Volume 62 Number 42
Produced: Thu, 04 Dec 14 21:34:33 -0500
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Archives of Tradition from 1958 through 2012 now available for free
[Sammy Finkelman]
Kaddish - when is a section break not a break? (3)
[Martin Stern Gershon Dubin Perets Mett]
Obligation to Serve in the IDF (2)
[Carl Singer Frank Silbermann]
Repulsive odour (2)
[Dr. Josh Backon Irwin Weiss]
Serving other gods
[Martin Stern]
Silent Mi sheberachs (2)
[Carl Singer Harlan Braude]
Tachnun on Thanksgiving
[Carl Singer]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sammy Finkelman <sammy.finkelman@...>
Date: Tue, Dec 2,2014 at 03:01 PM
Subject: Archives of Tradition from 1958 through 2012 now available for free
In MJ 62#13 I wrote:
> Ben Katz in (MJ 62#12) mentioned the article in the Spring 2014 (Issue 47.1) of
> Tradition entitled:
>
> A Man Takes Precedence Over A Woman When It Comes To Saving A Life: The Modern
> Dilemma of Triage from a Halakhic and Ethical Perspective by Dr. Alan
> Jotkowitz " A survey of twentieth century rabbis on the subject".
>
> Viewing this seems to require a $35 subscription. I inquired and it seems this
> single copy can be bought for $10 plus shipping (shipping is $5 within the
> USA) with payment by PayPal. PayPal includes the possibility of using a credit
> card even if you don't have a PayPal account. I am not sure if this something
> that you have to get special attention to buy by itself.
While that article is not available, many others now are:
http://www.torahmusings.com/2014/11/tradition-archives
I think you should go to this website:
http://traditionarchive.org/archives
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 27,2014 at 02:01 AM
Subject: Kaddish - when is a section break not a break?
Avraham (Alan) Friedenberg wrote (MJ 62#41):
> Kaddish Titkabel and Chatzi Kaddish are used as breaks between the various
> sections of our davening. However, there seems to be a conundrum during
> weekday nusach Sfard concerning the placement of Kaddish Titkabel. On Mondays
> and Thursdays we daven Ashrei - Lamnatzeach - U'va L'Tztion - Kaddish
> Titkabel, and then return the Sefer Torah to the Aron Kodesh.
>
> Logically, shouldn't the break and the Kaddish come after we return the Sefer
> Torah? Why does the order seem to be backwards?
Of course that makes more sense. In Minhag Ashkenaz and Teiman (Baladi),
Ashrei - Lamnatzeach - U'va L'Tztion are said after returning the Sefer
Torah, whereas in Minhag Sefarad they are said before. In Minhag Italiki,
Ashrei is said before while U'va L'Tztion is said after and Lamnatzeach is
omitted. However in all minhagim, Kaddish Titkabal is only said after all
have been said AND the Sefer Torah has been returned to the Aron Kodesh.
I can only suggest that the Chasidim, when they started Nusach Sfard, must
have had some deep kabbalistic motivation, so asking for a logical
explanation might be inappropriate.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 27,2014 at 02:01 PM
Subject: Kaddish - when is a section break not a break?
In reply to Avraham Friedenberg (MJ 62#41):
Kaddish Tiskabel is more than a place holder; it signifies the end of the
Shemoneh Esrei. Since Uva Letzion is considered the end of Shemoneh Esrei, the
kaddish tiskabel belongs there.
Gershon
<gershon.dubin@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett00@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 27,2014 at 02:01 PM
Subject: Kaddish - when is a section break not a break?
In reply to Avraham (Alan) Friedenberg (MJ 62#41):
I have pondering this very question recently. Why indeed should there be a
difference on days when we say musaf and on days when we do not.
Logically the Kadish should immediately follow Ashrei (or Uvo letsion).
I surmise that on days when there is Musaf, we want to precede Musaf with a
Kadish (like Mincho and Maariv), so we return the Torah to the Oron Hakodesh
before Kadish.
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 27,2014 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Obligation to Serve in the IDF
Yisrael Medad (MJ 62#41) wrote:
> Following the slaughter in the Har Nof synagogue, Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef, the
> Sephardi chief rabbi of Israel, said that Jews in Israel should not pray in a
> synagogue unless there is an armed guard. Yosef called on the government to
> help in funding the extra security. He noted that there is no reason
> synagogues should remain defenseless.
> ...
> That would be another reason for obliging military service.
The statement as presented above is two-fold - both of which have halachic
implications:
1 - (to the tzibur) do not pray in a synagogue without an armed guard
2 - (to the government) fund extra security
1 seems to imply that one should not pray in a makom sakannah [a dangerous
place] -- and if one labels a synagogue without an armed guard as such ....
