Volume 59 Number 47
Produced: Mon, 04 Oct 2010 15:29:28 EDT
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Birkat Kohanim
[Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz]
Chiyuv (3)
[Martin Stern Haim Snyder Orrin Tilevitz]
Lo Yishama al Picha (It shall not be heard through you) (3)
[Russell J Hendel]
Mezonos bread/hamotzi cake (3)
[Judith Weil Martin Stern Akiva Miller]
On duchening during neilah after sunset
[Dr. William Gewirtz]
Open wound vs. mikvah question
[Carl Singer]
Shemini Atzeret
[Martin Stern]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 3,2010 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Birkat Kohanim
Menashe Elyashiv <Menashe.Elyashiv@...> wrote (MJ 59#46):
> What about Birkat Kohanim at Musaf of Simhat Tora? In Israel, most do it,
> warning the Kohanim not to drink (wine) before Musaf. Also, the very early
> minyanim do not have a kiddush break. Sefaradim have hakafot after Musaf &
> kiddush. Outside of Israel - there are various opinions.
I was just shown a comment in the Mishnah Berurah that the Levush
stated that it was not done at all because most people make kiddush
immediately after their aliyah. As a result, the kohanim were not
allowed to duchan at musaf, even if they themselves had not made
kiddush. Apparently, this was done to prevent accidents and someone
forgetting or to prevent suspicion. The sentence then goes on to say
that the custom in Prague was to duchen at musaf while "some say" that
the kohanim duchen at Shacharis. The shul that I was in this year has
the minhag that if it is not done at musaf, then it is not done at
all. This has been their custom for at least the last 40 or 50 years
based on the Levush.
The custom there is to not duchen, even though kiddush is not held
until after musaf. Apparently, the custom is because it is considered
a takanah [rabbinical ordinance] with a "lo plug" [no difference
because of circumstances].
Sabba - ' " - Hillel
Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 3,2010 at 12:01 PM
Subject: Chiyuv
Anonymous wrote (MJ 59#46):
> This Shimini Atzeres I davened in my son's shul. The ba'al musaf (including
> geshem) left much to be desired -- both to "accuracy" (pronunciation of
> words) and chazunish (like me, he is tone deaf). My son told me that this man
> is not a member of the shul, but a friend of a "macher" and shows up every
> Shimini Atzeres with his kittle (he has yahrzeit that day) expecting to daven
> musaf and geshem.
>
> Is there a chiyuv at all on Yom Tov? That is, if one has yarhzeit on a Yom
> Tov must they be allowed to daven for the amud? Is there a chiyuv for musaf
> (ever)? If one is a chiyuv (say on Shabbos or Rosh Chodesh) must they be
> allowed to daven musaf? Is there a chiyuv for geshem?
The first point to make is that the congregation can choose whoever it likes to
daven and no individual can claim the right because he has a chiyuv - this
is true of every day of the year and even more so on Yom Tov when a pleasant
voice and knowledge of that day's particular tunes is essential.
There is a minhag that on the Shabbat before a yahrzeit, a person is called
up for maftir (on the yahrzeit itself he is entitled to a 'proper' aliyah) and,
as a 'compensation', since, theoretically, maftir is not a 'real' aliyah and can
be given to a child, he is allowed to daven mussaf, which a child cannot do.
However, this only applies if he is capable and acceptable to the congregation.
Someone who is not even a member, and who turns up only when he has
yahrzeit, has NO rights whatsoever and, if he is not capable, any member
present (though probably not a visitor) is allowed to object and demand he not
daven. Whether one would want to do so, with the inevitable ill-feeling that
will be caused in such a situation, is another matter entirely.
If the scenario is really as described by the anonymous poster, this person
brings disgrace on his departed parent by his high handed actions which are
the precise opposite of what acting as shliach tzibbur [prayer leader] is
meant to be - someone who is so popular that EVERYONE wants him to lead
their prayers and of whom it can be said "what a wonderful parent, who
brought him up so well, he must have had".
