Volume 57 Number 28
Produced: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 15:24:35 EDT
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Candle Lighting
[Martin Stern]
Candle lighting and other timing issues
[Ira L. Jacobson]
Forbidden Fruit (and Vegetables) (6)
[Perets Mett Ira L. Jacobson Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz Gershon Dubin Alex Heppenheimer Susan Kane]
Hanetz hachammah (2)
[Martin Stern Ira L. Jacobson]
Old Moon New Year
[Richard Fiedler]
tevilas kelim
[Ira L. Jacobson]
Viddui (Confession) - Intent
[Ken Bloom]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Candle Lighting
On Sun, Sep 13,2009, Harry Weiss <hjweiss@...> wrote:
> An off the cuff guess may be that it is that because the Yiddish word for
> light and Candle is both licht so it could be Licht lictzen for candle
> lighting which would be a bit confusing.
The Yiddish for 'lighting' in the sense of 'igniting' is not 'lichten' but
'tsinden' so I don't think this can be the reason.
Pace those who claim the word 'benchen' is used rather than the word
'blessing' because the latter is too 'churchy' should realise that the
former is actually derived from the Latin word 'benedictum' which means a
blessing. Could anything be more 'churchy'!
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Candle lighting and other timing issues
Michael Frankel:
>this has been recycled a few times. it would seem - kaufmann codex
>- that both heneitz and honeitz are equally attested usage.
My point was really that no matter how you vocalize the "he," that
letter in the word under discussion is not and has never been the
definite article.
>see mail jewish vol 57 #17 for more detail.
I looked, but the only thing that comes remotely close to this is the
discussion of nosah and its possible plurals.
> also, language usage evolves. at what point does common usage
> over generations by the majority of language practitioners cease
> being a "mistake" and assume the aspect of a hypercorrect affectation?
I haven't counted generations or majorities and really was (and am)
under the impression that this is an innovation since the beginning
(or middle) of the twentieth century. Like "shemonah esreh" for
shemoneh esreh, or "hamesh shekel" for hamisha shekalim. About as
old and about as wrong.
>go tell r. moshe and others that he is abusing the language (which
>perhaps he was). i occasionally encounter this phenomenon in
>leining (or been guilty of it myself).
At one point people used to classify one as a talmudist or a
grammarian. The rare individual excelled at both.
~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
IRA L. JACOBSON
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
mailto:<laser@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Forbidden Fruit (and Vegetables)
"Insect-free" brussels sprouts are available, so they are not off
limits..
I don't know about asparagus, but maybe there was a time in the past
when they grew without attracting so many insects.
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Forbidden Fruit (and Vegetables)
S.Wise <Smwise3@...> stated the following in mail-Jewish Vol.57 #27 Digest:
>Strawberries and figs are offenders among the fruit, and the likes
>of brussels sprouts and asparagus present problems.
>
>My question is this: What was the point of Hashem creating these
>produce if they are basically off limits to us?
You could ask the same question about turtles and camel milk. Or orlah.
~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
IRA L. JACOBSON
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
mailto:<laser@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Forbidden Fruit (and Vegetables)
> From: S.Wise <Smwise3@...>
> My question is this: What was the point of Hashem creating these produce
> if they are basically off limits to us?
You could ask why Hashem created non-kosher animals (sea, land, or
air) as well. The fact that certain fruits and vegetable would be
infested now does not mean that they would be infested in the future
or were infested in the past. You could also ask why Hashem created
poisonous (or even non-edible) fruits and vegetables.
Actually, I don't see the point of the question.
--
Sabba - ' " - Hillel
Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz | Said the fox to the fish, "Join me ashore"
<SabbaHillel@...> | The fish are the Jews, Torah is our water
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Forbidden Fruit (and Vegetables)
From: S.Wise <Smwise3@...>
> My question is this: What was the point of Hashem creating these pro=
> duce if they are basically off limits to us?
For a definitive answer you'd need to ask Him. Do you eat meat from the=
hindquarters? It's technically (glatt) kosher, but the effort involved=
in taking out the gid hanashe is not worth it, so we don't (in the USA =
at least).
If those species were grown bug-free (think Gush Katif) they would be edible.
It's a matter of cost benefit ratio.
Note, in times gone by, although European Jewry had little access to such
produce as brussel sprouts or strawberries, they had bug issues with the produce
they did have, and they did clean up the bugs in preparation for eating.
Gershon
<gershon.dubin@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Alex Heppenheimer <aheppenh@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Forbidden Fruit (and Vegetables)
In MJ 57:27, S.Wise <Smwise3@...> asked:
>My question is this: What was the point of Hashem creating these produce
>if they are basically off limits to us?
You could ask the same thing about pigs,lobsters, and many other kinds of
non-kosher foods, no? Hashem's creations have other uses for us besides eating
them. (Not to mention the ecosystems of which they're a part, and the non-Jews
who are allowed to eat them.)
