Volume 62 Number 71
Produced: Mon, 28 Mar 16 01:49:57 -0400
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
A hint for nineteen berachot in shemoneh esrei?
[Russell Hendel]
Corrections?
[Joel Rich]
Halachically married without civil marriage (7)
[Frank Silbermann Frank Silbermann Carl A. Singer Orrin Tilevitz Susan Buxfield Susan Buxfield Perets Mett]
Synthetic meat?
[Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz]
Why?
[Russell Hendel]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell Hendel <RHendel@...>
Date: Tue, Mar 22,2016 at 10:01 PM
Subject: A hint for nineteen berachot in shemoneh esrei?
In response to Martin Stern's comment on the nineteen berachot in shemoneh esrei
(MJ 62#70):
See Rav Hirsch's beautiful essay "Shmoneh Esray" where he there makes the
following distinction:
The Talmudic dictum "Sacrifices correspond to prayers"
* Is not just a correspondence in number and time, but
* Is a correspondence in the parts of sacrifices and the prayers.
The daily offering had 6 parts. Rav Hirsch beautifully parallels the 6 parts
with the first 6 inner blessings. The head of the animal was brought first
neatly corresponding to the prayer for wisdom. The stomach of the animal was
brought last neatly corresponding to the prayer for parnasah (livelihood) (6th
inner blessing).
There are 12 (now 13) inner blessings. Rav Hirsch argues that
* The first 6 are for the individual
* The next 3 correspond to the blessings 4,5,6 but for the nation
* The final 3 correspond to the blessings 4,5,6 but for the days of the
Messiah.
Let us look at the second set of blessings corresponding to 4,5,6:
* Blessing 4: Re'ey na beanyaynu - see our suffering corresponding to vital
organs (lung, windpipes etc)
* Blessing 5: Refa'aynu - Heal us - corresponding to the spleen which
produces antibodies
* Blessing 6: Baraych alaynu - Give us a good year - corresponding to the
stomach - livelihood
Rav Hirsch then argues that the next set
* Blessing 7: Tekah --- see the communal suffering of the exile (like blessing 4
for the individual)
* Blessing 8: Hashivah - Velamalshinim - Good judges and removal of slanderers -
like healing a person by removing the bacteria
* Blessing 9: Al Hatzadikim - prayer for righteous Jews in our midst like
blessing 6, a prayer for good food.
It is beautiful essay found as a stand alone and in his collected works. I
recommend reading it. It will give you a different perspective on the Shmoneh Esrei.
To respond to Martin (MJ 62#69): Using this classification scheme, we see that
removal of slanderers and judges both are analogous to the spleen - removal of
antibodies. Hence Rav Hirsch conjectures that when the slanderers (actually
people who turn people over to the government) were carved out as a separate
blessing from the blessing for judges when the slanderers increased.
Russell Jay Hendel; Ph.D., A.S.A.;
Towson University;
www.Rashiyomi.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joel Rich <JRich@...>
Date: Thu, Mar 24,2016 at 05:01 AM
Subject: Corrections?
In a shiur sometime back R'Aryeh Lebowitz mentioned that people are sensitive.
I'm thinking of conducting an online survey concerning what kind of "errors"
people would like to be corrected on (e.g. tefillin not on straight, tefillin
worn too low, Shabbat heating violations). I realize that what people might
answer intellectually is not necessarily indicative of how they might act in
practice. What specific examples would you add to the survey?
KT
Joel Rich
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Frank Silbermann <frank_silbermann@...>
Date: Tue, Mar 22,2016 at 11:01 AM
Subject: Halachically married without civil marriage
Susan Buxfield (MJ 62#70) wrote:
> A Jew who wishes to marry an additional wife while the first
> is still married to him but unable to accept a get due, generally,
> to mental incapability, has to obtain a heter meah rabbonim,
> as permitted by Rabbeinu Gershom, but not register that
> marriage due to bigamy concerns.
