Avodah Mailing List

Volume 06 : Number 120

Tuesday, February 6 2001

• Dreams
• RS"O for dreams
• seder tu b'shvat
• shibbole haleket
• Re: prompting kohanim by dukhaning
• Kaddish after Oleinu
• Seven kaddishim
• rashi question
• Re: The mechabeir's rule by majority
• key card on shabbat
• Re: makom p'tur
• Re: makom p'tur
• RE: rashi question
• Rashi question

From: "Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
> Mei'inyan l'inyan b'oso inyan, seems from Tosafos that the RS"O for dreams
> should not be said unless you have an actual dream for which you are
> asking correction.
> ..In EY, where these are not said, is that because of practical or Gr"o type
> reasons?

What EY Jews do about their dreams?
They NEVER have the opportunity to say the RSO?

SBA

>  RYGB wrote:
> > Mei'inyan l'inyan b'oso inyan, seems from Tosafos that the RS"O for dreams 
> > should not be said unless you have an actual dream for which you are 
> > asking  correction.

RGS responded:
> I believe the Maharsha says the exact opposite.  If you know that you had a 
> dream then you do hatavas chalom.  RS"O is for the dreams you do not know 
> about.

RYGB answered:
>  1. That does not fit into the nusach of the RS"O.
>  2. That does not fit into the lashon of Tosafos.

IIUC it is said when one knows he had a dream but "Lo Yoda Mai Chazi" as is 
the Pshat in the Sugia in Brochos 55b, and see S"A O"C 130 why we say it on 
all Yomim Tovim (that would explain why in E"Y where there is Birchas Kohanim 
Bchal Yom there is no reason for it), however I was once asked why do we say 
it on the second day of Y"T in Golus, also when do Kohanim get to say it.


Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

Does anyone know of sources which describe the origin of the seder tu
b'shavat? (i.e. is it sabbatien or is it from the Ari z"l?)

In Leon Wieseltier's book Kaddish, he discusses the Ashkenazi minhag of not
eating between mincha and ma'ariv on shabbat.  He then brings down in the
name of the Shibbole Haleket, that in Lorraine, it once arose that yom
kippur was motze shabbat, and they bekoshi allowed to eat then after mincha
on shabbat.  

As in our calendar yom kipppur can't occur motze shabbat, either the
shibbole haleket was misquoted by WIeselteir or there was something
interesting with the Jewish calendar in Lorraine. Anyone with the Shibbole
Haleket know what Wieseltier was referring to and the details of this story
from Loraine?

Meir Shinnar

>  R' "Seth Mandel" <sethm37@hotmail.com> writes:
  
>   I would note that the Rambam
>  treats prompting as d'Orayso, derived from "amor lahem." There is a
>  discussion about where the Rambam gets this from, but that does not
>  affect his position. The Rambam apparently does not see a problem
>  with the g'moro, either. 

Two Nkudos 1) see the Beis Yosef Al Hatur O"C 128 D"H Vshliach Tzibur (WRT 
Shitas Horambam, 2) WRT the Sugia in Soteh 39b while Rashi Teitches the 
Anouncing that the Kohanim have to wait for, as the word "Kohanim" the Ran at 
the end of Hakorei Oimeid (Megileh Perek 3/4) brings Teitch that it refers to 
each word of the Bracha (as I pointed out the Rashi in Brochos must have had 
another Girse, or Bdocheik that he is Mfareish in Brochos like the Ran).

>  R' "Yosef G. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> writes:

>  I missed the response. Upon asking the same question, it was noted to me
>  that the MB cites a Sifri

The question is that Tos. and likewise the Rosh say that the Sifri is talking 
about the anouncing of "Kohanim", and note the M"M on the S"A Horav O"C 128 # 
92, which brings the Mokor from the "Medrosh" (obviously alluding to the 
"Medrosh Chaseiros Vyeseiros" quoted in Tos and the Rosh) in M"M # 93 he 
quotes the Taz and the Sifri, (LAN"D the Sifri is being quoted there as 
another source to Teitch like the Targum "Kad Seimrun Lhoin" which refers to 
the anouncing of "Kohanim").

Kol Tuv, 
Yitzchok Zirkind

From: Phyllostac@aol.com
>  Meikar hadin there are only 7 kaddeishim in the davening of a regular day
> .... Other kaddeishim are not 'meikar hadin' and are later additions added
> for various reasons by some,

Does the Remoh stating that a Kaddish be said - make it a "meikar hadin"?
(Or meikar hadin refers to earlier than that?)

SBA

R'Mordechai aka Phyllostac wrote re: Seven kaddishim: <<and two in ma'ariv
(before and after shmoneh esreh).>>

Not until after it became customary to say sh'moneh esrei in ma'ariv.

R' Mordechai's list of seven is the same as that of the Arukh
haShulhan. The Bet Yosef, however, lists only one in ma'ariv and adds a
fourth in shaharit after k'riat haTorah (see O"Ch 55). What the B"Y does
about the other four days of the week has always been a mystery to me.

K"T,
David

Does anyone have a pshat in rashi (12:15) that there is a ptur anus for
eating chametz - why do you need a specific ptur for chametz when there
is a ptur anus in kol hatorah kulah?

The only answers I have are that anus here means omer mutar (like
Tos. Zevachim 108), or maybe it refers to misasek (to teach us that
chametz is different than chalavim v'arayos). It would be nice to have
a pshat that takes the word anus at face value?

