[Avodah] 10th of Teves on Shabbos
S Ismach
sismach at gmail.com
Sun Jan 11 18:18:21 PST 2009
Message: 13
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 15:09:36 -0500
From: "Richard Wolpoe" <rabbirichwolpoe at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Avodah] 10 B'Teves on Shabbos
To: "A High-Level Torah Discussion Group" <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Cc: Wolpoe Wolpoe <nishmarrw at gmail.com>
Message-ID:
<f6b170190901111209m372be448yc6ac4389689bccd3 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Danny Schoemann <doniels at gmail.com> wrote:
> In response to one of my Halocho-a-day posts kitzur.com/7zq2
> (
> http://halocho.blogspot.com/2009/01/halocho-244-fasting-on-shabbat-is.html
> )
> people keep on writing in informing me that if 10 B'Teves were to
> [theoretically] fall on Shabbos, we would fast.
>
> Over the years I've heard this from various people.
>
> Where does this Halocho come from? The SA in OC 550:3 says "if these 4
> fasts fall on Shabbos that are deferred to Sunday."
>
> Thanks
>
> - Danny
This is no misunderstanding.
The Avudraham clearly held that would Asara b'Teves fall on Shabbos we WOULD
fast. He compares it to Yom Kippur which we fast on Shabbos because the Navi
(Yechezkel) is told "b'etzem hayom hazeh" which is the very phrase that
stresses the importance of the tenth of Tishrei for YK not allowing it to be
pushed.
The Bies Yosef presents Rashi and Rambam who explicitly disagree and state
that it would be nidche to Sunday like 17 of Tamuz and Tisha b'Av. This is
how the Shulchan Aruch paskens, mentioning that we push the FOUR fasts if
they fall on Shabbos. (The Magen Avraham acknowledges that "FOUR" is lav
davka because the 10th of Teves can never fall on Shabbos.
There is much discussion about why (acc. to Avud.) this fact would be
different and would push away concerns of Oneg Shabbos. (See Ohr Sameach on
Rambam Taanis perek 5 and Chidushei Hagrach on maseches RH).
The shut Shoel uMeishiv 3:179 suggests that in a way, Asarah b'Teves was the
most significant of fast because it represented the beginning of
the siege and thus the "haschalas hapuranios".
S. Ismach
> ____
I think this is another perfect mis-understanding. This is the ONE fast of
the four that falls pn FRIDAY and we fast anyway.
Plus we DO fast fast kabbals Shabbos until tzeis even though this is no
slam-dunk.
So these factors - IMHO - cauesd a a perfect mis-understanding leading
people to BELIEVE that if it DID fall on Shabbos we would fast. But had they
consuled SNOPES.COM as you did it is ibviously false - a pashut Kal vachomer
from tisha b'av.
--
Kol Tuv - Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe at Gmail.com
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 3:13 PM, <avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org> wrote:
> Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
> avodah at 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 at lists.aishdas.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> avodah-owner at lists.aishdas.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. slippery slope (Eli Turkel)
> 2. Psak Computer (Rich, Joel)
> 3. Re: [Areivim] Efrat's rabbi: Same-sex couple can raise a
> family (Harry Maryles)
> 4. yosef and the 10 Martyrs, ahavat yisroel (Eli Turkel)
> 5. Halacha: How to prepare if you are going to be drafted on
> Shabbat (Shoshana L. Boublil)
> 6. Chabad on Arba Minim (Baal Tosef?) (Harvey Benton)
> 7. 7MBNoach: Stricter or Less-Strict? (Harvey Benton)
> 8. Re: Chabad on Arba Minim (Baal Tosef?) (Zev Sero)
> 9. Re: 7MBNoach: Stricter or Less-Strict? (Zev Sero)
> 10. Re: 7MBNoach: Stricter or Less-Strict? (Allan Engel)
> 11. 10 B'Teves on Shabbos (Danny Schoemann)
> 12. Re: 10 B'Teves on Shabbos (Zev Sero)
> 13. Re: 10 B'Teves on Shabbos (Richard Wolpoe)
> 14. Torah Geography & Dream Brachos (Gilad Field)
> 15. answering Amen to various brachot (Shlomo Pick)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:31:51 +0200
> From: "Eli Turkel" <eliturkel at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Avodah] slippery slope
> To: avodah <avodah at aishdas.org>
> Message-ID:
> <471ff3f40901090231p5eedb82csa5c4ef740369123d at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> <<However, the KY is clear that it is appropriate for a poseiq to not only
> take into account the halachic merits of an issue, but also the question
> of where it would lead. It's not always dismissable as "politics".>>
>
> Agreed that a posek can take a larger view of the question. However, the
> result is that different poskim from different communities come up
> with different answers
> i.e was is an appropriate psak for meah shearim is not for Raanana
> (where I live) or
> for NewYork.
