Avodah Mailing List

Volume 26: Number 21

Tue, 27 Jan 2009

• 1. Re: Is Smoking Mutar? (Micha Berger)
• 2. Re: Interesting Count (Daniel Israel)
• 3. Re: Open Door Policy (Ken Bloom)
• 4. Re: schechinah in the west (Micha Berger)
• 5. Re: Is Smoking Mutar? (Zev Sero)
• 6. Re: Currency Trading and Ribis (Zev Sero)
• 7. Re: schechinah in the west (Zev Sero)
• 8. shatz saying things aloud (Steven J Scher)
• 9. Re: Our Attitude towards Segulos (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Ramban - Love your fellow as yourself (Micha Berger)
• 11. Re: schechinah in the west (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Aruch Hashulchan Yomi (Micha Berger)
• 13. Re: Is Smoking Mutar? (Arie Folger)
• 14. Re: Aruch Hashulchan Yomi (rabbirichwol...@gmail.com)
• 15. Interesting Count (Cantor Wolberg)
• 16. Caravan (Shayara) (Gals...@aol.com)
• 17. Re: shatz saying things aloud (Moshe Y. Gluck)
• 18. Re: shatz saying things aloud (Steven J Scher)

Who ever said one should rely on "shomer pesa'im Hashem" (SPH)? "May",
yes; but "should"? "Eidus H' ne'emanah machkimas pesi." Who wants
to remain a pesi rather than embracing eidus Hashem? Pesi is not a
complimentary term; and it's a poor choice to rely upon. But that said,
and on to actual issur....

Kollel Iyun haDaf at
<http://www.dafyomi.co.il/azarah/insites/az-dt-30.htm> discusses two
opinions as to why SPH is invoked to permit people eating figs that were
left overnight, but not mayim shelanu. The two relevent factors appear
to be the normality of assuming the risk, and the magnitude of the risk.
See the web page.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man is capable of changing the world for the
mi...@aishdas.org        better if possible, and of changing himself for
http://www.aishdas.org   the better if necessary.
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning

On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 12:10:02 -0700 Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org> 
wrote:
>On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 12:49:38PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
>: Not the 7 mitzvot benei noach, which are included in our 613 
>(Hence Rut
>: accepted 606 additional mitzvot).  The additional 7 letters are 
>for the
>: 7 mitzvot derabbanan.
>
>And according to the Semag, who includes the 7 derabbanan among 
>the 613?

I don't understand the question.  Who says the Semag has to hold of 
this gematria?

--
Daniel M. Israel
d...@cornell.edu

T6...@aol.com wrote:
> From: Harvey Benton harveyben...@yahoo.com <mailto:harveyben...@yahoo.com>
>
>
> >>Sometimes a married woman finds herself in a situation where she may 
> need to be secluded with a man who is not her husband.  For instance, 
> if she visits a doctor or dentist, or has a repairman over her house 
> to fix something.... <<
>  
> >>>>>
>  
> My understanding is that in her own home, there is no problem with the 
> occasional man coming in as long as her husband is not out of town -- 
> "ba'alah ba'ir" -- and could theoretically walk through the door at 
> any moment (even though she knows he is at work -- but he could still 
> come home unexpectedly, and he does have a key to his own house!).
>  
> At the doctor's office or dentist's office, it would be a rare office 
> where the doctor and the patient were the only people present and 
> there was no chance of a nurse or receptionist coming through the 
> door.  Nevertheless many doctors have a policy of explicitly asking a 
> nurse to stay in the room with them when they are examining female 
> patients, in order to protect themselves from wild accusations made by 
> mentally unbalanced women.  Even though I am not mentally unbalanced 
> and would not make wild accusations against my doctor, in the unusual 
> case that he does not call in a nurse, I request that he do so.  I 
> simply feel more comfortable with another woman in the room.  I have 
> never known a doctor to hesitate or mind in the slightest when such a 
> request is made.
>  
> AFAIK halachically it is not necessary that another person be present 
> in the room, only that the door is unlocked and other people are 
> nearby and could theoretically enter.
>  
>  
> The case of a single, divorced or widowed woman, with no children at 
> home, who needs a repairman -- that is more difficult.  I guess that 
> leaving the front door open would help, or calling in a neighbor. 
>  
This could also be a situation where the husband isn't in the city, and 
that doesn't just have to mean he's traveling. According to sefer 
Minchat Ish on Hilchot Yichud, ba'alah ba'ir applies to areas that 
people call by the same city name. This leads to the rather paradoxical 
situation that one rabbi in Chicago whose shul is a half mile away from 
his home, on the Evanston side of the Evanston-Chicago border, would not 
be ba'ir if his wife were expecting a repairman and he was at shul. On 
the other hand if he were over 20 miles away on the Chicago side of the 
south border of the city he would be ba'ir.