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Haim Snyder <haimsny@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 04:01 AM
Subject: Chiyuv
There is an anonymous posting asking about whether a person who has Yahrzeit
on Shmini Atzeret should get Musaf if he has no voice and/or doesn't read
Hebrew properly. The simple answer is no. As I have heard said, and even
said myself, to a person who asked to be the baal tefila and had no voice
and/or couldn't read well, "The fact that your parent died made you an
orphan, not a baal tefila."
The term Shaliah Tzibbur means Messenger of the Public. If the public
doesn't want him to be their messenger, then he can't assume that position.
Presumably, the person making the comment wasn't the only one in the
congregation who didn't enjoy the service, so the "orphan" in question
usurped the position against their will and, therefore, did a disservice to
the congregation.
In order to avoid, or at least minimize, the resentment, this should be
explained to the "macher" who brings him. He can then decide whether to
invite this person on Shmini Atzeret again, knowing that the person will NOT
be given Musaf.
Regards,
Haim Shalom Snyder
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Orrin Tilevitz <tilevitzo@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 02:01 PM
Subject: Chiyuv
Anonymous asked (59#46):
> This Shimini Atzeres I davened in my son's shul. The ba'al musaf (including
> geshem) left much to be desired -- both to "accuracy" (pronunciation of words)
> and chazunish (like me, he is tone deaf). My son told me that this man is not
> a member of the shul, but a friend of a "macher" and shows up every Shimini
> Atzeres with his kittle (he has yahrzeit that day) expecting to daven musaf
> and geshem.
>
> Is there a chiyuv at all on Yom Tov? That is, if one has yarhzeit on a Yom
> Tov must they be allowed to daven for the amud? Is there a chiyuv for musaf
> (ever)? Is one is a chiyuv (say on Shabbos or Rosh Chodesh) must they be
> allowed to daven musaf? Is there a chiyuv for geshem?
It would be helpful if posters consulted MJ's archives before posting questions
[see http://mj.bu.edu/MjBackIssues.html -- Mod.]. They are online and
searchable, and even years-old information in them is often useful.
[Moderator's comment: in his defense, the anonymous poster who started this V59
thread may have tried to find previous M-J postings on the topic -- e.g., when I
searched the archives for "not a member; chiyuv", I didn't find any postings
from V49, just one from V47.]
In MJ 49#42, I posted the following:
> A man came to shul this morning (Shabbat Rosh Chodesh Av). He comes to our
> shul once every few years and, so far as I know, makes no financial
> contributions to it. He asked for maftir because he had yahrzeit. I (the
> gabbai) assented. At some point, he told me that he was also davening musaf
> because he had yahrzeit; he did not ask permission. Having nobody better, I
> did not object. He proceeded to rattle through musaf at top speed, pretty
> much ignoring the shalosh regalim nusach and also ignoring our attempts to
> sing, as is the custom in our shul, passages like mizmor ledavid, eitz chaim
> he and aleinu.
> This prompted me to do some research. As I read the Mishnah Berura, siman 53,
> s.k. 59-61, with one exception, an aveil - which would include a yahrzeit --
> has no right to be sheliach tzibur if I, the gabbai - who normally has the
> authority, on behalf of the shul, to select the sheliach tzibur - want
> someone else, even someone with no "chiyuv". The one exception is maariv.
> See also, particularly on the exception, Fuchs, "Hatefila Betzibur" (1978),
> 10:12, fn. 21, where he seems to say that an aveil has an absolute right to
> daven maariv even if the shul does not want him to and even if he cannot
> daven properly. (The Mishnah Berura is less certain on this point.) Is this
> right? If so, I could have stopped this guy -- this could happen again in
> another three years -- and an aveil has no right to walk into a shul and
> expect to be a sheliach tzibur if there are no other aveilim; but if someone
> like him were to show up on, say, erev Rosh Hashana or erev Yom Kippur and
> demand to be sheliach tzibur because he has yahrzeit (this is my nightmare;
> do not say nobody would do this), would I be obligated to permit it?