> Thus a woman reading a ketuba might be inappropriate in communities
> where women do not
> appear in public but is perfectly legitimate in a community where
> women frequently
> give public speeches in many different forums.
> This of course leads to the existence of "many torot" which lo
> titgogedu was supposed to
> eliminate.
>
> BTW we once had a discussion of a automatic psak computer. Such a
> computer of course could
> not account for such extra-halachic issues
>
> --
> Eli Turkel
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 08:54:56 -0500
> From: "Rich, Joel" <JRich at sibson.com>
> Subject: [Avodah] Psak Computer
> To: "A High-Level Torah Discussion Group" <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 7F5EC37AC45DE64DB56C8AD3D409C2B205601CCD at NYCEXCL01.segal.segalco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
>
>
> BTW we once had a discussion of a automatic psak computer. Such a
> computer of course could not account for such extra-halachic issues
>
> --
> Eli Turkel
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
>
> I think I would disagree in theory in 99% of the cases- just need a
> bigger computer and better fuzzy logic/AI programmers and poskim who can
> detail how they reach a decision. Of course it's hard to detail how you
> would react to a black swan.
> 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.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 06:56:38 -0800 (PST)
> From: Harry Maryles <hmaryles at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] [Areivim] Efrat's rabbi: Same-sex couple can
> raise a family
> To: avodah at lists.aishdas.org
> Message-ID: <14535.92501.qm at web36701.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7"
>
> (This post is being redirected to Avodah at the request of the the
> list-owner. I had written a lengthy post about the propriety of? a
> homosexual couple - whether male or female - raising a child (via adoption
> of artifical insemination). In the course of trying to determine whether
> there is any justification for that, I made the?comment that there is no
> Issur of Yichud for two mlaes or two females sharing a bedroom. I received
> the following response which includes an excerpt from my original post. My
> reply follows - HM)
> ?
> --- On Wed, 1/7/09, Moshe Y. Gluck <mgluck at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> R' HM:
> I am not sure about that. But even if he's right there would have to be
> several conditions attached. The couple would have to commit to living a
> Halachic lifestyle. Admitting that they are attracted to members of the
> same sex
> is not a sin. Only acting on it is. And there is no sin in two males or two
> females living in the same house and sleeping in the same bedroom at night.
> -----------
>
> Not so (at least regarding males). See EH 24:1 and the Chelkas Mechokeik
> and
> Beis Shmuel there.
> Just looked at it. IIUC?both?Nosei Kelim you mention there say?that in the
> Mechaber's?country?prominscuity in MZ?was common and therefore people should
> distance themselves from Yichud - as The Mechaber states. But in their
> countries - which I assume means Europe - it is only a Midas Chasidus - a
> meritorious practice and not a requirement.
> =========================
> ?
> Just looked at it. IIUC?both?Nosei Kelim you mentioned? say?that in the?
> Mechaber's?country?- promiscuity in MZ?was common and therefore people
> should distance themselves from Yichud - as the Mechaber states. But in
> their countries - which I assume means Europe - it is only a Midas Chasidus
> - a meritorious practice and not a requirement.
> OTOH if they are single it is Assur?for them to sleep in the same bed
> together.
> ?