Besides that, wouldn't the repairman also have to have ishto imo, not 
just ba'ir? (Or does either of these halachot suffice to permit yichud?)

--Ken
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090126/af6f2cd3/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 12:08:47PM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
: Eli Turkel wrote:
...
:> 2. What is west for me is east (or north or south) for someone else.
:> Thus, not putting certain types of activities to the west of the city may 
:> be to the east of some other city and vice-versa

: It's the direction, not some particular location....

I thought the Shechinah is in the West because evening comes there
first. Thus ma'arav. Our gemara (BB 25a) calls it "uriyah", which is
"west" in Farsi, also via the word for evening. But the Farsi version
is necessary for his word-play of "avir Kah". I therefore thought that
R' Avahu is saying that "imo Anokhi betzarah" is when Hashem is most
easily found. (Insert glurgy poem about footprints in the sand by Mary
Stevenson here.)

The Zohar (Bamidar 56) places Chessed and Gevurah in the south and north
respectively. Which makes sense, since a person properly ORIENTed would
be facing mizrach, so his yemin is toward teiman, and thus chessed as
well. Besides, the sun is always to the south of EY, and the north is
tzafun. Thus, south is more giving.

This is where the Zohar speaks of the west being the direction of the
Shechinah because it's Tif'eres, the synthesis of Chessed and Gevurah. The
east is Malkhus, another synthesis of left and right. Why this is east
and that west rather than the other way around is beyond me.

(BTW, ORIENTed is not an attempted pun. The concept of orientation gets
its root from a time when maps had east, the orient, on top.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When a king dies, his power ends,
mi...@aishdas.org        but when a prophet dies, his influence is just
http://www.aishdas.org   beginning.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                    - Soren Kierkegaard

Arie Folger wrote:
> RHB wrote:
>> When and to what extent?does?Shomer?PTaim HaShem apply? And wy would it
>> constanly change according to societies norms??
> 
> My understanding is that the societal standard is the part of the definition of 
> sakanah. Why? I am open to your suggestions.

It's certainly part of the definition of "shomer peta'im"; the full phrase
is "kevan dedash dash, veshomer peta'im Hashem".  Where there is no "dash",
there is no "shomer peta'im".

-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher

Micha Berger wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 11:39:13AM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> : Harvey Benton wrote:
> : >If currencies CAN be considered as commodities, are there restrictions
> : >as to how much one can earn, buying or selling commodities?
> 
> : The only restrictions halacha imposes on profit from selling commodities
> : are on food...
> 
> And ona'as mamon. The fixed range of legal sale prices will limit profit.

I don't see how that relates.  The retailer says "this is my price".
He's not misrepresenting what the market price is.  Ona'ah, AIUI, is when
he represents that he is charging the market price, and it turns out that
he's more than 20% off.  This is more shayach to wholesalers than to
retailers, whom everyone knows add a mark-up.  And it assumes a buyer who
doesn't know the market just as well as the seller.

-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher

Micha Berger wrote:

> I thought the Shechinah is in the West because evening comes there
> first.

On the contrary, evening comes to the east first, i.e. the eastern
horizon gets dark before the western one does.  Thus we judge the degree
of darkness for the varying stages of nightfall by the colour of the
eastern horizon.

> The Zohar (Bamidar 56) places Chessed and Gevurah in the south and north
> respectively.

Not just the Zohar.  Tehillim says "tzafon veyamin ata vera'tam", and
"achor vakedem tzartani" (kedem meaning both east and forward).


