Volume 55 Number 82
                    Produced: Mon Sep 24  5:31:57 EDT 2007

Subjects Discussed In This Issue: 

163 Free Learn Hebrew Study Sheets
         [Jacob Richman]
Hechsher on Fruit Juice
         [Dr. Josh Backon]
Jewelry on Yom Kippur
         [Shoshana L. Boublil]
new Dvar Torah list from Rav Shlomo Aviner
         [Rabbi Shmuel Jablon]
Perfume on Yom Kippur
         [Carl Singer]
Shema Kolainu Piyut (2)
         [David Ziants, Perets Mett]
Vowels in vav hachibur
         [Jay F Shachter]
Yonah vs. Avraham Avinu
         [Irwin Weiss]


From: Jacob Richman <jrichman@...>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 05:02:43 +0200
Subject: 163 Free Learn Hebrew Study Sheets

Hi Everyone!

Today I added a new feature to the website: Learn Hebrew with Audio and

I created 163 Learn Hebrew study sheets that you can use with the
website or independently in the classroom, home, work or on the road.

The study sheets include all 46 topics and over 1,700 words and phrases
from the audio site.  Both the study sheets and the audio site are free
to all.

The direct address of the study sheets is:

Feedback is welcome.

Please forward this message to anyone that may be interested in learning
Hebrew. Thank you!

Have a joyous Sukkot !
Chag Sameach !


From: Dr. Josh Backon <backon@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:50:42 +0200
Subject: re: Hechsher on Fruit Juice

>As suggested, I would very much like to "look at any of the standard
>Yoreh Deah books" and see this for myself. Can someone tell me where
>this Rashba can be found, and give some examples of which poskim
>disagree with that Rashba, and where in their writings they say so?

The Rashba is in Torat haBayit (Bayit Revii, Shaar Shlishi 31a).  The
sugya is in Yerushalmi Terumah 5:9, a gemara in Gittin 54b and a gemara
in Beitza 4b. See Shach YD 99 s"k 7 and Beit Yosef TUR YD 99.

Incidentally, the Rashba "holds" this din only for an issur
d'oraita. With regard to an issur d'rabbanan the Rashba permits adding
*heter* [something permissible] to a taarovet (pre-existing mixture of
issur d'rabbaban and *heter* and he is more LENIENT (!!) than the Rema
(YD 99:6,7) who allows adding heter to the mixture only if the issur is
about to be destroyed.

And what's even stranger is that the Rashba (in contrast to the Raavad)
holds that the entire din of "ein mevatlin issur l'chatchila" is an
issur d'rabbanan. And he rules (Torat haBayit) like R. Yossi in the
gemara in Chullin 98b on ayil ha'Nazir that if the nullification is done
b'shogeg (inadvertently) the mixture is permitted.

NODA B'YEHUDA (as quoted by Mark Shapiro): actually the Noda B'Yehuda
(as quoted in the Pitchei Tshuva s"k 3) holds the opposite of what Mark
Shapiro indicated!  He rules that "ein mevatlin issur l'chatchila" as an
issur d'rabbanan is only with regard to TAAM (flavor). However if there
is an actual visible piece of issur, then trying to nullify it by adding
heter is an issur d'oraita.

Peyrush Josh [tm]: I haven't got the faintest idea why Mark Shapiro
indicates that the ruling of the Rashba is the reason why kashrut
agencies exist.

Dr. Josh Backon


From: Shoshana L. Boublil <toramada@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 16:12:34 +0200
Subject: Re: Jewelry on Yom Kippur

> From: Janice Gelb <j_gelb@...>
> In a discussion this week, someone mentioned that you are supposed to
> remove all jewelry on Yom Kippur because you're not supposed to adorn
> yourself and because of echoes of the Golden Calf. I am pretty sure that
> I was told once, however, that you are allowed to wear "habitual"
> weekday jewelry like a wedding band or small earrings. An extensive web
> search came up with only one source that confirms my memory
> http://books.google.com/books?id=m5LIuwrmAckC&pg=PA78&lpg=PA78&dq=yom+kippur+wearing+jewelry&source=web&ots=RfO_ksbeo7&sig=g9bXUAA7ypqsG65VcT6K6MdZHZE#PPA78,M1
> page 78.
> Has anyone else ever heard this or have any confirmation?