The several responses in MJ 49#43 were all to the effect that "merutzeh lakahal"
[the congregation approves] trumps any supposed chiyuv, even at maariv. And in
MJ 49#45, Martin Stern answered:
> As regards davenning, nobody has the right to impose himself on the tsibbur
> and a gabbai would be perfectly entitled to refuse to allow him to do so. If
> the person, and his ability to act as shaliach tsibbur, is unknown, it is
> probably prudent not to allow him to do so to avoid the sort of problems
> Orrin encountered. This would apply on weekdays and, even more so, on Shabbat
> or Yomtov when, in those shuls which employ a chazan, it is generally
> accepted that even regular members do not take the amud when they have
> yahrzeit.
In short, Anonymous, there is no obligation to let this character violate the
sanctity of the tefila -- that's what it is -- by davening Geshem betzibur.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 3,2010 at 07:01 AM
Subject: Lo Yishama al Picha (It shall not be heard through you)
Jeanette Friedman <FriedmanJ@...> wrote (MJ 59#45):
> Yechiel Conway wrote (MJ 59#44):
>
>> I have wondered for a long time whether using the English names of the
>> days of the week is a violation of the prohibition of lo yishama al picha
>> (the names of other deities shall not be heard through you).
> We function in a world where most people are not even aware of the roots
> of the names of the days of the week.
> ...
> I, for one, will stick with Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday,
> Friday and Saturday ...
I think Jeanette has hit on the precise source for using the conventional
names of the days of the week, that the pagan deities after which they are
named are unknown to almost everyone. I would go further and suggest that if
someone not familiar with Norse mythology were asked to identify the names
of those pagan deities from the names of the days of the weeks, they would
be unable to do so accurately.
The question posed by Ira L. Jacobson <laser@...> (MJ 59#45):
> about using the Babylonian names of the "Hebrew" months, based on the names of
> the Babylonian gods.
and Michael Engel <michael11694@...>:
> Tammuz, the name of the fourth Hebrew month, and named for the Babylonian
> deity,
is much more problematic since there are verses in Nach that specify them
and so they are no longer "long forgotten".
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell J Hendel <rjhendel@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 3,2010 at 05:01 PM
Subject: Lo Yishama al Picha (It shall not be heard through you)
Jeanette's overly emotional reaction to the inquiry about whether we can say
Monday Tuesday Wed (because of the prohibition of mentioning idols) shows a lack
of understanding of the halachic process.
It is NORMAL to ask something on a purely formal level WITHOUT INITIALLY
worrying about the impact on Jewish/Non-Jewish relations. The halachic answer is
also initially arrived at through a purely formal process consisting of
consulting sources without regard to impact on relations.
This is as it should be. Otherwise our religion would not have autonomy. Our
religious actions would be to dependent on impact on Jewish/Non-Jewish relations.
Of course: Once a decision is reached it is proper to inquire on practical
matters. But one does not start off that way.
I haven't noticed anyone answering Jeanette (or the followup question about the
Jewish months).
First: Historically the state of Israel OFFICIALLY calls the days of the week
DAY 1 DAY 2 DAY 3 etc for the reasons given (NOTE: To the best of my knowledge
and belief the current public relations problems Israel has has nothing to do
with how it calls the days of the week....have you ever seen a Hamas spokesman
ridicule us for calling Sunday Day 1. Believe me...if that was an issue we would
have heard about it.
Conceptually: Words evolve. After a while words have their own meaning and are
not bound by their original etymology. As far as I know this is the reason there
is no prohibition (or even extra level of piety) at calling Day 1 Sunday etc.
I think a relevant more interesting question is whether one can call a person
who was named after the Christian deity (I know several such people...I
personally have never had this problem but I have not heard how one handles such
matters). Based on the logic above it possibly is OK to freely address him by
his name even if that is identical with the Christian Deity but if someone knows
for certain that would be nice to hear.