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher

On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, avodah-requ...@lists.aishdas.org wrote:

> This would be a good place to note to the chazzanim that they should say the
> Kaddosh kadosh, baruch kevod, and preferably yimloch hashem, as well as
> yehei shmei rabba of their kaddeishim, and the baruch hashem hamevorach of
> barchu aloud after the congregation (or louder than the congregation with
> them) to be motzi all those people who have not finished shmone esrei and
> stop to hear the keddusha, kadish or borchu and want to be yotzei these
> tefillot bezibbur.


This is a good point. But, could those who havn't finished shemonah esrei 
be yotzi with the tzibbur?  or, it the problem that the congregation 
doesn't necessarily have the intent to include everyone else.

on a related note: The Soleivetich machzor points out that the Rav 
believed that the congregation should hear every word of the hatzarat 
ha-shatz... including the Modim Anachnu.  This suggests that the Shaliach 
Tzibbur should also say Modim Anachnu aloud, rather than the common 
practice of saying it in a mumble while the tzibbur says the Modim 
d'Rabbanan.

On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 12:06:06PM +0000, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:
: 1) These forces enhance our bechira. You can't have white magic
: (nissim) unless black magic exists also. And segulos exist in both types
: - donations invoking R Meir Baal Hanes tends to reveal lost objects,
: and stepping on cut fingernails tends to cause miscarriages.

These aren't nissim or kishuf. Yes, if you have one you have to have
both. But why have either?

: 2) You mention statistics, and (predictable) patterns of behavior. It
: seems to me that metaphysical forces may exist precisely to remind us
: that we don't have it all figured out yet. Bring a radio transmitter and
: receiver back in time a few hundred years, and ask them if this force
: is physical or metaphysical.

    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
    magic.
                        - Arthur C. Clarke's Third "Law" of Prediction

But this is saying that HQBH does this without stepping beyond teva.
The complexity of what we experience will always be at least a little
beyond our ability to explain it.

Which is why I again see no need to posit a second system, one which the
person would have to first be a maamin to even accept the basics of.
Haniglos lanu ulvaneinu... vehaAretz nasan livnei adam... etc...
We're given the power to engineer based on physics, not metaphysics.

So I do not see how one can simply posit it's in the same role. Again,
two distinct reasons:
- why bother having two sets of laws serving the same purpose?
- why have laws that aren't given to man as nigleh/aretz for us to work
  and plan with?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It's never too late
mi...@aishdas.org        to become the person
http://www.aishdas.org   you might have been.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                     - George Elliot

On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 06:24:36PM +0200, Daniel Eidensohn wrote:
: I am having difficulty understanding the Ramban's commentary to Vayirka
: (19:18). He starts out saying that the commandment cannot be understood
: literally because the heart can not love another as oneself. Then he
: concludes by saying that this commandment is to remove the jealousy
: from your heart so that there is no limitation on the love you have for
: another person. This seems to be a direct contradiction.

So that jealousy will not be a limitation. I would say that in the reisha
the Ramban says man hasn't enough koach to do literally love another
person equally to himself, and in the seifa he says that therefore the
chiyuv is to remove those things that get in the way of the koach we
do have.

With that, see this part of your translation again:
:                  But if he loves him completely, he will want his beloved
: friend to gain riches, properties, honor, knowledge and wisdom. However
: [because of human nature] he will still not want him to be his equal,
: for there will always be a desire in his heart that he should have more
: of these good things than his neighbor. Therefore Scripture commanded
: that this degrading jealousy should not exist in his heart, but instead
: a person should love to do abundance of good for his fellow-being as
: he does for himself, and he should place no limitations upon his love
: for him.

You also gave me an excuse to quote from my translation of the haqdamah to
Shaarei Yosher <http://www.aishdas.org/asp/ShaareiYosher.pdf>. The Ramban,
as I'm explaining him, is also talking about the mitzvah in terms of
lowering the barrier between seld and other, even though self comes first.

    HOWEVER, what of a person who decides to submerge his nature,
    to reach a high level so that he has no thought or inclination in
    his soul for his own good, only a desire for the good of others? In
    this way he would have his desire reach the sanctity of the Creator,
    as His Desire in all of the creation and management of the world
    is only for the good of the created, and not for Himself at all. At
    first glance one might say that if a person reached this level, he
    would reach the epitome of being whole. But this is why our Sages of
    blessed memory teach us in this Midrash that it is not so. We cannot
    try to be similar to His Holiness in this respect. His Holiness is
    greater than ours. His Holiness is only for the created and not for
    Himself because nothing was ever added to or could ever be added to
    the Creator through the actions He did or does. Therefore all His
    Desire could only be to be good to the created.