Thanks for raising this question.

My memory (and confirmed by your source) was that women didn't wear GOLD
jewelery (except wedding bands and such) b/c of the golden calf.

But I have a question on this.

It is written that when the men wanted to make the golden calf, they
asked their wives for their gold earings.  B/c the wives said no, Hashem
gave them a present -- Rosh Chodesh.  This is a semi-Yom Tov for women,
a day where women are supposed to limit the housework they do; a day
where in many places they used to have festive dinners and nature hikes.

It would appear then, that davka the women should be wearing their gold
earings, to remind Hashem that they were faithful and didn't partake in
the Eigel.

Any comments?

Shoshana L. Boublil
(P.S. I realize that "Ein Makshim Min HaMidrash Al HaMidrash [you don't
question one Midrash from another] but still, I find this an interesting


From: Rabbi Shmuel Jablon <rabbij@...>
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 10:01:25 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Subject: new Dvar Torah list from Rav Shlomo Aviner

Shalom to all!  I wanted to make everyone aware that there is a
wonderful new email list of Divrei Torah (in English) from HaRav Shlomo
Aviner shlit"a (Rosh Yeshivat Ateret Yerushalayim and Rav of Bet El).
It is produced by Rabbi Mordechai Friedfertig, who recently made aliyah
with his family from Buffalo. You can view a sample issue at
www.rabbijablon.com/hetermechira.pdf .

If you'd like to join the list, send an email to <ToratRavAviner@...>

With all best wishes for a Chag Sameach,
(Rabbi) Shmuel Jablon


From: Carl Singer <casinger@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 06:50:12 -0400
Subject: Perfume on Yom Kippur

I know it's too late for a timely response as it's Erev Yom Kippur.  But
what about Perfume or Cologne on Yom Kippur -- from an Halachik

 From a Derech Eretz standpoint it would seem that those who drench
themselves in same lack sensitivity to others -- but what about the



From: David Ziants <dziants@...>
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 22:43:45 +0200
Subject: Re: Shema Kolainu Piyut

I asked someone during Yom Kippur this issue, and he pointed out a
number of things which has now changed my direction of the question.

1) All the sentences are convolution of pesukim in the same way as this
one. Therefore the Rav that I asked at the time was probably remarking
on the way I asked him the question.  When I asked him the question, I
referred to this sentence in Shema Kolainu as a "pasuk" , and he
corrected me that it is not a pasuk but an "ivut" (= convolution) of
one. Thus it seems that this remark was not part of his answer to the
question, since with exception to "hashivainu" which is a direct pasuk,
all the other sentences are built in a similar way.

2) The American Machzor (I think Artscroll) of the person I asked during
YK has it explicitly instructed that both "amarainu" (the sentence
before "yihiyu") and "yihiyu" should be said quietly by the
congregation. The earlier editions of this machzor only had it
explicitly instructed that "yihiyu" should be said quietly by the
congregation. This is in contradiction of the Rav, who is the city Mara
D'Atra (LOR), who instructed me not to say "yihiyu" at all.

What comes of this then is:

1. There are some people who do say it, but quietly, thus it is printed
in its traditional place in the Israeli selichot and machzorim, and also
in American Artscroll.

2. Avraham Rosenfeld (who set the British order of Selichot) understood
well before the American Machzor that these two sentences form a pair
and in addition he also felt that if it was to said quietly then it
needed to be said at a time that doesn't disturb the hazan/congregation
interaction, i.e. in the second part of shema koleinu which is said
individually in any case.

So my questions:
It is obviously a wide spread custom not to say at all the sentence 
"yihiyu", at least in Israel. Most Ashkenazi congregations here, use the 
Polish order.
a) On what precedence is this based?  (Gr"a?, Ari?,..)
b) The Mara D'Atra probably instructed me not to say it at all, because 
this is the accepted local practice. Are there any Ashkenazi 
congregations or Yeshivot in Israel that do say "yihiyu" out aloud, or 
give a break for the congregation to say it quietly? If so, I would be 
interested to hear of the type (Haredi/Dati Leumi/Yeshivat 
Hesder/Yeshiva for year programs from abroad), as this will give an 
indication of the acceptance of this custom.
c) Similarly, I would be interested to hear if there are congregations 
in Israel that treat "amarainu" like "yihiyu".