Micha Berger wrote:
     
> Reading OhrNet, I was reminded of a data point that makes this far less 
> likely. "Shu"t Min haShamayim", by R' Yaakov miMarvege, is quoted lihalachah 
> by the Shlah and Radvaz. As the title emplies, it is a collection of teshuvos 
> recieved bachalom to halachic questions asked of Shamayim.
     
Exapnding a bit on R. Daniel Eidensohn's mareh mekomos, the Chida in Shem 
HaGedolim (1:yud:224) offers two possible explanations of why the Shu"t Min 
HaShamayim is mutar.

His first explanation is that there is a machlokes tannaim whether we darshen 
"Lo bashamayim hi" to prohibit paskening based on heavenly messages.  For 
example, we pasken like Beis Hillel because of a bas kol.  Therefore, the author
of the Shu"t Min HaShamayim paskened against the Rambam and held that it was 
mutar.

Ephraim Urbach in an article titled "Halachah uNevua'h" in Tarbitz 318 (5707) 
expands this idea and (very) extensively quotes from the talmudim and midrashim 
to try to show that there were two shitos about this throughout the times of the
tannaim and amoraim.  He also tries to tie "lo bashamayim hi" with "ein lemeidin
midivrei kabbalah" and "ein navi rashai lechadesh davar me'atah" and show that 
these three ideas are part of one shitah which some tannaim and amoraim held and
some did not.  I'm not sure how well he proved this point.

Along this idea, Urbach quotes an interesting Kuzari.  The Kuzari (3:41) says 
that chachamim and nevi'im are not included in the issur of bal tosif.  He seems
to say that we are allowed to pasken based on a nevu'ah.

R. Reuven Margolies in his pesichah to his edition of Shu"t Min HaShamayim 
quotes extensively from rishonim who made decisions based on dreams.  However, 
many of these decisions do not have halachic ramifications and are therefore not
relevant to our discussion.  Two that are relevant are the Shu"t Radvaz vol. 6 
#2286 and Semag, Lo Sa'aseh 64.  The Radvaz reversed a pesak based on a dream 
and the Semag included an issur in his minyan hamitzvos because of a dream.  The
Yad Ephraim on Shulchan Aruch (OC 692) paskened how to be mekayem "michayav 
inish livsumei..." based on a dream.

The Chida's second explanation is that we can pasken based on a heavenly 
communication ONLY when we are in safek and have no ability to machria.  For 
instance, when we did not know whether Beis Shammai or Beis Hillel was 
considered rov, we followed the bas kol.  However, when we had halachic 
parameters to pasken like chachamim against R. Eliezer, we did not follow a bas 
kol.  Occasionally, a rishon will pasken based on a chalom.  This is only if he 
believes the issue to be totally unresolvable otherwise.  However, if another 
rishon disagrees with this pesak, it is because he believes that the issue is 
resolvable and we are therefore not allowed to follow a dream.

The Maharatz Chayes, in his Toras Nevi'im chapters 1 and 2, follows the 
shitah of the Rambam and leaves anyone who is cholek as tzarich iyun.

Gil Student

I am presently in Brussels for several months and have a problem which
I am sure is discussed in poskim. Does anyone have a reference 
(please also send directly to turkel@icase.edu).

The key card works on holes in the card and as far as I know is completely
magnetic and  mechanical and so no problem on shabbat.
However, at the entrance to the building it also turns off a red light
and turns on a small green light.
I dont care at all about these lights but it is psik reisha (de-lo neicha le).
According to RSZA psik resha does apply to a goy. However, because this
is not a regular hotel there is no on duty over the weekends and traffic
is very slow. Hence, waiting for a goy can be painful.

A possible heter to use directly would be
1. It is melacha sheno tzricha legufo (the lights are not being used)
2. The card can be inserted in an unusual way (le-achar yad)
so it is 2 de-rabban for a mitzva (going to shul + eating on shabbat)

Thanks,
Eli Turkel

Eric Simon wrote:
> Neither book mentions the case of an area that is less than 4 tefochim 
> on one dimension and greater than 4 tefochim in the other dimension.

If an area has less than 4 tefochim in either length OR width, it is a makom 
petur.  See Mishnah Berurah 345:81.

Gil Student

On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 10:35:07AM -0500, Gil.Student@citicorp.com wrote:
: If an area has less than 4 tefochim in either length OR width, it is a makom 
: petur.  See Mishnah Berurah 345:81.

What about oddly shaped areas?

Is it sufficient if the area is 16 sq-tefachim and one can find within
the surface two perpendicular lines that are 4 tefachim each, or need
the area include a 4x4 square?

If the former, than any area that is 2.83 tefachim (4 / sqrt(2)) in one
direction would have to be checked that it isn't 4x4 if you would turn
it to some angle.

-mi

C1A1Brown@aol.com:
> Does anyone have a pshat in rashi (12:15) that there is a ptur anus for
> eating chametz - why do you need a specific ptur for chametz when there
> is a ptur anus in kol hatorah kulah?

> The only answers I have are that anus here means omer mutar (like
> Tos. Zevachim 108), or maybe it refers to misasek (to teach us that
> chametz is different than chalavim v'arayos). It would be nice to have
> a pshat that takes the word anus at face value?

Here is a guess.

IIRC one is yotzei the mitva of Matza when one is anus. IOW, if someone else
forces matza down one's throat one is yotzei.

So it makes sense to treat the converse of matza - iow chametz- as a special
case

Kol Tuv,
Rich Wolpoe 

On the posuk  "timla'emo nafshi" Rashi explains at length that this is a
composite word,  made up of  "timaleh osam". 

Why didn't Rashi explain this earlier,  at "yechasyumu?

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

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


[ 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         ]