Volume 43 Number 14
                 Produced: Mon Jun 21  7:49:01 US/Eastern 2004

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

Chiyuvim  -- One vote or 3 ? (4)
         [Elazar M Teitz, Carl Singer, Meir Possenheimer,
Minhag for middle names
         [Martin Stern]
Queen Victoria and Chief Rabbi Adler (2)
         [Paul Shaviv, Nathan Lamm]
Y'kum Purkan - Who is an Individual? Prayers in Aramaic
         [Gilad Gevaryahu]


From: Elazar M Teitz <remt@...>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 09:10:14 -0400
Subject: re: Chiyuvim  -- One vote or 3 ?

> I have unfortunately recently become an Avel.  Until the Shloshim a
> week ago I was given priority to be Shaliach Tzibbur.  Now that I am
> in the 'year', I am just one of a number of people vying for the omed.
> Amongst the other mourners, is a set of three brothers.  Assuming that
> we were to all daven together in the same minyan every day, &
> pretending that there were no other mourners, should I be leading
> every 4th tphillah, or every 2nd ? Is the rotation based on the number
> of mourners, or the number of the deceased ?  Furthermore, what is the
> priority ranking of 'chiyuvim' ? Eg 1) Shiva 2) shloshim 3) yahrtzeit
> 4) avel ?

        The Mishna B'rurah, in Siman 132 in the Biur Halachah, discusses
the order of priority of saying kaddish.  While these laws are not
applicable to us (they relate to places where the proper method is
adhered to, that only one person at a time says kaddish), he
mentionsthat the same priorities apply for serving as the shaliach

        Regarding the first question, he states explicitly that each of
the brothers counts separately, since all the mourners are equally
obligated to honor their parent.  In other words, what counts is the
people saying kaddish, not the people for whom kaddish is being said.

        As for the second question, shiva is first and an avel is last.
For shloshim and yahrzeit, it would seem that the yahrzeit takes
precedence over the shloshim.  (What he writes is that the yahrzeit gets
one kaddish, and the shloshim all the others; but when there are as many
yahrzeits as kaddeishim, the shloshim loses out completely.  Extending
this to serving as the shaliach tzibbur, where there can only be one, it
would thus seem to follow that the yahrzeit gets it.)

Elazar M. Teitz

From: Carl Singer <casinger@...>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 08:41:53 -0400
Subject: Chiyuvim  -- One vote or 3 ?

1) my condolences to Mr. Waysman on his becoming an avel -- HaMakom ....

2) as I recall various lists of priority ranking that have appeared in
   previous Mail Jewish issues.

3) the question as asked (3 vs. 1) should be decided the Rav of the
   shule -- not by internet, or Gadol haDor.

4) the use of "vying" to describe the situation is troubling --- vie \v\
   verb vied vying \v-in\ [modif. of MF envier to invite, challenge,
   wager, fr. L invitare to invite] (1577) verb intransitive : to strive
   for superiority : contend, compete (C) 1996 Zane Publishing, Inc. and
   Merriam-Webster, Incorporated

Carl Singer

From: Meir Possenheimer <meir@...>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 15:42:50 +0100
Subject: Re: Chiyuvim  -- One vote or 3 ?

The Maharil states (Hilchos Tefillah - ed R' Shlomo Spitzer - Mifal
Toras Chachmei Ashkenaz - p.446) that each of the sons has his own right
to Kaddish which means that you should be leading every 4th Tefillah.

From: <Yisyis@...>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:24:01 EDT
Subject: Re: Chiyuvim  -- One vote or 3 ?

The chofez chaim in the Biur Halacha, Siman 132 says that the number of
people saying kaddish is important and that every son of a deceased
parent gets an equal opportunity to daven.  May you be comforted amid
the mourners of Zion.


From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 16:34:14 +0100
Subject: Re: Minhag for middle names

Douglas Moran <dougom@...> wrote:

>I've actually wondered what the minhag is for middle names, as opposed
>to first names.  So for example, what if one has a child and names him
>Yitzchak (after a deceased grandparent), but wants to honor a living
>grandparent by giving him (say) Yosef as a middle name?  Does anyone

There is no minhag for middle names. In many communities, the whole set
of names is considered as a single name allowing, among such Ashkenazim
who avoid naming after a living relative, such names as Yitschak Seckel
ben Yitschak Dov (not a posthumous son). The custom of shinnui hashem
(changing the name of a very sick person) would also seem make this
assumption. If the person had been called Avraham and the new name was
Chaim, on his recovery he is called Chaim Avraham NOT just Chaim.