But I disagree with the premise anyway; these fruits and vegetables aren't
"basically off limits," they just require very careful checking. Of the four
items you listed, we know that figs were a popular food item in Biblical and
Talmudic times (they're one of the "seven species" for which the Land of Israel
is distinguished, after all); and from various references in the Gemara
(Berachos 51a, Nedarim 53b, et al) it seems that they ate "asparagus"and also
used it to make a medicinal drink.(Though this isn't dispositive, since Rashi
translates this word as a variety of cabbage, and Rambam (Hil.. Nedarim 9:10)
understands it as cabbage soup.) So how did they eat figs and (possibly)
asparagus? Presumably they checked them for bugs as carefully as they could, and
that was that.
As a practical matter nowadays, it may well be that we have to avoid these
fruits and vegetables because we lack the expertise to check them properly (we
find this to be the case in other halachic contexts - see, for example, Rema to
Yoreh De'ah 36:15), or because modern growing conditions are more conducive to
infestation, or because of other considerations. But it's not that Hashem
created them initially as something forbidden.
Kol tuv, and kesivah vachasimah tovah,
Alex
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Susan Kane <suekane@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 01:01 PM
Subject: Forbidden Fruit (and Vegetables)
I heard an interesting theory once on this topic. It used to be that people
worried a lot about meat - shechita, soaking, salting, etc.
Nowadays, you either trust your butcher / hechsher or you don't which has left
people with something of a kashrus worry-deficiency. Worry about produce has
come in to fill this vacuum so that people can at least worry.
I always thought this was a reasonable theory given that produce is no more -
and probably much less - dangerous than before.
Produce today is cleaner and has fewer bugs than when you bought it straight
from the fields. And yet there are apparently some who are so afraid of it that
they rely only on hechshered canned vegetables.
This made me wonder about another issue. Is it possible that the increase in
chumrot has something to do with the increased isolation of frum Jews from non
frum Jews?
It used to be - and still is in many eidot hamizrach communities - that all Jews
were technically Orthodox.
Within that large umbrella, some prayed every day and some did not, some were
strict about kashrut and some were not, some drove and others walked, etc.
In that kind of mixed community, its easy to express one's devotion to G-d by
being one of the more frum people.
But if the less observant Jews go elsewhere - becoming essentially invisible to
the frum community - the baseline is raised. Now you have to seek out chumrot in
order to show particular devotion.
Also when a chumra becomes standard practice, it ceases to serve its real
function, which is to allow people to go above and beyond.
Thus I would argue that it is davka very important to continue to serve
strawberries at kosher functions - so that those who want chumrot will have an
opportunity to refuse to eat them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 12:01 PM
Subject: Hanetz hachammah
There is one serious objection to calling sunrise 'Netz hachammah' in that
the word 'Neitz' is the name of a non-kosher bird, probably some kind of
hawk or falcon, that was the symbol of the Egyptian sun god. Thus the term
'Netz hachammah' might be misunderstood as being in some way acquiescing in
this idolatry!
Furthermore the name of that deity was 'ra'. This might be the reason that
Chazal modified the verse in Isaiah (45,7) from 'borei ra' to 'borei et
hakol', in the first berachah before Shema in the morning, so that it should
not be mistakenly read as "borei ra hameir et ha'aretz'. [The Creator, Ra, who
enlightens the land, or possibly, Who Created Ra the one who enlightens the
land, but correctly translated would be something like: Who Created evil, and
enlightens the land - MOD]
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 12:01 PM
Subject: Hanetz hachammah
Martin Stern stated the following:
>There is one serious objection to calling sunrise 'Netz hachammah'
I think bad grammar is also a serious objection. As in "hamesh shekel."
>Furthermore the name of that deity was 'ra'.
Wikipedia informs us that "Ra is most commonly pronounced 'rah'. It
is more likely, however, that it should be pronounced as 'rei' (like
English 'ray'); hence the alternative spelling Re rather than Ra. The
meaning of Ra's name is uncertain, but it is thought if not a word
for 'sun' it may be a variant of or linked to 'creative'."
>This might be the reason that Chazal modified the verse in Isaiah
>(45,7) from 'borei ra' to 'borei et hakol', in the first berachah
>before Shema in the morning, so that it should not be mistakenly
>read as "borei ra hameir et ha'aretz'.
A bit fanciful; I think it had more to do with negating
Zoroastrianism. And the correct pronunciation makes your explanation
a bit more unlikely.
~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
IRA L. JACOBSON
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
mailto:<laser@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Richard Fiedler <richardfiedler@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 08:01 AM
Subject: Old Moon New Year
Friday, Erev Rosh HaShanah at 5:49 AM the Old Moon will rise in the
eastern sky of Jerusalem. The Sun will rise at 6:24 AM so the light of
the Old Moon will quickly be overcome by the twilight. Making this
sighting difficult will be the .7% visibility of the moon.
What is the relevance of this to the New Year? The Gemora treats the
visibility of the Old Moon with great concern in the Tanhuma, the
Yerushami, and the Bavli with regard to R' Hiyah and the great
conflict between Rabban Gamaliel and Rabbi Joshua ben Hananiah in the
Bavli.
It is universally understood that it is not possible to see the New
Moon after sunset if the Old Moon is seen before Sunrise. It is lesser
known that at the time of the Molad of Tishrei it is equally
impossible to see the New Moon after sunset one day after the Old Moon
is seen before Sunrise.
