Avodah Mailing List

Volume 23: Number 150

Thu, 12 Jul 2007

• 1. Tisha B'Av and aveilus (Jonathan Baker)
• 2. Re: Falling Tallis (torahmike@gmail.com)
• 3. kesuvah (M Cohen)
• 4. Re: SMA or SME (Zev Sero)
• 5. Re: Gezeros in the BHMK (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: kesuvah (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: Falling Tallis (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 8. arukh hashulchan (Eli Turkel)
• 9. SMA or SME (Dov Kay)
• 10. Re: tisha ba-av and aveilut (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: kaddish kashes (Micha Berger)
• 12. Falling Tallis (Dov Kay)
• 13. kaddish kashes (Dov Kay)
• 14. Leviim serving in the Beis HaMikdash (Doron Beckerman)
• 15. Required beliefs (Rich, Joel)

RMi:
> RJRich:
> :      I'm not sure we need a mitzvah to feel the loss of a loved one,
> : it is inherent in the briah and the mitzvot seem designed around it
> : (again for aveilut yachid/ chadasha versus rabim/yeshana) One could
> : argue (R' YBS) that the whole point of the 3 weeks is to build those
> : feelings.
 
> Or perhaps it's even more parallel...
 
> Aveilus is a mitzvah that channels and harnesses the feelings of loss.
> As RJR writes, it takes it as a given that those feelings are there.
 
> The notion he attributes RYBS, that the qiyum of aveilus is the
> sadness, doesn't seem muchrakh. Aveilus starts with sadness and
> teaches how to express it.

In the normal course of things, yes - you start from the death, when
the feelings are strongest, and the aveilus allows you to direct them
in productive ways, as they guide you towards reintegration into normal
life.  The feelings are there, the aveilus acts on them to reduce them.
 
> I would therefore suggest that the 3 Weeks were designed with the
> assumption that people would feel sadness for the loss of the BHMQ and
> of la'asos chovoseinu beveis bechirasekha, and the qiyum is using that
> sadness properly.

I don't see that assumption at all, given that the aveilus of the 3 Weeks 
is the reverse of the norm.  Aveilus for that which we personally never
experienced, that which was lost 2000 years ago, that nobody we know ever
experienced, is going to be pretty dim.  The aveilus of the Three Weeks
seems to create a real sense of loss.

Here the effect would be the reverse of the
norm, at least for those unfortunately experienced as aveilim.  As the
depth of aveilus increases, it invokes feelings closer to those at the 
moment of loss, until the morning of Tisha B'Av, which is the mourning 
of the day of burial - the meal of eggs and ashes, the sitting on the
floor, etc.

In parallel with that, the fasting/inuyim, exactly parallel to Yom Kippur,
invokes feelings of teshuvah, davka *because* of Yom Kippur.  That,
combined with the idea that standing at the open grave inspires 
teshuvah in a "there but for the grace of God go I" sense, would imply
a strong teshuvah component to Tisha B'Av.   RYBS would see it somewhat
differently,

IIRC from R' Mayer Twersky - that the inuyim, while parallel,
are supposed to have different effects - for Tisha B'Av, to increase the
"feeling bad", for Yom Kippur, to separate us from the cares of the world
so that we focus on our true selves and teshuvah.

In my view, though, One is explicitly made to "feel bad", both over loss
and over aveiros, where for normal aveilus, the halacha guides one *away*
from the bad feelings that are presumed to be there.
 
> Which would be teshuvah, at least in part.

As above, I don't see that loss and teshuva are incompatible, rather,
synergistic.
 
--
        name: jon baker              web: http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker
     address: jjbaker@panix.com     blog: http://thanbook.blogspot.com

>>Two questions: 1) I recall seeing R' Moshe Feinstein say that in the case
>>where the Tallis inadvertently fell, one does _not_ have to repeat the
>>Berachah if he was wearing a Tallis Katan - not like the Be'er Heitiv.
Does
>>anyone remember such a thing, from RMF or someone else? (Yagati V'lo
>>Matzasi.) 2) I asked someone about this, and he said he recalled hearing
the
>>R' Yaakov Kamenetzky said that the current Minhag is not to repeat the
>>Berachah should one's Tallis fall. Can anyone corroborate this?

      R' Neventzal shilt"a, in his sefer on the Mishna Brurah, says in the
name of RSZA to not say a new bracha. His reasoning is that
the da''as of a person is that he will wear his tallis for all of davening
when he made the original brocha.

                             -- Mike
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070709/aa9cf822/attachment.html 

does anyone have any maareh m'komos or insights into the current minhag not
to pay kesuvah?

(the minhag in EY may be different)

Mordechai Cohen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070709/8415a422/attachment.htm 

Dov Kay wrote:

>>> The difference is that the initial letter is an alef, which is pronounced
>>> A, not an ayin which is pronounced E.
> 
> That only makes sense if you apply Yiddish pronunciation, in which the ayin 
> is pronounced E.  But why would you do that?  We don't do it for any other 
> acronyms I can think of. For instance, it's the Ra'avya, not R'evya (his 
> first name was Eliezer with an ayin).