> I do not see this as definitive halacha forbidding two men sleeping in the
> same room. As the Mechaber points out at the very beginning of the Siman
> -?Jews (i.e. males in the context of this Halacha)?are not suspected of MZ
> so Yichud is not Assur for them.?One can possibly say that religious Jews
> are not suspected of MZ. IOW?even if they are gay - they will abstain.
> ?
> But I will admit that if two men are attracted sexually to each other then
> it is at least common sense not sleep in the same bedroom together. Ein
> Apitropus L'Arayos. But Halacha L?Maaseh? I?m not so sure.
>
> ?
> HM
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090109/b6bd8494/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:56:45 +0200
> From: "Eli Turkel" <eliturkel at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Avodah] yosef and the 10 Martyrs, ahavat yisroel
> To: avodah <avodah at aishdas.org>
> Message-ID:
> <471ff3f40901090256x70a884e3x706e0126a32f0de2 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> In a shiur I heard today from the rabbi of Yakir (in the Shomrom) he
> talked about
> Yosef and the importance of Ahavat Yisroel for everyone. He brought
> several issues
> which we have discussed in the past
>
> 1. In Otzar HaMedrashim (Bar Ilan CD)
> HKBH put in the mind of the Caeser to read Chumash and he came to
> kidnapping etc..
> leading to the connection of the 10 Martyrs to the sale of Yosef. ...
> Yishmael Cohen Gadol went to heaven and met Gavriel. Gavriel told him that
> he
> heard from behind the curtain that 10 sages will be killed by the
> Romans. R. Yishmael
> asked why and the angel Gavriel answered "Because of the sale of Yosef who
> was
> sold by his brothers, every day the "midat hadin" complains before the
> heavenly throne
> R. Yishmael asked hasn't G-d found anyone until now except for us? and
> Gavriel
> answered that HKBH has has not found a generation with 10 such righteous
> people
> like the sons of Yaakov and therefore HKBH punishes (poreah) from you
>
> 2. In a similar vein Medrash Esther Rabbah pasrha 7, DH ko haratzim ba
> states that since the 10 sons of Yaakov sold their brother while engaging
> in
> food and drink so G-d will repay them and so it says "The king and Haman
> sat to drink"
>
> 3. R. Kook in Orot 148 states that "ahavat yisroel is not just a good
> feeling (avodah hergershit)
> but also a major project (miktzoah gadol ba-torah) ... and it comes
> from the belief in G-d
> and especially when everything holy is being trampled ...
> We must love even the great sinner who has left the path of G-d
> (gam be-nefesh ha-nesogah me-od, asher sarah harbeh mi-derech hashem)
> " (end quote)
>
> To quote the famous phrase we pray that sins should end and not the sinners
> The brothers of Yosef sinned by not extending brotherly love to their
> brother and we
> must repay by stressing ahavat yisroel
>
> 4. The rabbi at the time of the expulsion from Gush Katif asked his
> congregation (Yakir)
> what would be their attitude if the US granted citizenship to all
> those in favor of
> the expulsion. Many answered they would be happy if they left EY for the
> USA.
> The rabbi explained that they were mistaken since we dont get to
> choose who is part
> of klal Yisroel. We need everyone in EY. We can disagree and fight for
> our beliefs but
> not at the expense of disowning part of Jewry.
> Hatred just leads to further hatred and eventually civil war.
>
>
> --
> Eli Turkel
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 21:29:56 +0200
> From: "Shoshana L. Boublil" <toramada at bezeqint.net>
> Subject: [Avodah] Halacha: How to prepare if you are going to be
> drafted on Shabbat
> To: <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID: <02af01c97359$d1e291e0$a27ba8c0 at VIDEO>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255"
>
> Lieutenant colonel Rabbi Eyal Krim published the instructions at:
>
> http://www.inn.co.il/News/News.aspx/183953
>
>
> Shoshana L. Boublil
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090110/88cf68e3/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:21:20 -0800 (PST)
> From: Harvey Benton <harveybenton at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [Avodah] Chabad on Arba Minim (Baal Tosef?)