    But what He wants from us is not like this. As Rabbi Aqiva taught us,
    "your life comes first." 6 [Our sages] left us a hint of it when
    they interpret the scripture "Love your neighbor as yourself" in
    a negative sense, "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your
    peers." In terms of obligation, it is fitting for a person to place
    his own good first. There are also grounds for asserting that in
    the very foundation of the creation of Adam, the Creator planted in
    him a very great measure of propensity to love himself. The sages
    of truth 7 describe the purpose of all the work in this language,
    "The Infinite wanted to bestow complete good, that there wouldn't
    even be the embarrassment of receiving." This discussion reveals
    how far the power of loving oneself goes, that "a person is more
    content with one qav [a unit of measure] of his own making than
    [he would be of] two qavin that are given to him" -- even if from
    the Hand of the Holy One! -- if the present is unearned. From here
    it should be self-evident that love of oneself is desired by the
    Holy One, even though "the wise shall walk because of it and the
    foolish will stumble over it." 8...

    Although at first glance it seems that feelings of love for oneself
    and feelings of love for others are like competing co-wives 12 one
    to the other, we have the duty to try to delve into it, to find the
    means to unite them, since Hashem expects both from us. This means [a
    person must] explain and accept the truth of the quality of his "I",
    for with it the statures of [different] people are differentiated,
    each according to their level. The entire "I" of a coarse and lowly
    person is restricted only to his substance and body. Above him is
    someone who feels that his "I" is a synthesis of body and soul. And
    above him is someone who can include in his "I" all of his household
    and family. Someone who walks according to the way of the Torah, his
    "I" includes the whole Jewish people, since in truth every Jewish
    person is only like a limb of the body of the nation of Israel. And
    there are more levels in this of a person who is whole, who can
    connect his soul to feel that all of the world and worlds are his
    "I", and he himself is only one small limb in all of creation. Then,
    his self-love helps him love all of the Jewish people and [even] all
    of creation. In my opinion, this idea is hinted at in Hillel's words,
    as he used to say, "If I am not for me, who will be for me? And when I
    am for myself, what am I?" 13 It is fitting for each person to strive
    to be concerned for himself. But with this, he must also strive to
    understand that "I for myself, what am I?" If he constricts his "I"
    to a narrow domain, limited to what the eye can see [is him], then
    his "I" -- what is it? Vanity and ignorable. But if his feelings are
    broader and include [all of] creation, that he is a great person and
    also like a small limb in this great body, then he is lofty and of
    great worth. In a great engine even the smallest screw is important
    if it even serves the smallest role in the engine. For the whole is
    made of parts, and no more than the sum of its parts.

    FOOTNOTES (mine):

    6 When faced by a moral dilemma in having to choose between two
    lives to save, one is not obligated to sacrifice one's own life for
    the sake of another. Rabbi Aqiva learns this from the verse "and your
    brother shall live with you" (Leviticus 25:36), which implies that the
    obligation to save another is only where he can then live "with you".

    7 i.e. the Kabbalists. Rav Shimon is quoting Pischei Chokhmah ch. 4

    8 A rabbinic idiom. The Torah occasionally says things that the
    wise can understand and grow from even though those less wise or
    with a foolish disposition are likely to misunderstand the verse
    and be lead further astray.
...
    12 The term used here is that used for two wives in a polygamous
    marriage arrangement. "Tzaros", literally, "troubles".

    13 Pirqei Avot 1:14


Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Never must we think that the Jewish element
mi...@aishdas.org        in us could exist without the human element
http://www.aishdas.org   or vice versa.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                     - Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch

R' Mordechai Torczyner in his WebShas
<http://www.webshas.org/emunah/noguf.htm> gives two more sources that
relate to the westerliness of the Schechinah:
> The Shechinah is 'Located' between East and West: R. Berachot 5b
>     "Tzafon"; Tos. Berachot 5b #7
> Where the Shechinah was 'Located' in the Temple: Megillah 26a

(WebShas is a topic index to 1685 amudim of gemara.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

Bcc: RMT

On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 03:01:56AM -0800, Dovi Jacobs wrote:
: 1. A daily study program should cover the entire Shulchan Aruch.

