Volume 66 Number 10 
      Produced: Thu, 03 Nov 22 11:34:12 -0400

Subjects Discussed In This Issue:

Eating Seudah Shelishis in Shul 
    [Prof. L. Levine]
Halachos Pertaining to Travel 
    [Martin Stern]
Kavod habriot - human dignity (2)
    [Martin Stern  Chana Luntz]
What Should the Nature of Mail-Jewish be? 
    [Meir Shinnar]


From: Prof. L. Levine <llevine@...>
Date: Wed, Nov 2,2022 at 11:17 AM
Subject: Eating Seudah Shelishis in Shul

At this time of year, it is common for many shuls to serve Seudah Shelishis in
shul after Mincha. At this meal there is often a Dvar Torah and the singing of
zemiros. Men and boys participate, but, in general, women do not.  the women are
at home either by themselves or with their children.

I believe that the net result of this is that many women do not eat Seudah
Shelishis. However, women are also required to eat the third Shabbos meal.

One of the elements of ONEG SHABBOS is to have (and enjoy) three meals on
Shabbos. This idea is linked to the pasuk from this week's sedra (16:25): "And
Moshe said: Eat it (the Manna) today, for today is Shabbos to G-d; today you
will not find it in the field." The threefold use of the word HAYOM (today) in
reference to eating the Manna is considered an ASMACHTA for the Rabbinic rule
requiring three meals on Shabbat.

Everyone is required to have of Seudah Shelishis; one should be careful to do
it, even if one is satiated (from lunch).

Shulchan Aruch states clearly that women are obligated too. The Mishna Berura
elaborates on this point and reiterates that women have equal requirements for
all aspects of Shabbat. Furthermore, women were equal beneficiaries of the
miracle of the Manna, this being a/the source for Shalosh Seudos. Women should
take this mitzva seriously, especially in families where the men have Seudah
Shlishis in shul between Mincha and Maariv. Many women in that setting feel it
unnecessary for them to have the third Shabbat meal.

See https://www.ou.org/holidays/seuda_shlishit_shalosh_sudot/

In light of the above. I wonder if the practice of men eating Seudah Shelishis
in shul should be discontinued. What do others on Mail Jewish think?

Professor Yitzchok Levine


From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 3,2022 at 11:17 AM
Subject: Halachos Pertaining to Travel

Though we do not generally reprint other publications, I feel that this week's
halachah sheet, Chukei Chaim (Lech Lecha 5783 issue 277), contains material
regarding pikuach nefesh that needs wider publicity. I am quoting it verbatim
except for any Hebrew text which the Mail-Jewish system cannot process. As Rabbi
Bleier says in conclusion:

Talking to Others about These Vital Matters

38. No matter how much we write about this topic, it is not enough, as people
completely disregard it. Every parent and mechanech must discuss these matters
with their families, talmidim, children, and spouses.

Common Risks of Travel, Chiyuv to Be Careful

I. Following Traffic Laws

22. Sadly, there have been many traffic accidents lately all over. It is our
obligation to reinforce matters that need improvement and urge the tzibbur about
exercising caution on the road so that we can say Our hands did not spill this

23. There are traffic laws meant for the safety of the travelers. It goes
without saying that the Torah also obligates us to follow them: this is part of
bein adam lchaveiro; so that we do not cause damage or danger to ourselves ...
and part of the chiyuv to be on guard against the issur of murder ...

24. Without getting into the halachic question of what falls under Dina
demalkhuta dina and whether that applies in Eretz Yisroel, common sense
obligates a certain level of caution and to have accepted rules. The Torah
obligates every person to strengthen himself to act with good, proper middos in
bein adam lchaveiro; to exercise caution with other peoples lives and money; and
to think about others.

II. Pedestrians

25. Walking on the street. For the sake of order and safety, the sidewalk is
designated for pedestrians and the street is designated for cars. However, many
people choose to walk specifically on the street, where cars go by, even when
there is no reason not to walk on the sidewalk [perhaps they live with Shabbos
all week ] and the sidewalk is empty. In doing so, they endanger themselves and
harm drivers " as they cause cars to slow down even though no pedestrians should
be in the street.

26. People sometimes push a stroller with a baby on the street, claiming that it
is easier than pushing it on the sidewalk. This is also dangerous and
irresponsible. [The fact that the stroller has four wheels and a human engine
with one horsepower does not make it into a vehicle].

27. No sidewalk. Some areas have no sidewalk, forcing people to walk on the
street. One must be extra careful not to go near the area where cars drive,
especially when there is a bend in the road and cars drift to the edges of
the road.

28. Dark. An additional danger exists at night in areas that are not
well-illuminated. If there is no sidewalk and pedestrians must walk on the
street, it is a real and present danger, as drivers cannot see the pedestrians.
Chareidim especially, who wear dark clothes, cannot be seen at night. In such a
case, one has a halachic obligation to protect himself by wearing a reflective
belt, as local rabbanim in Lakewood, Monsey, and other places have ruled. One
may not claim that it is not befitting for a chareidi to wear such things. It is
a mitzvah belt - one that is more vital than a gartel for davening ... 

