Avodah Mailing List

Volume 06 : Number 097

Tuesday, January 9 2001

• RE: Shabbos: maculine or feminine?
• tzedaka
• Har Habayit
• greenery in town and Yerushalmi
• FW: Some Thoughts on Limud Zechut
• Re: Davening

Seth Mandel <sethm37@hotmail.com>:
>          In musaf it clearly is used as feminine: tikkanta shabbat, ratzita
> qorb'noTEHA and on and on. In shaharis, the paragraph "v'lo n'tatto...l'goyei
> ha'aratzot," which immediately follows "vshamru," picks up on the last
> phrase: uvayyom hash'vi'i shavat..v'lo n'tatto, just like later: uvash'vi'i
> ratzita BO. In those cases, the antecedent is yom, which is masculine.

Seth said: uvash'vi'i ratzita BO. In those cases, the antecedent is yom,

Hagoho: I say the antecedent here is shvi'i.   

Shalom
Rich Wolpoe

Is anyone aware of any written sources for the seemingly common practice of 
giving(collecting) tzedaka during chazarat hashatz?

KT
Joel

On areivim an interesting issue was raised regarding the position that we 
can't use har habayit at this time but we don't want someone else to have 
sovereignty.  Assuming no geopolitical issues, would those that hold no 
Jewish entry onto har habayit at this time also hold that we should forbid 
non-Jews from Har Habayit(based on "black letter" halachik reasons)?

KT
Joel

Yerushalmi Kiddushin 4:12 notes garden of vegetables.  The Acharonim on the
page say the idea is to eat vegetables.  If so, this matches Bavli Eruvin
55b where we also see a requirement that there be vegetables in town for
eating.

Shlomo Goldstein

To: 'Feldman, Mark'
>> Tosfos was defending a minhag that - as far as Ashkenazim go - had an
>> authority on par with the Gmoro. However, a later minhag would NOT have
>> that same weight. So we might want to be discerning which minhagim we
>> are defending.

> I agree with you that this is the probable historic explanation.  However,
> the point is that Tosfos was not aware that Ashkenazic mesorah was different
> than the Bavli and was still willing to use limud zechus against a
> b'fairusheh gemara.

What is your source that Tosfos was not aware of a competing minhag?

Shalom
Rich Wolpoe

Chana Luntz wrote:
> That, to my mind, takes it out of the category of an
> action against the text and puts it firmly within 
> the category of "black letter halacha".

The Rashbash (Shu"t #56) actually says that he was so in favor of the
heicha kedushah that he would have instituted it lechatchilah if his
father, the Rashbatz, had allowed him.

Gil Student

********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]