: There are three major sections missing in the printed versions of the
: AHS. Two are in Yoreh Deah (Hilkhos Aku"m and Hilchos Nedarim) and
: one in Even Haezer (Hilchos Kesubos). We know with certainty that the
: author wrote them all, but none of them were ever published until R.
: Simcha Fishbane published Hilchos Nedarim in 1992...

: Not surprisingly, the current study program skips the missing parts.
...
: 2. A daily study program should be of reasonable daily quantity.
: 
: Some daily Torah-study programs are meant to be very short: The Mishnah
: Yomis is two mishnayos per day, the Halachah Yomis is three seifim a day...

: Other daily Torah-study programs require a very serious investment in
: time, Daf Yomi being the primary example...

: It seems to me that an AHS Yomi program would be a middle-ground one.
...
: The current AHS study cycle is based on the simple idea of one
: siman-per-day...

This is leshitasi, along with the skipping you mention above, as well as
why I did not choose something like an amud yomi. I didn't want a
program tied to a given edition. So many people's commitment to a Yomi
programs fall apart when they lose track of the special calendar, or
don't have ready access to the right pagination. I wanted something
someone could follow without access to www.aishdas.org/luach , or to the
new edition of the AhS.

Yes, it would be more complete to imitate the Daf Yomi's choice of
including Y-mi Sheqalim by picking a similar seifer. But that creates
greater depency, and thus greater chance of failure..

What would this "middle-ground" length be? 15 min?

: 3. Flexible topics.

I do not see how this matches with #1. The nice things about a program
that covers all of halakhah is that left to my own devices, I'm quite
likely going to skip or gloss over those very dinim I personally need
the most work on. Whatever avoidance mechanism one has for shemirah
would be invoked for limud as well.

Therefore only flexibility I could see as appropriate is as follows:
: On the other hand, the bulk of material in Even ha-Ezer and Choshen
: Mishpat is truly meant for dayyanim (except for the first part of EE that
: is relevant to mesadrei kiddushin). There are obviously some halachos
: in EE and CHM that are highly relevant to all, but not the vast majority
: of topics.

Two programs: one that skips those inyanim that aren't nogei'ah to the
"balebas". Kind of like those topics that wouldn't be touched in the QSA
if it were being compiled today. (Melichah is in the QSA, which made sense
even a century later [1949] but I don't really see the lemaaseh for most
people any more.) And one that allows a review of kol haTorah kulah.

...
: Thus, Orach Chaim is completed in a two-year cycle, where each year
: one learns the relevant moadim at the appropriate times, plus *either*
: Seder ha-Yom *or* Shabbos. The moadim are somewhat heavier in terms of
: daily quantity (closer to two dapim-per-day) but are also reviewed more
: frequently. Plus, they are already fully available in digital form,
: edited and formatted for easier study:
: * <http://he.wikisource.org/wiki/AHS:OH>

: A similar schedule could be worked out to complete Yoreh Deah (403
: simanim) in about two years along with the moadim. The combined Even
: ha-Ezer and Choshen Mishpat could be completed in perhaps three years
: (178+427=605 simanim), maybe four.

Or, the relevent portions of EhE, CM and YD in a single cycle for a
"lemaaseh" version?

I wanted to research how many se'ifim this means, but I decided RDJ
was probably giving up on getting a reply altogether, and I shouldn't
keep him waiting.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of
mi...@aishdas.org        heights as long as he works his wings.
http://www.aishdas.org   But if he relaxes them for but one minute,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      he plummets downward.   - Rav Yisrael Salanter

RMB wrote:
> In calculating the added risk caused by smoking a cigarette one must
> take into account the fact that it's addictive. Thus the risk of one
> cigarette is not only that of the cigarette itself. By smoking, one
> continues and enhances the addiction. Future cigerettes and their risk
> become more probable. and that too is part of the life expectancy risk
> associated with the current decision. No one would be smoking their
> 3,000th cigarette if they didn't try their first. Or if they would have
> stopped after their 2,000th.