2 begs the question, who will provide the security (a request for funding is, in
essence, a request for security personnel) -- a police force or the military --
if the latter then again we are back to the question of does one have an
obligation to serve in one's nation's security forces.
As an outsider, I shall not get wrapped up inside Israeli politics, but I find
Yisrael's observation interesting as it, to me, points out differences
between Israeli and U.S. societal norms and behavior.
In Israel, gun carrying individuals are not shocking nor are they considered
dangerous -- the opposite, they are considered protective.
Here in the U.S. there is a deep chasm regarding the benefits and dangers of gun
carrying -- to discuss the U.S. pro/con arguments in-depth would be off topic -
just an observation.
Carl Singer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Frank Silbermann <frank_silbermann@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 27,2014 at 02:01 PM
Subject: Obligation to Serve in the IDF
Yisrael Medad (MJ 62#41) wrote:
> Following the slaughter in the Har Nof synagogue, Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef, the
> Sephardi chief rabbi of Israel, said that Jews in Israel should not pray in a
> synagogue unless there is an armed guard. Yosef called on the government to
> help in funding the extra security. He noted that there is no reason
> synagogues should remain defenseless.
If government policy prevents the worshippers from protecting themselves, then
it has an obligation to provide guards -- but that's hardly the ideal situation.
Why would the worshippers want to delegate a religious obligation to mostly
nonreligious strangers?
> Based on personal experience of living in yishuvim, visiting other communities
> and such, the simple fact is that where there is a larger number of
> worshippers who have served in the IDF, there is a larger percentage of
> people who not only know how to use weapons but either usually carry them or
> can if called upon by the synagogue committee will carry them, thus
> alleviating the need for such a call by the Chief Rabbi - Sepharadi.
>
> That would be another reason for obliging military service.
I'm not trying to discourage military service nor to defend its rejection, but
just as one can prepare meals without first serving as an army cook or drive a
car without first driving a jeep, private citizens can also learn to use pistols
and rifles. Tactics can be taught via courses modeled on, say, those offered by
the Khan Academy. People who do not work for a living and who struggle to keep
their mind on Torah fourteen hours a day might welcome a topic whose mastery
makes use of other parts of the brain.
Frank Silbermann
Memphis, Tennessee
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dr. Josh Backon <backon@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 27,2014 at 05:01 AM
Subject: Repulsive odour
Martin Stern (MJ 62#41) wrote:
> Recently we learned in Daf Yomi (Chagigah 4a and 7b) that certain persons
> were exempt from the mitzvah of re'iyah [appearing in the Beit Hamikdash on
> the Pesach, Shavuot and Succot]. A gatherer of dog's dung, a copper smelter
> and a tanner are mentioned specifically. This was because their occupations
> meant that they had such a repulsive small that others would not wish to be
> in their immediate proximity and the verse (Sh. 23:17, Dev. 16:16) specifies
> that "ALL your males shall appear before Hashem ...", excluding those with
> whom others would not be prepared to associate.
>
> I wonder if this principle might be equally applicable nowadays, in
> particular to those heavy smokers whose breath and clothing reeks of stale
> tobacco smoke. Should they be barred from shul or, at the very least, be
> compelled to sit in a designated area away from others where they will not
> disturb them.
>
> Similarly, should meshullachim reeking of stale tobacco smoke be prevented
> from circulating in shul for the same reason? Ironically, many are there to
> collect money to finance medical treatment for illnesses they have inflicted
> on themselves by that same smoking habit.
First of all, Kol HaKavod for the post! Passive smoking is prohibited even
if only one person objects to someone smoking in his presence. See: Shulchan
Aruch CHOSHEN MISHPAT 155:41 (in din harchakat nezikin):
"kol davar she'yadua she'ein h'me'ar'er yachol l'sovlo, af al pi she'she'ar
bnei adam sovlim oto, ein lo chazaka k'neged m'ar'er zeh [anything that it is
known that the complainant cannot abide it, even if others may tolerate it, the
person causing it has no right to override the complainant]
See also Iggrot Moshe CM II 18, Rambam Hilchot Shechenim 11:5, gemara in Bava
Batra 22b, ROSH BB Siman 18.
Josh Backon
<backon@...>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Irwin Weiss <irwin@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 27,2014 at 08:01 AM
Subject: Repulsive odour
Martin Stern asks (MJ 62#41) about banning persons from shul who have a
repulsive odor derived from cigarette smoking.
1) Isn't it time that cigarette smoking be banned entirely?
