped making kidush in shul on Friday and YomTov
nights. It is nothing do with standing around the tish of a rebbe.
The mechaber says in Shulchon Orukh that the custom of saying kiddush in
shul should not be instituted in new communities (as the reason for it
is n o longer applicable) but should be maintained in old communities
which already have the custom. In matters of tefilo chasidim frequently
adopt the psak of the mechaber, and that is why they did not institute
kiddush in shul when they founded new minyonim. It may well be that as
a result the saying of Bameh Madliqin fell into disuse, as Seth
suggests.
Perets Mett
London
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@...>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 23:03:01 -0400
Subject: Biblical Source for Duchaning Everyday
Just to quickly answer Avi and Akiva (V42n87) on the source for
Duchaning every day.
There is a controversy among the early authorities on the meaning of a
verb with a komatz-cholam (eg Zachor vs zechor). Some rishonim take this
an alternative command form (So Zachor Shabbath means REMEMBER IT).
But Rashi believed that the infinitive can simply indicate ONGOING
REQUIRED ACTIVITY. ZeChoR means REMEMBER (once!) while ZACHOR means BE
INVOLVED IN REMEMBERING.
This has halachic consequences: For Shabbath it means I have to think
about Shabbath continually during the week (hence this verse is the
source for requiring buying wine and challah during the week for
shabbath (See Sifsay chachamim on Zachor Shabbath)
Another good example might be Dt16-01a (Be involved in watching (SHAMOR)
the Springtime for Passover). The emphasis on continual watching leads
to the Rashi comment that eg if winter is long then we should make the
year a leap year (that is we WATCH CONTINUOUSLY THROUGHOUT THE YEAR).
Rashi in fact explicitly states on Ex13-03a REMEMBER THE EXODUS that BE
INVOLVED IN REMEMBERING IT EVERY DAY.
Consequently I think (by analogy) that Nu06-23a (The commandment to tell
the priests to Duchan) is a requirement EVERY DAY(SHAMOR vs SHEMOR).
For a dozen examples where Rashi applied this principle see
http://www.Rashiyomi.com/ex18-22b.htm or visit the Rashiyomi calendar at
http://www.Rashiyomi.com/calendar1.htm and do a FIND for the INF
(infinitive series).
Russell Jay Hendel; http://www.Rashiyomi.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Avi Feldblum <mljewish@...>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 06:19:30 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Biblical Source for Duchaning Everyday
I don't know why you need all this, as far as I know there are no poskim
who disagree that there is a biblical requirement to duchan
everyday. The question is whether there is some external overriding
reason that removes that requirement. Most poskim that I know of who
deal with the issue reference the requirement that the blessings be
given in a state of joy (based on a statement in the Zohar). What the
implication of this statement in halacha needs to be reviewed. For
instance, the main focus brought by the early authorities is that a
non-married Cohen may not duchan. Also as a note to an earlier statement
from Martin Stern about kabbalistic reasons vs halachik practice, I
think it is far from clear that kabbalistic reasoning has not abrogated
normative halacha in a number of places. I consider this to one of those
cases.
Avi
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dov Bloom <dovb@...>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 22:23:58 +0200
Subject: Re: Duchaning outside of Eretz Yisrael
>I stumbled across a Tshuva ... (it's in abbreviation, Kaf Nun Hey
>Gimmel, and might be Sefer Kohen HaGadol (?)
KNHG is an important acharon, from Turkey 17th cent the author of
"Knesset HaGedola" and "Shiurei Knesset Hagedola", his name was R. Chaim
Benvenishti.
The quoted article on duchening was summarized as saying "he explains
that an interpretation of the Beit Yosef that he supports saying the
blessing daily is not what you think ....."
I think the Mechaber means exactly what everyone including all
Sepharadim think he means. You fullfill the mitzva of Nesiat Kapaiim
(duchening) everyday. Just look at where the halachot were put! Along
with the everyday davening halachot. I believe the Sephardim always
continued the mitzva of "nesiat kapaim" everyday, on them there is no
question. The question is why don't the Ashkenazim fulfill a mitzva
de'oraita everyday?
The quoted article seems like Askenazi-biased trying to read present-day
Ashkenazi practice (unsucessfully) into earlier Sephardi sources.
Are there any hard sources that Sephardim didn't say nesiat kapaim
everyday? From Sephardi Rishonim or early Acharonim? I dont know of any
(but I may be wrong) and I think the evidence is all on the other
side. There is a continuing tradition of nesiat kapaiim during
shacharit. The were 2 sepharadi sounding names quoted, but in my
ignorance I have never heard of Rav Yaakov Sasportas (Ohel yaakov) and
R. Chaim Falag (sic) i is much later than mechaber era sources.
Dov Bloom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael and Batya Medad <ybmedad@...>
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 20:55:47 +0200
Subject: Duchaning outside of Eretz Yisrael
Kenneth G Miller <kennethgmiller@...> wrote:
But I though that this was the original way of doing it, and it
was the Ashkenazim who made the innovation of duchaning only on
Yom Tov. Have I been mistaken?
I am going on memory now, but the last time we discussed this, didn't
someone quote a Gemara which could have been a source for the halt of
the custom after the Churban Habayit?
Yisrael Medad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dani Wassner <dani@...>
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 11:51:48 +0200
Subject: Not Duchaning on Shabbat (was Duchaning outside of Eretz Yisrael)
In the shul that I used to daven in in Australia, they had the custom
(British in origin, I believe) of NOT duchaning on any yom tov that
falls on Shabbat- making duchaning even rarer than it already is in
chu"l.
Any ideas on where this minhag came from? Seems strange to me...
Dani Wassner
Jerusalem
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Anonymous
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 21:46:00
Subject: Shiddach Dating Rules
Our son has just gone on his first "Shiddach Date" -- a family friend
fixed him up via an exchange of telephone calls with each set of parents
and the two parties (boy & girl) involved -- and now I'm bewildered by
all sorts of "rules" (of etiquette?) that are trickling down --
examples:
Boy must wear suit & hat -- regardless of planned event.
ALL communication is between shadchun & boy or girl --
Although boy meets girl's parents (when he picks her up) boy's
parents don't meet girl until ??
Two sets of parents are not to communicate with each other until ??
Must go on second date unless first date is real disaster.
Third date means ??
Anyhow -- does anyone have a compendium of these "rules" -- I'm sure
they vary by community, but they nonetheless would be of interest.
Thank you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@...>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 23:00:31 -0400
Subject: A Social approach to Bameh Madlikin--Helping people
The discussion on Bameh Madlikin reminds me of a thought I heard from
the Rav, Rabbi Joseph Solveitchick many times.
The Rav pointed out that there was a social dimension to prayer. One
relevant law is that in old times (and today) there was a danger of
mugging when you left the synagogue at night to go home. Hence all
people in the minyan should be careful that they do not leave any person
alone.
For this reason (to make sure no one is left alone in the synagogue)
various prayers were instituted (to keep people in shule so that
latecomers could catch up). Among the prayers instituted are a) the
sfardic custom of repeating barchu b) Vihi Noam on Saturday night c)
Magayn Abraham on Friday night.
I would conjecture that perhaps Bameh madlikin falls into this category
also...that is it is said so that late comers could catch up (Of course
this does not contradict any of the beautiful postings on the
subject...after all given that we say an extra prayer...why does it have
to be that particular chapter).
Russell Jay Hendel; http://www.Rashiyomi.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 42 Issue 90