Yes, I believe that it is sensible to take addiction into account. And while I 
can't recall what R. Bleich said about that part, I feel he'd take addiction 
into account. Furthermore, addiction is not only problematic because it 
increases the likelihood of sakanah, as we have been discussing in this 
thread, but also because it is bad in and of itself (artificial dependence upon 
a gashmi substance) and in some cases because it leads to consorting with the 
wrong crowd (as per RMF in IM).

Kol tuv,
-- 
Arie Folger
http://ariefolger.wordpress.com
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com

On a tangent:

I woyld love to see a program for R. A Danzig's big 3 namely chayei adam, chochmas adam, and zichru toras moshe. (Ztm)

Ztm could be done ever shabbos and maybe on a twice a year cycle that way one could add kehilas yomtov.

Chayei adam is aisi about half way between SA and AhS.

Chochmas Adam has new edition for niddah and issur v'heter that is highly user freindlly.  Anyway chochmas adam is great summarizer bichlal.

If anyone is interested, I'd coloborate. B li neder

Kt rrw


Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Not the 7 mitzvot benei noach, which are included in our 613 (Hence Rut
accepted 606 additional mitzvot).
Saadya Gaon said that it is the sheva mitzvos benei Noach whiich makes  
sense.
Sure, the 7 mitzvos are included in our 613 but for a goy, the 7  
mitzvos is in a
different category. Hence, we have our taryag and they have their  
sheva mitzvos.
I'm sure Saadya Gaon knew the difference.

R' Micha wrote:
And according to the Semag, who includes the 7 derabbanan among the 613?
Very good point.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090126/3be46b77/attachment-0001.htm>

I am curious to know how the Gemara learns that a Shayara (Cravan) is not 
less than three. I read it in Bavli Eiruvin 16, and also in the Yerushlami where 
it says "Ein Shayara Pachot Mishlosha" (a caravan is not less than three).  I 
was surprise to find no source, while I could find source for the phrase 
"yamim Rabim" (many or several days) = three days, and in Ketuvit 75 "Rabim" (many 
or several) = three, etc.
 
Thanks,
galsaba
**************Know Your Numbers: Get tips and tools to help you improve your 
credit score. 
(http://www.walletpop.com/credit/credit-reports?ncid=emlcntuswall00000
002)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090127/24c59312/attachment-0001.htm>

R' Steven J. Scher:
> This is a good point. But, could those who havn't finished shemonah esrei
> be yotzi with the tzibbur?  or, it the problem that the congregation
> doesn't necessarily have the intent to include everyone else.

Yes. But R' MF points out that you could ask your neighbor in Shul (before Davening) to be Motzi you.

> on a related note: The Soleivetich machzor points out that the Rav
> believed that the congregation should hear every word of the hatzarat
> ha-shatz... including the Modim Anachnu.  This suggests that the Shaliach
> Tzibbur should also say Modim Anachnu aloud, rather than the common
> practice of saying it in a mumble while the tzibbur says the Modim
> d'Rabbanan.

The Rav might have been referencing MB 124:41.

KT,
MYG

> R' Steven J. Scher:
>> on a related note: The Soleivetich machzor points out that the Rav
>> believed that the congregation should hear every word of the hatzarat
>> ha-shatz... including the Modim Anachnu.  This suggests that the Shaliach
>> Tzibbur should also say Modim Anachnu aloud, rather than the common
>> practice of saying it in a mumble while the tzibbur says the Modim
>> d'Rabbanan.
>
R'MYG:
> The Rav might have been referencing MB 124:41.

I'm not so sure.  The MB is talking about someone who forgot Ya'aleh 
v'Yavo (or another insert where one is required to repeat Sh"E).  Then, 
instead of repeating, you can be yotze the shaliach tzibbur.

If I recall correctly, the Rav made the point that the repetition was 
always as if you were saying the prayer yourself.  Therefore, he rules 
that one should stand for the whole repetition.  See the Rema at 124,seif 
4 and the MB there (20).

But, this is my recollection from not even this past RH, but actually from 
a year ago.  Perhaps someone with access to the Machzor could report what 
it actually says???

-- 


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


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


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 21
**************************************

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..."