> To: avodah <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID: <69269.74933.qm at web51710.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Chabad (and perhaps other Chasidim) have a custom of taking
> numerous Hadasim with their Lulavim.? I
> was wondering if this is Baal Tosef??
> Going further, would taking additional Etrogim (say 3) and/or Lulavim (5?)
> together with the Hadasim and Aravot be considered Baal Tosef??
>
> ?
>
> I asked someone, and he told me that taking additional units
> of the ?Arba Minim might not be a
> problem, but that taking for instance a non-Arba Minim fruit, like an
> apple,
> would be?.. HB
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090109/55361d38/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 16:00:43 -0800 (PST)
> From: Harvey Benton <harveybenton at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [Avodah] 7MBNoach: Stricter or Less-Strict?
> To: avodah <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID: <627510.86611.qm at web51705.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ?We recently had in the Chumash the episode (according to
> Chazal) of the Brother?s of Joseph arguing their status (Jew vs. non-Jew)
> regarding the issue of Ever Min Hachai.
>
> ?
>
> The Brothers held themselves to be Jews, and thus were able
> to eat of a still moving animal that had been killed for eating (more
> maikel)
> without violating AMHachai.? Joseph held
> that the Brothers were considered (pre-Siani?) as non Jews, and thus were
> bound
> by the more strict (machmir) law of the Sheva Mitzvos Bnei Noah (7MBN) in
> regard to the AMHachai halacha.
>
> ?
>
> But 1. We have the concept of Maalin Bakodesh ? and 2. Specifically
> with regards to Geirus, we say that if 2 sisters converted to Judaism,
> though
> they are technically permitted to the same husband in Judaism because of
> their
> new status, we don?t allow it, so that people should not say that the
> Sisters
> went from a higher standard (pre-Geirus) to a lower standard
> (post-Geirus).? It appears from this, that we hold Judaism to
> be of a higher standard in strictness than the 7MBN.
>
> ?
>
> Here we have 2 cases at apparent odds: 1. Aver Min Hachai
> where Judasim is LESS strict than the 7MBNoach. ?and ?2.
> the inyan mentioned (re the 2 sisters) where we don?t want people to say
> they
> went to a lower standard after converting.?
> This means we hold Judaism to be MORE strict than the 7MBN.
>
> ?
>
> I was always under the impression that Judaism is more strict
> in the laws that it has in common with the 7MBN??.? For instance belief in
> shitfus is ok for a
> non-Jew, but not for Jews.
>
> ?
>
> Is the EMHachai Halacha just an exception?? Are there other
> exceptions??? Kol Tuv, HB
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090109/dd7f18ec/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 19:09:33 -0500
> From: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Chabad on Arba Minim (Baal Tosef?)
> To: harveybenton at yahoo.com, A High-Level Torah Discussion Group
> <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID: <496938BD.4050009 at sero.name>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> Harvey Benton wrote:
>
> > Chabad (and perhaps other Chasidim) have a custom of taking numerous
> > Hadasim with their Lulavim.
>
> Not just chassidim. The rishonim quote customs of taking 68 (gematria
> lulav), 69 (gematria hadas), or 70 (like the parei hachag). The Tur
> quotes Rav Amram as saying that the custom in his yeshivah was to take
> no fewer than 68 hadassim, and some took up to 70.
>
>
> > I was wondering if this is Baal Tosef?
> > Going further, would taking additional Etrogim (say 3) and/or Lulavim
> > (5?) together with the Hadasim and Aravot be considered Baal Tosef?
> >
> > I asked someone, and he told me that taking additional units of the
> > Arba Minim might not be a problem, but that taking for instance a
> > non-Arba Minim fruit, like an apple, would be?.. HB
>
>
> This is an open SA, OC 651:14-15. Adding an extra species is bal tosif.
> Adding an extra lulav or etrog may or may not be bal tosif, but it's not
> allowed. But one may add as many hadassim and aravot as one wishes.