Unless there were some reason to maintain the first marriage legally (e.g.
employer-sponsored health insurance), why wouldn't the man get a secular
divorce, marry without a Get using a heter meah rabbonim, and then register the
second marriage?
Frank Silbermann Memphis, Tennessee
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Frank Silbermann <frank_silbermann@...>
Date: Tue, Mar 22,2016 at 12:01 PM
Subject: Halachically married without civil marriage
Carl A. Singer (MJ 62#70) wrote:
>
> These are not by any stretch of the imagination single parent homes
> -- these are "normal" families who chose NOT to have a civil marriage
> so they can reap the benefits of the bride being classified as a single,
> unwed mother.
When such a practice becomes universal, the system to support single mothers
becomes overloaded and breaks down financially.
I suppose such a consequence would illustrate the reason a society needs a
severe social stigma against single motherhood (other than for reasons over
which the woman has no control, such as widowhood, divorce or abandonment by a
husband).
Frank Silbermann Memphis, Tennessee
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl A. Singer <carl.singer@...>
Date: Tue, Mar 22,2016 at 01:01 PM
Subject: Halachically married without civil marriage
May I thank Professor Dane (MJ 62#70) for his enlightening article and also
interesting blog post.
At my shallow depth -- my concern is people who are for all intents and purposes
in a long term, monogamous marital relationship but who present themselves to
government authorities as being "single" in order to reap financial gain through
various government subsidies.
Perhaps this question is not really for Mail-Jewish -- but are such actions
criminal. What is definitely relevant to the Mail-Jewish discussion -- are such
action halachically permissible .... and what if anything should our
"leadership" or society do about it?
Carl
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Orrin Tilevitz <tilevitzo@...>
Date: Tue, Mar 22,2016 at 03:01 PM
Subject: Halachically married without civil marriage
Susan Buxfield wrote (MJ 62#70):
> Rare are there religious marriages that are not registered civilly.
I suspect that is true in the States for the reasons others have given --
First, in most cases the civil benefits of marriage (e.g., tax-free
employer-paid health insurance, the ability to leave property to a spouse free
of estate tax, and the effective ability to split income on a joint tax return)
outweigh any detriments.
Second, most religious marriages are performed by clergy licensed by the State,
and they'd risk losing that license if the marriage is not registered.
However, while I have no evidence for this, I suspect that the complications of
social security benefits and end-of-life medicaid planning make civil divorce
without religious divorce a good deal less rare.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Susan Buxfield <susan.buxfeld@...>
Date: Wed, Mar 23,2016 at 06:01 AM
Subject: Halachically married without civil marriage
Perry Dane (MJ 62#69) wrote:
> FWIW: For more on the relation between civil and religious marriage, see my
> article "A Holy Secular Institution," at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1293946 and my
> blog post at http://clrforum.org/2013/12/16/polygamy/
> The bottom line is that "It's complicated."
Perry has tried to conceptualize the legislative conundrum of the Christian
attitude to adultery and polygamous marriage.
Adultery in many legislatures remains on the statute books not so much as a
rarely enforced punishable crime but as a factor in divorce proceedings.
Except for fundamentalist Islamic religious regimes, most authorities today do
not intervene in non-registered conjugal relationships.
Susan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Susan Buxfield <susan.buxfeld@...>
Date: Wed, Mar 23,2016 at 07:01 AM
Subject: Halachically married without civil marriage
Carl A. Singer (MJ 62#70) wrote:
These are not by any stretch of the imagination single parent homes -- these are
> "normal" families who chose NOT to have a civil marriage so they can reap
> the benefits of the bride being classified as a single, unwed mother.
If the authorities determine that she receives income from her partner, her
financial benefits may not be so forthcoming.
> As to the government intervening -- clergy in many (perhaps most or all)
> jurisdictions may choose to become licensed to perform weddings. Thus when
> they perform a religious wedding they may sign appropriate civil documents
> so that in addition to having performed whatever religious wedding is
> appropriate to their religion, they have also attest to a civil wedding. The
> bride and groom, having previously obtained a civil marriage license now has
> their civil marriage attested to (signed by) the clergy.