Um, who?

-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas

Aryeh Stein wrote:
>>>> The first mishna in Shas tells us that hekteir chalavim v'eivarim,
> though their time for hakrava min haTorah is all night, were to be
> offered by chatzos.>>>
> 
> Actually, Rashi (on the mishna) explains that by hekteir chalavim
> v'eivarim, there was no gezeira that they had to be offered by chatzos
> - the zman for hekteir chalavim v'eivarim is all night.  (Rashi
> explains that the only reason that hekteir chalavim v'eivarim is
> brought down in the mishna is to teach us that any mitzvah that is
> done at night is "kasher kol halayla.")

Ah, I thought I remembered that from somewhere, but I couldn't find it.
I guess I never thought to look at Rashi on the Mishna.  Thank you.

The Rambam seems to disagree with Rashi, and assumes that there must
have been such a regulation, even if there isn't any other mention of
one.


-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas

M Cohen wrote:
> does anyone have any maareh m'komos or insights into the current minhag not
> to pay kesuvah?

In most countries the law gives the widow an inheritance, which will
generally come to much more than she would get from the kesuba.  And
most men who make wills also leave their wives better off than they
would be with the kesuba.

In the case of divorces, women do much better in the secular courts
than they would getting their kesuba.  Especially since most women who
demand a get have no halachic grounds for one, so they're mordos and
halachically aren't entitled to anything at all.  (I don't think there
are any statistics on who initiates Jewish divorces, let alone frum ones,
but in the general USAn culture most divorces are initiated by the wife,
and I know of no basis for supposing that Jews are different in this
regard.)

And if there's a private financial agreement that both agreed to, then
both sides are waiving anything they'd be entitled to in either court
or beis din, so the kesuba becomes irrelevant.


-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev@sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas

>>Two questions: 1) I recall seeing R' Moshe Feinstein say that in the case
>>where the Tallis inadvertently fell, one does _not_ have to repeat the
>>Berachah if he was wearing a Tallis Katan - not like the Be'er Heitiv.
Does 
>>anyone remember such a thing, from RMF or someone else? (Yagati V'lo
>>Matzasi.) 2) I asked someone about this, and he said he recalled hearing
the
>>R' Yaakov Kamenetzky said that the current Minhag is not to repeat the 
>>Berachah should one's Tallis fall. Can anyone corroborate this?

????? R' Neventzal shilt"a, in his sefer on the Mishna Brurah, says in the
name of RSZA to not say a new bracha. His reasoning is that 
the da''as of a person is that he will wear his tallis for all of davening
when he made the original brocha.

???????????????????????????? -- Mike

How does that reasoning trump the Mechaber and Ramah who clearly disagree
with it? Also, I'm not familiar with the Sefer you quote. What is it called?

Some parts of Arukh Hashulchan are missing
see
http://seforim.blogspot.com/

-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070710/cac0e853/attachment.html 

I wrote in my haste <<For instance, it's the Ra'avya, not R'evya (his first 
name was Eliezer with an ayin)>>

As has been pointed out to me by a kind listmember, Eliezer commences with 
an aleph, not an ayin, so "Ra'avya" is no proof at all, but I think that my 
point, as unimportant as it was, still stands.

Kol tuv
Dov Kay

_________________________________________________________________
Watch all 9 Live Earth concerts live on MSN.  http://liveearth.uk.msn.com

On Fri, July 6, 2007 5:50 am, Eli Turkel wrote:
: I find this statement confusing. The gemara explictly calls tisha
: ba-av aveilut yeshana and aveilut de-rabim....

The question AIUI is whether aveilus is defined as a lack of simchah
or as a show of kavod (which I guess would be better termed "kibud"
than "kavod").

My source of confusion in understanding RMF's position is
"mishenichnas Av mima'atim besimchah" (Taanis 29a). Seems pretty
open-and-shut. And this is in opposition to "mishenichnas Adar".

I wrote about aveilus as the existential "but" that comes with trying
to come to terms with tragedy in contrast to the simchah of
understanding one's cheileq. Takes detours through R' Aqiva's laughter
and Rav Saadia Gaon on simchah and laughgter. See
<http://www.aishdas.org/asp/idealism.shtml>.

From the idea as I developed it (admittedly far from a primary
source), simchah and aveilus are perforce in contrast.

...
: Thus, IMHO other fast days are a mixture of avelut over the bet
: hamikdash and teshuva while tisha ba-av stresses the avelut=sadness
: part. Various comentaries talk about the need for crying and sadness
: on tisha ba-av. At the other extreme Yom Kippur symbolizes teshuva
: and not sadness.

This is certainly true, since YK with the avodah is the happiest day
of the year.