>
> The Rambam (Lulav 7:7) encourages adding to the hadassim but rules that
> one may not add to the aravot, but he later changed his mind and allowed
> extra aravot as well. The Rosh suggested that the Rambam changed his
> mind completely and allowed extra lulavim and etrogim as well, at least
> to the extent that if one did add a lulav or etrog it would not be pasul,
> but almost all poskim disagree with this, and hold that the Rambam only
> changed his mind about aravot, and that an extra lulav or etrog is still
> forbidden (see, e.g., Bach).
>
>
> --
> Zev Sero May the light of Chanukah
> zev at sero.name brighten your life
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 19:17:18 -0500
> From: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] 7MBNoach: Stricter or Less-Strict?
> To: harveybenton at yahoo.com, A High-Level Torah Discussion Group
> <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID: <49693A8E.4070106 at sero.name>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> Harvey Benton wrote:
>
> > But 1. We have the concept of Maalin Bakodesh ? and 2. Specifically with
> > regards to Geirus, we say that if 2 sisters converted to Judaism, though
> > they are technically permitted to the same husband in Judaism because of
> > their new status, we don?t allow it, so that people should not say that
> > the Sisters went from a higher standard (pre-Geirus) to a lower standard
> > (post-Geirus). It appears from this, that we hold Judaism to be of a
> > higher standard in strictness than the 7MBN.
>
> On the contrary. The basic halacha is that this is permitted; but in
> order to prevent the *perception* that they have gone down in kedusha,
> the rabbanan forbade it. Without this later takanah, it would still
> be permitted. In this and a few other instances, where the difference
> was glaring, the chachamim legislated to close the loophole; but they
> didn't do so in all instances, and the default is that there are many
> details in which the 7 mitzvot are stricter than the 613.
>
>
> --
> Zev Sero May the light of Chanukah
> zev at sero.name brighten your life
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 00:41:46 +0000
> From: "Allan Engel" <allan.engel at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] 7MBNoach: Stricter or Less-Strict?
> To: harveybenton at yahoo.com, "A High-Level Torah Discussion Group"
> <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID:
> <f8f425560901101641n6730faa1kc3e21bc8ebe1413 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> There is an opinion that under certain circumstances, abortion would be
> muttar for Jews but not for non-Jews. The Mishna in Oholos that regards the
> mother's life as paramount over the unborn child applies only to Jews.
>
>
> ADE
>
> 2009/1/10 Harvey Benton <harveybenton at yahoo.com>
>
> > We recently had in the Chumash the episode (according to Chazal) of
> the
> > Brother's of Joseph arguing their status (Jew vs. non-Jew) regarding the
> > issue of Ever Min Hachai.
> >
> >
> >
> > The Brothers held themselves to be Jews, and thus were able to eat of a
> > still moving animal that had been killed for eating (more maikel) without
> > violating AMHachai. Joseph held that the Brothers were considered
> > (pre-Siani?) as non Jews, and thus were bound by the more strict
> (machmir)
> > law of the Sheva Mitzvos Bnei Noah (7MBN) in regard to the AMHachai
> halacha.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > But 1. We have the concept of Maalin Bakodesh ? and 2. Specifically with
> > regards to Geirus, we say that if 2 sisters converted to Judaism, though
> > they are technically permitted to the same husband in Judaism because of
> > their new status, we don't allow it, so that people should not say that
> the
> > Sisters went from a higher standard (pre-Geirus) to a lower standard
> > (post-Geirus). It appears from this, that we hold Judaism to be of a
> > higher standard in strictness than the 7MBN.
> >
> >
> >
> > Here we have 2 cases at apparent odds: 1. Aver Min Hachai where Judasim
> is
> > LESS strict than the 7MBNoach. and 2. the inyan mentioned (re the 2
> > sisters) where we don't want people to say they went to a lower standard
> > after converting. This means we hold Judaism to be MORE strict than the
> > 7MBN.