29. Parking on the sidewalk. There is a shameful phenomenon in which a driver
who cannot find parking parks his car or truck on the sidewalk, completely
blocking passage for pedestrians. This driver values himself and his car more
than the lives of others, as he forces pedestrians to pass on the street. On
many occasions, we have seen mothers with strollers forced to walk on the street
because of a car blocking the sidewalk. The driver has a serious aveirah, as he
endangers others. Since a vehicle has the status of a bor breshus harabim, one
may call the authorities to identify the owner based on the vehicles license
plate and instruct him to move immediately to remove the dangerous obstacle.

30. Crossing at a red light. It is illegal for a pedestrian to cross the street
at a red light. Some people scoff at this and cross at a red out of impatience,
claiming they can see that no cars are coming, as if there is no danger.

31. In reality, this is how accidents happen. People do not always see
everything. A car that one did not notice can suddenly appear around a corner.
Additionally, this causes a pitfall for others, especially children. To be
specific, we have seen many times children waiting at an intersection for a
green light before crossing when suddenly they see an adult crossing the street.
Without checking if the light turned green, they also cross without looking at
the street to watch out for oncoming cars, relying on the adult who is crossing.
This can lead to a serious risk. It is irresponsible toward others; it is
forbidden to cross at a red in all circumstances.

32. Regarding this one can say, It is better for one to lose a minute in
his life, than to lose his life in a minute!

III. Cyclists

33. Bike lights. Some people ride bikes on the street at night without lit bike
lights. This is a real danger. Whether they are biking in the same direction as
the cars or in the opposite direction, drivers just do not see them on the
street even if the street is lit. It is dangerous and reckless to bike without
lights. Parents must be very careful not to let their children and bochurim ride
bikes without lights. A woman must also stop her husband from riding a bike
without lights - she has the right not to become a widow.

IV. Electric Bikes, Scooters

34. It has become increasingly common as of late to ride electric bikes and
scooters on the streets. Sadly, this has also become a great danger. These
riders are usually young and do not have drivers licenses; hence, they have no
knowledge of traffic laws. They endanger themselves and others. This has already
caused multiple deaths and injuries.

35. Knowing and following traffic laws. Riders must know that they have a Torah
obligation to follow all traffic laws, e.g., stopping at a red light. They
cannot suddenly become pedestrians and ride on the sidewalk to circumvent a

36. Also, they may not pass vehicles in an illegal and unsafe manner or cut
between cars. This has caused many accidents, as drivers simply do not see them.

37. Riding on the sidewalk. It is also forbidden to ride an electric device on
the sidewalk. This endangers pedestrians lives, especially when there are women,
children, or elderly people around who have more difficulty keeping themselves safe.

Martin Stern


From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Sun, Oct 30,2022 at 01:17 PM
Subject: Kavod habriot - human dignity

Stuart Pilichowski wrote (MJ 66#09):

> Do we ever allow the Torah reader / baal koreh to get away with a mistake or
> the chazan / leader of the services to say the wrong thing (ten bracha or
> morid hatal) without correction because of kavod habriyot / man's dignity ...
> why embarrass them?

This is an important point. On the one hand, where the baal koreh makes a
mistake that changes the meaning, he must be corrected but, on the other
hand, where the error makes no difference he should not. An example of the
latter is where he reads the (untranslatable direct object indicator) 'et'
with a segol instead of a tseirei, or vice versa.

Similarly, should a chazan make a mistake which would invalidate the text in
question, and require a repeat of the tefillah, one must correct him but, again,
one must be certain that this is the case, before calling out.

Stuart's example of 'ten brachah' when one must say 'ten tal umatar livrachah',
or vice versa, is a good example provided one knows the local usage (Eretz
Yisrael versus Chutz La'aretz).

As regards his other example, omitting or including 'morid hatal' (depending
on local custom) does not cause an invalidation, and need not be corrected.
However, omitting 'mashiv haru'ach' in winter does, and must be rectified.
Incidentally saying the words 'mashiv haru'ach' in the summer can be corrected
by the chazan himself by adding 'umorid hatal' provided he realises immediately
before continuing 'umorid hagashem...'

A general rule is that those wishing to call out corrections should make sure
they can distinguish between necessary and unnecessary ones and, if in any
doubt, keep silent. It should not become an exercise in one-upmanship!

Martin Stern

From: Chana Luntz <Chana@...>
Date: Mon, Oct 31,2022 at 10:17 PM
Subject: Kavod habriot - human dignity

In response to Stuart Pilichowski (MJ 66#09):

Regarding the Torah reading, the machloket [disagreement] between the Ba'al
HaManhig and the Rambam is brought in the Tur (Orech Chaim siman 142) as

"The Ba'al HaManhig writes that if the reader or the Chazan that reads makes a
mistake it is good that they do not correct him for his mistakes in public that
they should not cause his face to whiten that even though he made a mistake he
has by way of the reading fulfilled his obligation that there is in the midrash
that if he reads for aharon haron he fulfils his obligation while the Rambam
writes one that reads and makes a mistake even in the dikduk [grammar?] of one
letter we cause him to go back until he reads it with the dikduk." [Perhaps
dikduk here is better translated as 'correct pronunciation' - MOD]

As you can see, the Ba'al HaManhig refers to kovod habriyot/non-embarrassment
issues, specifically, as being the relevant question. 