Some countries in the world require a civil marriage before the religious
ceremony. But in the UK and USA, a civil registration is not considered a civil
marriage.
> As we know, in Judaism, Clergy (Rabbis) have no special halachic status -- thus
> a Jewish wedding requires only 2 "kosher" witnesses -- no Rabbi is necessary.
> All other things being equal -- two bar mitzvah boys could serve as witnesses
> and the wedding is halachically valid.
Since Kiddushin is considered D'Oraita, if the witnesses were two bar-mitzvah
boys, they would first have to prove to other male adult witnesses that they
both have at least "two hairs".
Also they are required to be competent in understanding what is expected of
them:
1. To verify that the ring belongs to the bridegroom
2. To verify that the ring is worth a perutah
3. To see (without obstruction) the giving of the ring
4. To make sure that both parties are agreeable to the marriage
5. To make sure that the bride actually took the ring (as a kinyan).
Susan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett00@...>
Date: Wed, Mar 23,2016 at 10:01 AM
Subject: Halachically married without civil marriage
Carl Singer (MJ 62#70) wrote:
> Two bar mitzvah boys could serve as witnesses and the wedding is halachically
> valid.
Two barmitsva boys are quite likely not of age by Torah law and would not
qualify as witnesses to a marriage.
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <sabbahillel@...>
Date: Tue, Mar 22,2016 at 04:01 PM
Subject: Synthetic meat?
Shmuel Himelstein wrote (MJ 62#69):
> Yesterday I read of a new process whereby cells of a live animal can be
> grown to yield (within 9-21 days) the identical type of meat (chicken,
> beef, etc.).
>
> To see further about this:
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2016/03/14/indian-american-scientist_n_9456524.html
>
> Thus one can obtain meat without slaughtering any animal. They are talking
> of going commercial in a few years. Can anyone authoritative comment on this,
> in terms of the following (for example):
>
> Is it kosher?
>
> Is it fleishik?
This would seem to raise the much more serious problem of ever min hachai [the
consumption of a limb cut from a living animal - MOD] since the animal is alive
when the meat is cultured and the remainder of the cultured meat stays in the
nutrient medium after it has been harvested. This would seem to be more
important than other kashrus considerations that occur when the cells are taken
from slaughtered animals.
Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz
<SabbaHillel@...>
http://sabbahillel.blogspot.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell Hendel <RHendel@...>
Date: Tue, Mar 22,2016 at 10:01 PM
Subject: Why?
In response to the five postings on "Why?" (MJ 62#70):
Rabbi Hirsch uses a semantic approach. See his commentary on Ex. 32:11. Here is
a brief summary:
* LAMmah (Milayl) has emphasis on CAUSE: "Why do this?"
* lamMAH (Milrah) has emphasis on EFFECT: "What is the purpose of this?"
So Rabbi Hirsch interprets Ex. 32:11 as follows:
* lamMAH: "What effect will it have if you lose your temper on your nation?"
In other words: Not "WHY are you losing your temper?" Clearly, God is losing his
temper because of the idolatrous sin. But the question Moses asks is: "What
will your exterminating them accomplish?"
* LAMmah: "WHY do you want Egypt saying that You took them out in evil to
destroy them?" In other words: Not "What is the effect of destroying them?" The
effect will be a descecration of God's name. Rather the question is WHY should
God want this.
Rav Hirsch brings other examples (Please read them).
A note about methodology: We live in an advanced age with computers and
statistical methods. Rav Hirsch says "It will be necessary to see if this rule
applies in every case".
Not so. It is simply necessary to check that this rule explains more than
the syntactic explanation based on the letter in the next word.
Russell Jay Hendel; Ph.D.;A.S.A;
Dept of Math; Towson University;
www.Rashiyomi.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 62 Issue 71