Martin (Mosheh ben Eliezer Mosheh) Stern


From: Paul Shaviv <pshaviv@...>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 17:07:28 -0400
Subject: Queen Victoria and Chief Rabbi Adler

Nachum Lamm recounts the fable (immortalised in a Mesorah Press book,
'Chance Encounters' by M. L. Moshinsky) of how Rabbi Nathan Marcus
Adler, helped by Moses Montefiore, caused Queen Victoria ("visiting the
heim") to give birth (according to the book, to the future King Edward
VII, her successor) on a British ship, thereby ensuring the correct
citizenship for her child. As a reward, "She was so greatful [sic] for
the advice that she made him Chief Rabbi of the UK".

Some facts:

1.  All of Queen Victoria's nine children were born in England - eight
in Buckingham Palace, and one at Windsor Castle.  None were born on a
ship .....

2.  The ship is named in the book as the "Arc [sic] Royal".  The first
Ark Royal sank in the seventeenth century; its successor was an aircraft
carrier built in 1938.

3.  N. M. Adler was *elected* Chief Rabbi in !844 by an assembly of
representatives of the three most important London congregations ("
....it was found that he had been almost unanimously elected, with 121
votes out of a total of 143.")

4.  However, history does record the following (no doubt the
unembellished kernel of the 'ma'aseh'):

"The recommendations which he had presented were of the most cordial
nature: it was said that they were backed by private communications from
Queen Victoria's uncle, the Duke of Cambridge, who had come into contact
with him as Viceroy of Hanover. Because of his German origin and
upbringing, the Prince Consort found him congenial company; and family
legend [Adler family legend -- PS] tells how he, expert in the problems
of nationality, warned the Queen on an historic occasion of the legal
complications that might ensue were any of her children born in
Germany."  (C. Roth, "History of the Great Synagogue').

5.  Moses Montefiore is nowhere to be found ...

6.  Interestingly, one of the defeated candidates for the post of Chief
Rabbi was a young Rabbi S. R. Hirsch, whose application letter for the
post is printed in the Kluger edition of Hirsch's Teshuvot etc, "Shemesh

7.  Next, Mr. Lamm tells us that the Queen heard Rabbi Adler duchaning
(cf other postings -- not recorded whether this was Mincha, Neilah,
shabbat/Yomtov ...), and incorporated the chant into a Royal funeral
lament.  This, too, has a historical kernel, although apparently not
because Victoria heard it in the ezras noshim, as Adler died in
1890. The Jewish Encyclopaedia records (sv Blessing, Priestly) that the
niggun used in England was associated particularly with days on which
Yizkor was said: "From this it has come to be widely known as "Niggun
Metim" or "The Chant of the Dead." Its recent history is of particular
interest. Developed with insight and feeling by Cantor Naumbourg of
Paris, an instrumental arrangement was published in E. Pauer and
F. L. Cohen's "Traditional Hebrew Melodies," London, 1896, which
attracted the attention of the late Queen Victoria, and was played as
the introductory voluntary at several memorial services of the British
royal family."

8.  Finally, the closer association with Queen Victoria was of Nathan
Marcus Adler's son, Hermann Adler.  Hermann Adler, who served as
'Delegate Chief Rabbi' in the years when his father was indisposed and
had retired to Brighton, affected the dress and manners of an Anglican
bishop. Queen Victoria referred to him as 'my Chief Rabbi'.

I would like to thank Mr. Lamm for causing me an entertaining hour or so
rooting through some books and the internet, and apologise, if apology
be needed, for spoiling the story!

Paul Shaviv, Toronto.

From: Nathan Lamm <nelamm18@...>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 07:33:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Queen Victoria and Chief Rabbi Adler

--- Paul Shaviv <pshaviv@...> wrote:

> I would like to thank Mr. Lamm for causing me an entertaining hour or
> so rooting through some books and the internet, and apologise, if
> apology be needed, for spoiling the story!

