[Avodah] Selichos - Especially before Midnight

[Richard Wolpoe]

On 9/20/07, kennethgmiller at juno.com <kennethgmiller at juno.com> wrote:
>
> R' Richard Wolpoe wrote:
> > Rav Gelley has said many times that Breu'ers does not say
> > X or Y because their minhag pre-dates the inclusion of X
> > or Y into the Davening - IOW the minhag is older than Rema!
>
> I'd like to know how this works. At what point did the kehilah say "Today
> is the cutoff. Things we've added until now are okay, but no more new
> stuff."
>
> I ask this because it seems clear to me that they DO say some things which
> were added after Chasimas HaGemara. Like Slichos.
>
> Akiva Miller
>
>
Breuer's STILL adds/changes stuff and has made changes to both Nusach and
melodies over the years.

I have a post about modifying a kitchen in a  Frank Lloyd Wright home -
which is a classic but stuck with a 1950's kitchen.  The art/science of
change in a place like Breuer's about being consistent and in harmony with
the various shitos it has adopted over the years

That is why the "lesheim Yichud" 's in the Roedlehim IMHO have no place
being there. They are inconsistent and wer eprobably borrowed from
elsewhere.  E.G. Years ago we discussed how the Kaddish Derabban  got a
"le'chayyim tovim" in the yehei Shlama. This is NOT taive to Ashkenaz, it's
an import.

Similarly, When the Alter Rebbe of Chabad did his Siddur AL PI ARIZAL he did
NOT follow the Ari blindly-  rather he  modified nusach Ashkenaz according
to Lurianic principles!

When you master the principles of the German Minhag you would know HOW and
WHEN to make those modfications.   Anyone who understands Breuers would
realize why reading Zeicher and Zecher both on Zachor would NEVER fit that
model. [{See R. Moredcai Breuer's A"H arrtcile on Zeicher/Zecher] .

Heidenhim, Baer, and RSR Hirsch, and others all published Siddurim and/or
Machachazorim.  There is even diversity in yekke land.

Aslo See Artscrol on Yamim Norai' re: l'eila 'eila vs le'ila Ul'eila.
Dikduk seesm to dicatate no OO  sound. OTOH the Mahayil's own writings
support this read. The roedlehim takes the literal read of the Mharyl OVER
the dikduk based revision.  This revision is strongly suported by BOTH
Mishna Brura and Birnbaum [a strange set of fellows indeed!] byut not by the
old source texts.


In most American Congregations, there is no consistent shita, so changes go
in willy-nilly.[FWIW I don't see Artscroll as 100% consistent either thought
they USUALLY follow Rema in the text.}  E.G. A congregation in Teaneck
LOOSELY follows the GRA and RYD but is clearly inconsistent. During my first
Shabbos in this shul: I asked the Rabbi
Q: "How come yo skip Baruch hashem l'olam in Arbis of weekdays but say
v'shamru on Shabbas!"
A:  "What do you want from me? I came to this shul with this and I am stuck
with these minhaggim."


The idea of Hasima imho is a popular but false myth.  There is a period of
diversity and debate and the dialetic gets resolved.  E.G. Tefillin deRashi
vs. Derabbeinu Tam.  After the issue is settled a precedent is set,
regardless of hasimas hatalmud etc.  Differing Halachic precedents get set
at different times.

Later on, revisionists come in and "stir the pot". E.G. The matter of Baruch
Hsheim L'olam in Arbis.  The Ga'onim added it and Ashkenazim did for
600-900  years w/o much debate. Only later on did it become problematic.
[FWIW the Gra did not prohibit this he jsut personalyl moitted it whilst his
Minyan recited it. see Ma'sev harav iirc.] Standing for Asseres hadibros is
another.  The original lminhag is quite cogent and it has bee nrevised, But
IMHO the revisions are a trade-off and while PERHAPS solving some problems
they arguably create an equal number of new ones [see the wonderful
sefer "Minhag
Avoseinu beyadeinu"

Kesiva vaChasima Tova
Best Wishes for 5768,
RabbiRichWolpoe at Gmail.com
Please Visit:
http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070921/f92d27ab/attachment.htm>