> >
> >
> >
> > I was always under the impression that Judaism is more strict in the laws
> > that it has in common with the 7MBN??. For instance belief in shitfus is
> > ok for a non-Jew, but not for Jews.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Avodah mailing list
> > Avodah at lists.aishdas.org
> > http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
> >
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090111/1e457fa1/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 11:59:00 +0200
> From: "Danny Schoemann" <doniels at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Avodah] 10 B'Teves on Shabbos
> To: avodah <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID:
> <856f95d70901110159t4eece56cx28e10af2f7db0721 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> In response to one of my Halocho-a-day posts kitzur.com/7zq2
> (
> http://halocho.blogspot.com/2009/01/halocho-244-fasting-on-shabbat-is.html
> )
> people keep on writing in informing me that if 10 B'Teves were to
> [theoretically] fall on Shabbos, we would fast.
>
> Over the years I've heard this from various people.
>
> Where does this Halocho come from? The SA in OC 550:3 says "if these 4
> fasts fall on Shabbos that are deferred to Sunday."
>
> Thanks
>
> - Danny
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 14:28:13 -0500
> From: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] 10 B'Teves on Shabbos
> To: A High-Level Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Message-ID: <496A484D.9030202 at sero.name>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Danny Schoemann wrote:
> > In response to one of my Halocho-a-day posts kitzur.com/7zq2
> > (
> http://halocho.blogspot.com/2009/01/halocho-244-fasting-on-shabbat-is.html
> )
> > people keep on writing in informing me that if 10 B'Teves were to
> > [theoretically] fall on Shabbos, we would fast.
> >
> > Over the years I've heard this from various people.
> >
> > Where does this Halocho come from?
>
> The BY brings this in the name of the Avudraham, ultimately based on the
> pasuk "be'etzem hayom hazeh".
>
> Since it's only a hypothetical, I don't think it counts as a psak din,
> and I speculate that if it were a practical question that needed a psak
> then the halacha would be paskened otherwise. It seems to me that if
> this had been actually practised when there was kidush hachodesh al pi
> hare'iyah, then there would have been some mention of it in the gemara.
> The fact that the earliest mention of this idea is in the geonim tells
> me that they were engaging in harmless speculation, not rigorous psak.
> If kidush hachodesh is renewed before Moshiach comes then the BD that
> does so can also pasken this question; and once Moshiach comes it will
> become a yomtov anyway, so it will be just like any yomtov that falls
> on Shabbos.
>
>
> > The SA in OC 550:3 says "if these 4
> > fasts fall on Shabbos that are deferred to Sunday."
>
> That refers only to the three that can fall on Shabbos; since this one
> can't, there's no need for the SA to address the case.
>
> --
> Zev Sero A mathemetician is a device for turning coffee
> zev at sero.name into theorems. - Paul Erdos
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 15:09:36 -0500
> From: "Richard Wolpoe" <rabbirichwolpoe at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] 10 B'Teves on Shabbos
> To: "A High-Level Torah Discussion Group" <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Cc: Wolpoe Wolpoe <nishmarrw at gmail.com>
> Message-ID:
> <f6b170190901111209m372be448yc6ac4389689bccd3 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Danny Schoemann <doniels at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > In response to one of my Halocho-a-day posts kitzur.com/7zq2
> > (
> >
> http://halocho.blogspot.com/2009/01/halocho-244-fasting-on-shabbat-is.html
> > )
> > people keep on writing in informing me that if 10 B'Teves were to
> > [theoretically] fall on Shabbos, we would fast.
> >
> > Over the years I've heard this from various people.
> >
> > Where does this Halocho come from? The SA in OC 550:3 says "if these 4
> > fasts fall on Shabbos that are deferred to Sunday."
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > - Danny
> > ____
>
>
> I think this is another perfect mis-understanding. This is the ONE fast of
> the four that falls pn FRIDAY and we fast anyway.
>
> Plus we DO fast fast kabbals Shabbos until tzeis even though this is no
> slam-dunk.