No apologies neccesary! The stories sounded a bit apocryphal, and I'm
glad you were able to track down the facts. I had looked up the
birthplaces of Victoria's children, but all I found was a reference to
eight of nine, including the eldest, being born at Buckingham palace, so
that left open a slim possibility. (They were the last born there until
the current Prince William.) So I edited the story accordingly so as not
to imply that the birth actually took place. (I also didn't mean to
imply that Victoria actually heard the tune at shul, of course.) I saw
the original in the Encyclopaedia Judaica, which was edited by Cecil
Roth- who's also your source for the story.

Is there any note as to how the Duke of Cambridge first met him? Also, I
know the Chief Rabbi was elected, but a friendship with the Queen
couldn't hurt his chances.

The Adlers, by the way, appear in a Sherlock Holmes story- when Watson
looks up the biography of Irene Adler, Holmes' nemesis in "A Scandal in
Bohemia," he finds the entry between those of "A Hebrew Rabbi and a
deep-sea captain." The latter is apparently a reference to someone named
Adeler; the former is, of course, a reference to Hermann and/or Nathan

On Hermann Adler and Anglican dress- this was by no means restricted to
Adler; many German Orthodox rabbis (including many regarded today as
gedolim) of the 19th Century wore ecclesiastical garb- Rav Hirsch
himself does so in pictures of him as a young man. Rabbi Hertz did the
same, and some English "Reverends" actually wore the white clerical
collar. I suppose it was seen more as general religious garb than
specifically Christian. To this day, many Chazzanim still wear clothes
influenced by this.

Finally, can anyone confirm or disprove the legend of how Chief Rabbi
Hertz and Winston Churchill met, as refugees from the Boer War, sharing
a rowboat out to a ship? I know Churchill escaped by train, but there's
plenty of room for this story as well.

Nachum Lamm


From: <Gevaryahu@...> (Gilad Gevaryahu)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:41:24 EDT
Subject: Y'kum Purkan - Who is an Individual? Prayers in Aramaic

> From: Shimon Lebowitz <shimonl@...>
> > The accepted practice is that an individual does not complete the Y'kum
> > Purkan (two plus one) but only recites the first section.

To which Yehuda Landy replied (MJv43n09)
<Just wish to point out, that although many sidurim have instructions
that an indivdual does not recite the second Yakum purkan and the
mu"sheberach the Mishna Brurah (101:19) states that an individual may
not recite prayers in Aramaic thus' he shoud recire neither Yakum

The prohibition of saying prayer bi-ychidut in Aramaic has it source in
Sota 33a. "..amar Rav Yehudah: Le'olam al yish'al adam tzerachav bilshon
Aramit, de'amar Rav Yochanan kol hashoel tzerachav bileshon Arami ein
Mal'achei ha-Sharet nishma'in lo...ha beyachid ha betzibur." [=Rabbi
Yehudah said: Never should a person ask (pray) in Aramaic, as it is
quoted from Rabbi Yochanan: He who asks for his personal needs in
Aramaic, the Angels of God do not listen to him.] The Gemara then makes
a distinction between private and public prayer. The underlying idea of
this Gemara is that public prayer, where the Shechina is present (Rashi:
Shechina sheruyah im ha-tzibur), prayers go directly to Hashem, whereas
private prayers need the Angels as intermediaries before they reach
Hashem. And since Angles do not understand Aramaic it is tantamount to
tefilah levatala (i.e., Prayers in vain) if an individual davens
bi-yechidut in Aramaic.

Accordingly, the Gr"a held that neither of the Yekum Purkan prayers
should be said bi-yechidut (Siddur Ezor Eliyahu, Jerusalem, 1998, pp.
220-221), followed by Mishnah Berurah (101:19), whereas others (Sha-arei
Ephraim 10:26) ruled that only the second one should not be said
bi-yechidut. The reason for the difference is the content of the first
Yekum Purkan is for the sake of Talmidei Chachamim (public servants)
whereas the second one is the rest of the community (i.e., individuals).
Some held that for the sake of public servants (scholars and leaders)
the tefilah, even in Aramaic is OK, but not so for the rest of the
community.  The Mishnah Berurah is emphatic in his ruling that "Yachid
lo yishal tzerachav bilshon Arami." [=An individual should never ask
(pray) in Aramaic.]

One might ask about the Aramaic parts of "Uva LeZion," but these parts
are only a narrative explaining the Hebrew parts which preceded them,
and not a self standing prayers.

Gilad J. Gevaryahu


End of Volume 43 Issue 14