However, I thought RYBS has aveilus switch to teshuvah at noon on 9
beAv. Before the BHMQ was set aflame, r"l, our aveilus reaches a
crechendo. Once it is burning... "Mizmor le'Asaf: E-lokim, ba'u goyim
be'nachalasekha, tim'u es heichal qodshekha!"

The medrash asks, "mizmor"? How is this topic appropriate for a style
of song associated with joy? And the medrash answers that the fact
that His anger was taken out on eitz va'even shows that He wants us to
survive and awaits our return.

And so, in the interval during which the Romans actually threw the
stones over the wall and lit the wood pillars of the bayis, aveilus
actually wains and teshuvah moves to the fore.

Tir'u baTov!
-mi

PS: At the dig just south of the kotel, there is a pile of stones
actually thrown by Romans onto the road outside har habayis.

Last time I was there, I had fled an air raid siren in Tzefat in the
morning just a few hours before, in a state where emotions were
running stronger than thoughts. I saw the stones, connecting the pain
I had seen up north with millenia of Galus, and I unthinkingly just
responded to the need to touch them. Crying out a silent "Ad masai!"
to the Eibishter along with my Tehillim. But be"H I will soon be
returning, and hopefully will be more inclined to level thinking.

Now for the Avodah question: Is it mutar to touch the stones that are
no longer on har habayis?

-- 
Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
micha@aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

On Sun, July 8, 2007 7:57 am, Rich, Joel wrote:
: In Nefesh Harav (P135) R'HS  brings down the M"A who quotes the kadima
: order for kaddish....

In "Frum or Ehrlich" (REQUIRED READING!) R' Prof YLevine provides the
following story about RYS from Tenu'as haMussar:

On one of the anniversaries of his father's death, R. Israel was in
Memel. He was informed that someone else in the synagogue wished to
say Kaddish. Now R. Israel was very insistent that only one person at
a time be allowed to recite the Kaddish at the services and apparently
this congregation had complied with his ruling.

Reb Yitzchak Isaacson was observing the yahrzeit of a daughter who had
died very young. Now the Halachah gives precedence to a son observing
the yahrzeit of a parent on these occasions, and R. Israel was
obviously entitled to the privilege. Sensing the grief he would cause
the father by depriving him of the opportunity to say Kaddish for his
daughter, R. Israel went up to him and said: ?You sir, will say
Kaddish.?

The worshippers expressed their surprise. Not only had R. Israel
yielded his own right, but also overlooked the duty of honoring his
father, since he was, by law, obliged to say Kaddish. He explained to
them that the merit of extending kindness (gemilut chesed) to a fellow
Jew possessed far greater value than the saying of Kaddish. (pages 248
? 249)

-----------------------------------------


Tir'u baTov!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
micha@aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter

<<Two questions: 1) I recall seeing R' Moshe Feinstein say that in the case
where the Tallis inadvertently fell, one does _not_ have to repeat the
Berachah if he was wearing a Tallis Katan - not like the Be'er Heitiv. Does
anyone remember such a thing, from RMF or someone else? >>

I recall seeing that R. SZ Auerbach in Halichos Shlomo also paskens that one 
does not make a new b'rocho in this case.  Can't remember his sevara, 
though.

Kol tuv
Dov Kay

_________________________________________________________________
The next generation of Hotmail is here! http://www.newhotmail.co.uk/

>>A side question:  Are the halachos of kadima in kadish actually me'akeiv,
as in, does a shul really *need* to follow them?  It seems that many of
them were kind of arbitrary, to have some kind of system to stop the
fighting in shul.  (Or is that just me being an am ha'aretz and trying to
talk about something I know nothing about?)<<

Some have already quoted RHS in Nefesh HaRav, that the rules of kadima are 
in fact arbitrary.  The AhS says something similar about the rules of kadima 
for aliyos l'Torah, saying these rules have no source in Chazal but have 
been adopted in any event.

Kol tuv
Dov Kay

_________________________________________________________________
Watch all 9 Live Earth concerts live on MSN.  http://liveearth.uk.msn.com

Rn Toby Katz wrote (on Arevim):


>>> The previous Brisker Rov refused to get a pacemaker (in the 1950's)
because he felt that the wires extending through his skin would make him
pasul as a  levi to work in the bet hamikdash.

Leviim are Passul B'Mum? I thought only B'Shanim in the Midbar and B'kol
after that (Chullin 24) and even then the Rambam holds that he is Kasher to
be a Shoe'r, just not a Meshorer. (Klei HaMikdash 3:8)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070711/12bcc574/attachment.htm 

	Are there any opinions out there who take issue with the
Rambam's requirement that to be a "full fledged" ben noach you must not
only carry out the 7 mitzvot but do so because you believe HKB"H gave
Moshe the Torah (e.g. what if an individual believed in them solely
because he felt Adam Harishon got them )
	KT
	Joel Rich
> 
> 
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070712/27ab4510/attachment.html 

------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avodah@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 23, Issue 150
***************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."