Russell Jay Hendel; Phd ASA; http://www.Rashiyomi.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Frank Silbermann <frank_silbermann@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 3,2010 at 08:01 PM
Subject: Lo Yishama al Picha (It shall not be heard through you)
Yechiel Conway wrote (MJ 59#44):
> I have wondered for a long time whether using the English names of
> the days of the week is a violation of the prohibition of lo yishama
> al picha (the names of other deities shall not be heard through you).
Ira L. Jacobson (MJ 59#45) replied:
> The question is even more serious, perhaps, when we ask about using
> the Babylonian names of the "Hebrew" months, based on the names of
> the Babylonian gods.
It always gives me the creeps when someone asks, "I wonder whether such-and-such
a common-practice really should be forbidden."
The proper way to ask the question is, "Doing such-and-such obviously
seems to be permitted. Principle this-and-that sounds as though it
would forbid it; I wonder why this is apparently not so."
Frank Silbermann Memphis, Tennessee
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Judith Weil <weildj@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 3,2010 at 12:01 PM
Subject: Mezonos bread/hamotzi cake
David Ziants wrote (MJ 59#46):
> On the other hand chareidi [Ultra Orthodox] authorities (such as Kedassia in
> London, UK) recognise the status of a mezonot roll as such, as one can see by
> the note that comes with the airline meals.
I understand that there are leniencies that are permitted when one is on a
journey that are not permitted in the general way. Being allowed to say
Mezonot on a roll when one eats it when on a journey does not automatically
mean it would be allowed if one were at home.
Judith
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 3,2010 at 04:01 PM
Subject: Mezonos bread/hamotzi cake
David Ziants <dziants@...> wrote (MJ 59#46):
> The authorities quoted below, by David Tzohar, all belong to the
> Religious Zionist sector (I would say chard"al = charaidi dati le'umi
> but I have also heard this in the name of more modern religious zionist
> Rabbanim - cannot remember whom), and they insist that one would need to
> wash for a "mezonot roll" of even a k'zayit. On the other hand chareidi
> [Ultra Orthodox] authorities (such as Kedassia in London, UK) recognise
> the status of a mezonot roll as such, as one can see by the note that
> comes with the airline meals.
My wife came back from Israel recently and, as she had not eaten her
"mezonot roll" on the plane, I had it for my breakfast, the one meal for
which I make a point of washing and eating bread because of Chazal's
enconium on "pat shacharit". It definitely tasted more like cake than bread
but I was koveia seudah on it [made it the basis of my meal] so washing was
required.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Akiva Miller <kennethgmiller@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 4,2010 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Mezonos bread/hamotzi cake
Regarding the proper bracha to say on "Mezonos bread", David Ziants asked (MJ
59#46):
> PS If I define myself as "Modern Orthodox" does that give me licence to
> follow a charaidi Rav on matters that he is more lenient, rather than
> Rabbanim who are more tolerant of my world view?
First of all, my understanding is that one should never go around picking an
authority based on whether he is more lenient or more strict, but rather one
should try to find the path that HaShem wants him to follow.
But my main question is: What does being "Modern Orthodox" or "charaidi" have to
do with the proper bracha to say on a certain food?
Akiva Miller
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dr. William Gewirtz <wgewirtz@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 3,2010 at 01:01 PM
Subject: On duchening during neilah after sunset
Dr. Backon(MJ 59#43)responded to my previous comments (MJ 59#42). I apologize
for not being clear and leaving the impression of not following his comments. He
was basing his comments on the opinion (I suspect not widely accepted in current
psak) to recite the priestly blessings at neilah even in the "night".
David Ziants (MJ 59#46) links to comments from R. Melamed. R. Melamed mentions:
1) the position of duchening at night that Dr. Backon referenced.
2) duchening during bein hashemashot, the period of uncertainty, (until 13.5
minutes) even according to the Geonim
3) limited reliance on Rabbeinu Tam.