However despite this the Shulchan Aruch (Orech Chaim siman 142 si'if 1) rules:

"One who reads and makes a mistake, even in the dikduk of one letter, we cause
him to go back [and repeat]. 

And the Rema adds: and so is the law when the Chazan reads, and specifically
when he changes the meaning, but if he makes a mistake in the tune of the
cantillation marks [hata'amim] or the vowelisation [nikud], we do not cause him
to go back [and repeat] but we do scold him (Beit Yosef)." 

This last from the Rema - i.e. that we do not make him go back is the Beit Yosef
and other commentators' attempted reconciliation of the position of the Rosh,
which appears to be very similar to the Rambam, with that of the Ba'al HaManhig.
In which case the answer to your question of if we ever allow the Torah reader
to get away with a mistake is - yes, in cases where he doesn't change the
meaning but merely makes a mistake in the tune of the cantillation marks or the
vowelisation (although note they do make reference to scolding - although the
language of the Beit Yosef is scold him katzat [a little], which the Rema does
not include).  And while the Bach says that we are accustomed to go like the
Ba'al HaManhig, the Aruch HaShulchan (Orech Chaim siman 142 si'if 2) appears to
disagree and says we are accustomed to go like the Rambam with the modifications
of the Rema.

There is also a second case in si'if 2 where the Shulchan Aruch adds: "A
settlement in which there is a minyan but there is not one that knows to read in
the Torah like the halacha with the dikduk [grammar] and the ta'amim
[cantillation notes], even so he should read in the Torah with the blessing, ab
initio" - so in that case we do let a Torah reader get away with mistakes
completely, but only because there is nobody there to correct him.

Note though that this is all based on the Ba'al HaManhig's statement that "he
has by way of the reading fulfilled his obligation" - based on the midrash.  It
is clear that where the obligation is not fulfilled even the Ba'al HaManhig
would require mistakes to be pointed out so that the shaliach tzibbur can redo
what needs to be done. In the case of not saying mashiv haruach, where the
halacha is that if it is forgotten the Shmonei Esrei is repeated, pointing out
the mistake would seem therefore to be necessary even according to the Ba'al
HaManhig.  And note the Aruch HaShulchan in si'if 2 in questioning the matter
says "and what is the relevance of this whitening of the face, and if so also in
prayer when he makes a mistake we should not make him go back from the reason of
the whitening of the face" - with the implication that with prayer he certainly
needs to be made aware of the mistake and made to go back.  Hence the conclusion
that the relevance of the Ba'al HaManhig is only in those cases in layning where
it does not change the meaning.




From: Meir Shinnar <chidekel@...>
Date: Tue, Nov 1,2022 at 09:17 PM
Subject: What Should the Nature of Mail-Jewish be?

I have been a member of mail-jewish for a long time (with several years off due
to professional burden).  I think the moderators have done a good job.

I want to address one specific aspect of Prof. Levines post. I see no mention in
his comments about educating list members by referring to articles either
online or by respected rabbis. I personally think that a key role that
Mail-Jewish can play is to expose its readers to thoughts and articles that they
may very well not be aware of.

I think mail-jewish has been educational - by posing questions and seeing
multiple answers.  However, the model that Prof. Levine suggests is not one that
is sustainable. Thus, Prof Levine posts (at least weekly) from rav Hirsch and
rav Schwab.

However, imagine if every list member would (weekly or even more frequently)
post such articles - each by their favorite rabbi - whether rav Soloveitchik,
rav Kook, Lubavitcher rebbe, from the more yeshivish community, or other
rebbeim.  These would all be educational.  Maybe even we can all post our
rabbi's weekly drasha - why deny the list chance for education??

Clearly this is not a serious suggestion - and would make mail-jewish
unreadable.  This is not to question the quality of any individual contribution.
However, most of us understand that the list is not to serve as the personal
bully pulpit of members.  It is not the role of any one here to be the educator
of the group - we are here to educate each other.

If an issue is raised on the group, it may be appropriate to refer to an article
about the issue.  On rare occasions, one may find an article that is of such
importance or interest that it warrants sharing.  However, for the list to be
readable - this has to be a rare occurrence, rather than the weekly norm of

Most of us think we have important ideas and knowledge to contribute - and in
the right setting, should do so.  However, on a list like this, we have to make
sure that our contributions add to the discussion of the group. We should ask
the pseudo-Kantian question of whether it would be appropriate if everyone would
do what I am doing.

Meir Shinnar


End of Volume 66 Issue 10