I will report whether I succeed in seeing this Old Moon for this year
from the Old City in Jerusalem. Whether I do or not this link will
provide the reader with a PDF of calendar data supported of this
discussion.
files.me.com/richardfiedler/8l8aez
Even if I do see the Old Moon in my opinion this sighting is not quite
of what I believe the Gemora was talking about. as it will not be an
emphatic sighting. By this I mean that since there is no special value
in sighting the Old Moon no one is really looking for it. I am going
to make effort to see the Old Moon and will know exactly where and
when to look.
Contrast this to Rosh HaShanah 2013 for which the Old Moon will be
quite visible to all who are awake before dawn Erev Rosh HaShanah. In
2013, in Jerusalem, there will be one hour and six minutes to see a
very bright Old Moon of 2.2% brightness. This is of the nature of the
Old Moon at the time of Rabban Gamiel and R' Hiyah.
It is almost universally held by today's Rabbis that the Calculated
Hebrew Calendar was inaugurated by Hillel II in 358 CE. There is only
one source for this a responsum of R. Hai Gaon (early eleventh
century) cited by R. Avraham b. Hiyya.
. . . until the days of Hillel b. R. Yehuda in the year 670 of the
Seleucid era (358/9 CE), from when they did not bring forth or
postpone, but kept to this cycle which was at hand . . .
Sacha Stern in his book Calendar and Community because of a lack of
any reference to a Hillel II as a patriarch in the Yerushami or in the
Bavli and because of convincing evidence that Bavil was still waiting
for Jerusalem to sanctify the moon as late as 835/6 AD and for other
reasons on pages 175 though 179 of his book Calendar and Community
concludes "The very existence of a 'Hillel the Patriarch' in the mid
fourth century may thus treated as uncertain." As Sacha Stern points
out the first mention of Hillel II is over seven hundred years after
the fact. It is Sacha Stern's thesis that the Calculated Hebrew
Calendar was inaugurated a great many centuries later. But Sacha Stern
fails to explain the source from R. Hai Gaon.
Modern lunar data supports Sacha Stern in that certainly 358 CE is not
the date of the inauguration of the Calculated Hebrew Calendar but
dramatically refutes Sacha Stern's central thesis, the Calculated
Hebrew Calendar was not established after 358 CE but rather
considerably before 358 CE!
How is this so
The Hebrew Calculated Calendar produces a Molad of Tishrei of
September 19, 358 CE, 23 hours and 233 helekim. On September 18th
before sunrise the Old Moon was visible for one hour and 35 minutes at
a brightness of 4.0%. This is almost the maximum brightness and
longest duration possible and coincidentally it all happens at the
alleged inauguration of the Hebrew Calculated Calendar. This gives new
significance to the quote and it's included date of 358 CE. In the
year 358 CE Hillel b. R. Yehuda saw a very visible Old Moon in the
morning and learned that the Nasi had sanctified the New Moon that
evening. Unlike R' Joshua and Rabban Gamaliel he realizes that the
Nasi is sanctifying the moon on the basis of some computed system and
then accepting the witnesses accordingly and not accepting the
testimony of the witness and then sanctifying the New Moon accordingly.
Why it is so
When Nevuchadnetzer exiled the Jews to Bavel he exasperated the
difficulty that Jews living far from Jerusalem knowing when was the
fast of Yom Kippur. If they did not know then a two day fast was
mandated out of the doubt. The answer to this problem was that Elul
was kept at 29 days and the Calculated Hebrew Calendar was how this
was accomplished.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ira L. Jacobson <mehandess@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 10:01 AM
Subject: tevilas kelim
Rabbi Meir Wise <Meirhwise@...> stated the following:
>Yes I seemed to have confused Rav Avraham Yosef Ash with Rav Yaakov
>Yosef Ash.
I have not found any indication that the surname of Rabbi Jacob
Joseph was Ash, or anything other than Joseph. Have you a source?
~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
IRA L. JACOBSON
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
mailto:<mehandess@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ken Bloom <kbloom@...>
Date: Tue, Sep 15,2009 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Viddui (Confession) - Intent
Saul Newmn <Saul.Z.Newman@...> wrote:
> in re vidui, what to say , and which kavanot to have, see
> http://linkla.org/2009/09/11/link-in-newsletter-rosh-hashana-edition/
> bottom of page 3 , on the kavvana needed to be yotze the mitva
> of
> tshuva, according to rav elyashiv
So now having read this (without getting into the reasons why R'
Elyashiv changed the nusach he used for the vidui) we can begin to
answer the question of what the vidui formalized into our tefillot
accomplishes. The vidui in our tefillot is parallel to the vidui of the
Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur. He confessed sins for am yisrael that were
not his own, because am yisrael had sinned.
So, what does the Kohen Gadol accomplish by doing that? What do we
accomplish by following the lead of the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur? And
what is accomplished by saying this vidui every other day of the year
(for Sepharadim and others who say vidui during tachanun).
--Ken
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 57 Issue 28