When one is misunderstood, as I may have been, I take responsibility for being
unclear/opaque; so let me clarify. My goal was to indicate that even one who
would NOT recite the priestly blessings at neilah during bein hashemashot, need
not adhere to sunset precisely as the start of bein hashemashot. To be clear,
assume one rejected reliance on Dr. Backon's sources that allow duchening at
night and rejected as well ANY of the three reasons R. Melamed gives. Even if
one would not duchen during bein hashemashot, I argue that there are a
significant number of authorities who do not believe that bein hashemashot (even
according to the Geonim) begins at sunset proper. The Baal haTanya, R Chaim
Volozhin, minhag of various Middle Eastern poskim wrt to a brit on Shabbat, R.
Kapach's reading of Rambam, etc. ALL believe that bein hashemashot begins 4-15
minutes AFTER sunset proper. My view is that this position, now often
overlooked/discarded,is STRONGLY supported by the gemara in Shabbat 34b-35a and
would allow duchening for a few minutes after sunset as it is still day and not
yet bein hashemashot. The statement of Shmuel (that assumedly follows the tanna
R. Yehudah), Rambam in Kiddush hachodesh, Ramban's clear reading of the word
"mishetishke", etc. all support such an approach.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 3,2010 at 08:01 PM
Subject: Open wound vs. mikvah question
It was gratifying to see that most replies (MJ 59#46) urged the writer to
consult their Rav re: specifics. Jeanette Friedman introduces another vector --
the health and welfare of others will subsequently be using the mikvah
> I don't think anyone has the right, ever, to go into a mikvah with an open
> wound. In fact, it would be nice if anyone with a contagious disease, lice,
> crabs or wounds would stay away -- many people I know have gotten sick from
> going to a mikvah that wasn't carefully monitored.
This raises a tangential question -- Is it preferable for someone who is ill
and possibly contagious stay home or should they go to shul so they daven with
the tzibor. (I am not an epidemiologist)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 3,2010 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Shemini Atzeret
If one looks at the way "Ya'aleh vayavo" is printed we see that before the
mention of any day the formulation is "beyom", and in "Atah bachartanu" (and
in Mussaf before specifying the days particular sacrifices) we find "et
yom", followed by all the possible Yamim Tovim. In all the cases other than
Shemini Atzeret this is grammatically correct e.g. "beyom chag hasuccot hazeh"
or "et yom chag hasuccot hazeh" where yom and chag are both construct forms (day
OF, festival OF) and therefore do not take the definite article (ha-) which is
appended to the final noun in the sequence though it is understood as
applying to the first one. In our example, "beyom chag hasuccot hazeh" does
not mean "on A day of A festival of THIS succot" but "on THIS day of THE
festival of succot".
The traditional liturgical usage in Ashkenazi siddurim and machzorim for
Shemini Atzeret is "Beyom (or Et Yom) Hashemini Chag Hatzeret" which
unfortunately is grammatically questionable. "Hashemini" is an adjective
qualifying the noun "Yom" and the rule is that both must take a definite article
or both must omit it, i,e, either Hayom Hashemini" [THE eighth day] or "Yom
Shemini" [AN eighth day]. Various alternative formulations have been suggested
to get round the problem but I should like to suggest why this one might have
arisen in the first place.
Perhaps the error crept in because of the way printers (and before them
scribes) set up the page. Really on Shemini Atzeret, the text should have
had "BAyom HAshemini Chag HAtzeret HAzeh" i.e. "On the eighth day, this
festival of Assembly", and similarly elsewhere "Et HAyom HAshemini Chag
HAtzeret HAzeh", but to save space this slight difference was not put in.
I am not aware of any manuscripts that have this vocalisation but that would
not necessarily disprove it since so many have been lost over the centuries
and those variant forms that have survived have done so in such places as
the Cairo genizah and been found serendipitouslyy. Does anyone have any
further information on this?
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 59 Issue 47