Shanna Tova,
David Ziants
Ma'aleh Adumim, Israel

From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:49:38 +0100
Subject: Re: Shema Kolainu Piyut

> There is a sentence "yihiyu leratzon imrai phi..." which is printed in
> most additions of the ashkenazi selichot books (both Poland and Lita)
> as part of the section that is read aloud in famous "shema Kolainu"
> piut. [Avraham Rosenfeld's edition is an exception, and moves this and
> the sentence before this towards the bottom of the piut, which is not
> read aloud.]
> In practice though, this sentence is always skipped by the hazzan and
> congregation, and is not read at all.
> I asked a Rav, if maybe this should be said individually and quietly,
> and he said "no".  I asked him why, and he answered because this is
> not a "pasuk" (i.e. quoted from tanach) but a convolution of one.
> It seems that the piatan (poet) transformed the original pasuk from
> the singular to the plural, as we usually express our prayers in the
> plural.
> Apart from "hashivenu", none of these sentences are "pesukim", so my
> questions are:
> a) Why do we not say it, if it is printed there?
> b) Is this sentence anyhow inferior because of the convolution?
> c) If it is not meant to be said, why was it ever printed?
> d) Why did Avraham Rosenfeld change the order? Is it anything to do  
> with this issue?

I cannot answer all of David's questions, but I can tell you that

(1) the order of the pesukim varies in the different nuscho-os of  
(2) it is our custom that both the shats and the congregation say  
yihyu lerotson quietly.

[Also for the shats to say yihyu lerotson quietly at the end of "oichilo
lo-eil.." after oleinu on the Yomim Noroim, not to mention after every
shmone esre.]

I don't really know why it is said quielty, but that seems to be the
practice for this posuk.

I don't understand the problem with psukim being converted to plural for
tfilos - just think of Vehu rachum on Mondays and Thursdays.

Gmar chasimo tovo
Perets Mett


From: Jay F Shachter <jay@...>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 08:19:39 -0600 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Vowels in vav hachibur

In v55n79, Leah Aharoni asked:
> I have noticed that vav hachibur in davening and in tanakh sometimes
> carries a shva and at other times a patakh. Does anyone know the rule
> for which each one of the vowels is used?

I suspect that you mean vav hahippukh, not vav haxibbur.  If so, the
pattax (or qamatz, in the case of first person singular forms, because
the 'alef does not take a dagesh xazaq) indicates a change from future
tense to past tense, whereas the shva is used to change from past tense
to future tense.  In the latter case, first person singular and second
person masculine singular forms experience a stress shift from the
penultimate to the ultima (except when they don't: in lamed-heh verbs,
and whenever followed by a stressed syllable) thus indicating to the
listener that it is vav hahippukh, and not vav haxibbur.  Forms other
than first person singular and second person masculine singular are
already stressed on the ultima, and in those cases there is no
morphological way to distinguish between vav hahippukh and vav haxibbur
placed before a verb in the past tense, and the listener must use
contextual information.

(It is understood that "past tense" and "future tense" in indo-European
languages and in modern Hebrew correspond only approximately to the two
verbal moods in Biblical Hebrew; but those are the terms that are
commonly used when describing such forms.)

If you truly did mean vav haxibbur, then I have no answer to your

Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter


From: Irwin Weiss <irwin@...>
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 21:29:13 -0400
Subject: Yonah vs. Avraham Avinu

I hope everyone here had an inspiring Yom Kippur, and will have a
wonderful year.

For the first time I thought about something.  The Akedah story takes
place "Bayom Hashlishi"---the third day after Avraham was instructed to
do his thing with Yitzchak.  What I noticed for the first time is that
Yonah spends 3 days and 3 nights inside the Big Fish before being
vomited out.

Is anyone aware of any comments on the coincidence of the "3s", as both
texts are read for these Yom Tovim?  Of course, it could be "just
coincidence" but that rarely happens.

Irwin Weiss


End of Volume 55 Issue 82