See http://www.jlaw.com/Commentary/smoking.html
2) I recall something from Mishna Berura in a section relating to Rosh Hashana,
prohibiting ingestion of certain foods which were said to cause the consumer of
such foods to give off an unpleasant odor, thus disturbing the davenning.
But, I note that some of the men who walk to our shul from farther away on a hot
and humid Baltimore summer day give off a significant odor, too. I don't think one
can require these folks to drive on Shabbat in an air conditioned vehicle to
avoid the odor of sweat.
Irwin Weiss
Baltimore, MD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 27,2014 at 02:01 AM
Subject: Serving other gods
David Tzohar wrote (MJ 62#41):
> I think that Martin Stern (MJ 62#40) is to quick in denouncing Christian
> charitable groups. There are some groups that have proven that they can give
> aid without any ulterior message. Such groups have given generous support to
> development projects in Yehudah veShomron and to ex-Gush Katif residents.
I fear David has misunderstood me when I wrote:
> If this is correct, the verse is warning of a "slippery slope" by which one
> might be seduced into idolatry, something Christian missionaries have used
> by setting up ostensibly charitable "outreach" activities such as medical or
> food aid to target groups.
I was not referring to any specific group nowadays but, rather, to the
phenomenon, especially in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, where
missionary groups certainly set up 'medical missions' as a way of gaining
the confidence of 'native' populations, not only Jews, in order to draw them
to their religion.
> Would these Christians like to see Jews serving "oto ha-ish"? Certainly. But
> as long as they keep that sentiment to themselves we can accept their
> contributions.
As regards the groups to which David refers, becoming too dependent on them
might turn out to be problematic. Perhaps we should take the stance of
"kabdehem vechashdehem [respect them but suspect them]".
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 27,2014 at 07:01 AM
Subject: Silent Mi sheberachs
Bob Kosovky's post (MJ 62#41) brings to mind another question:
What obligation is there for the person who adds a name - which he or she
may do individually or broadcast (in our community an email to a group list
- "please be mispalel for plony") -- to remove that name when B"H the individual
we are praying for has recovered (or has v'shalom that person has succumbed)?
Carl Singer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Harlan Braude <hbraude@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 27,2014 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Silent Mi sheberachs
In MJ 62#41, Bob Kosovsky wrote:
> I see a trend in synagogues where, in order to accomodate many sick people, the
> chazzan starts the mi sheberach and then falls silent at the point where the
> [...]
> Is this a legitimate way to say a mi sheberach? I would think the chazzan would
> need to recite names out loud. Since he is reciting the prayer, an individual
> intoning a name would have no purpose, and that only when recited by the chazzan
> does it become part of the prayer. Is this correct?
"Legitimate" as in "effective" as prayer for the patient or "legitimate" as in
"appropriate" protocol for publicly held services or both? Personally, I think
it's fine either way, though I'm no authority on the matter.
I've attended services where not only the mi sheberach, but also the recitation
of the names of the deceased at Yizkor, was performed in this manner because the
growing list of names extended services longer than the congregation could
tolerate.
It seems legitimate to me as long as the Rabbi/congregation is OK with it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 27,2014 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Tachnun on Thanksgiving
I probably should have posted this weeks ago so that people might respond
in a timely manner.
I recall several years ago attending a shiur on whether one could eat
Turkey (on Thanksgiving or at any time). This shiur dealt with whether a
turkey was a bird of prey and also reflected on the mesorah (or lack thereof)
that many had regarding it.
In my town, Passaic, NJ, I see posters for a "civil holiday shiur" -- taking
advantage of the day off from work, but not even mentioning the name of this
civil holiday.
There are of course many unresolved issues -- is Thanksgiving a Christian
religious holiday? Some Rabbonim say yes, others note that it is not mentioned
in the Christian religious scriptures. You can look these discussions up on-line
if you so choose. A good starting point might be an article by Rabbi Yair
Hoffman, "Thanksgiving and Halacha":
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/272941/thanksgiving-
and-halacha.html
Among other questions addressed is whether one may have a Thankgiving "feast" --
that is a special meal.
Of great interest to me, since my wife's family for several generations were
members of the Spanish & Portuguese Synagogue in Manhattan (we still maintain an
associate membership), is the "Service for Thanksgiving Day" as published in 1945
by Rabbi David de Sola Pool:
http://kavvanah.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/service-for-thanksgiving-day-1945-rabbi-
david-de-sola-pool/
It has the following sections:
Baru'h Haba
Prayer for the Government
Blessing of the Congregation
Psalm 98
Psalm 100
Alei'nu Leshabei'a'h
Sermon
Adon Olam
Psalm 150
All the above begs the question -- should an American say tachnun on Thanksgiving?
Carl Singer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 62 Issue 42