>
> So these factors - IMHO - cauesd a a perfect mis-understanding leading
> people to BELIEVE that if it DID fall on Shabbos we would fast. But had
> they
> consuled SNOPES.COM as you did it is ibviously false - a pashut Kal
> vachomer
> from tisha b'av.
>
> --
> Kol Tuv - Best Regards,
> RabbiRichWolpoe at Gmail.com
> see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090111/01e41ca3/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 16:38:02 +0200
> From: "Gilad Field" <gilad73 at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Avodah] Torah Geography & Dream Brachos
> To: avodah at lists.aishdas.org
> Message-ID:
> <abe5e7ba0901110638y72db6122yef8193ef6cd9d7a2 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> 2 unrelated questions:
>
> 1) The Gemara, in Bava Basra 25b (it is also in the first perek of
> Gittin), wants to prove that Bavel is north of EY by quoting a Pasuk
> in Yermiyahu. Why should we need a pasuk to teach us geography? This
> seems a bit strange to me. Anyone have any thoughts on that?
>
> 2) I saw in Sha'arim Metzuyanim B'Halacha (on KSA 50:3) where he
> quotes from the Pri HaSadeh (anyone know who he is?) Who says that if
> someone makes a bracha in a dream (because he dreamt he was drinking
> water) and he wakes up thirsty he needs to make "another" bracha. He
> gives 2 reasons for this: 1) He wasn't a bar chiyuva while he was
> sleeping, and 2) the water was not considered "l'fanav" (in front of
> him) in that bracha.
> I don't have access to the full teshuva - but the whole question
> sounds very odd to me. what would even be the hava amina that a
> bracha in a dream could apply to real life?
>
> If anyone has any insight - i would be grateful.
>
> Thanks,
> gilad field
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 16:52:44 +0200
> From: Shlomo Pick <picksh at mail.biu.ac.il>
> Subject: [Avodah] answering Amen to various brachot
> To: avodah at lists.aishdas.org
> Message-ID: <0KDB00MOYANTJQ90 at mxout1.netvision.net.il>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> In an Areivim post concerning the issue of answering Amen I wrote the
> following:
>
>
>
> >I remember hearing from m"vr HaRav Herschel Schachter that answering
>
> >Amen to a bracha is not only an agreement to the bracha itself, but how
>
> >it came about. He then criticized those chuppot where there are
>
> >talmidei chachamim present but the honors go to the chasan's friend,
>
> >cousin, etc. Under those circumstances, I remember Rav Schachter
>
> >saying that one should not answer amen to the brachot, nay, it was
>
> >forbidden to answer Amen, for the bracha came about in a manner that
>
> >was mezalzel betalmidei chachamim.
>
> >I have seen this take place, and with Talmidei chachamim amiteeyim,
>
> >they were never phased by this, as their very essence is humility. And
>
> >thus the zilzul has been increased.
>
> >Bebirchot hatorah
>
> >Shlomo Pick
>
>
>
> To this I received the following response and which was also posted in
> areivim:
>
> >I lived in Elizabeth, NJ from 1968 to 1974. Rav Teitz regularly came on
> Sunday mornings to daven in the Bais Yitzchok shul on Bellevue Street. (For
> those who do not know much about Elizabeth, Rav P. M Teitz, ZT"L, was THE
> rov of the city. He was the rov of the 4 Orthodox shuls in Elizabeth. See
> http://tinyurl.com/63gryd for more about Rav Teitz and his amazing
> accomplishments in building Orthodoxy in Elizabeth, NJ.)
>
>
>
> >One Sunday morning an obviously Sefardi fellow whom I had never seen
> before
> was davening for the Amud. After a moment or two Rav Teitz stopped him and
> said, "You can pronounce any word the way you want except for HaShem's
> name.
> You cannot say A--nai (that is, pronouncing a kamatz as if it were a pasach
> as some Sefardim do.). You must say A--noi (pronouncing the kamatz with an
> Ashkenaz pronunciation.) Your pronunciation is Chol for us and we cannot
> answer Amen.
>
>
>
> >Since then I am often in doubt when some Israelis or a "real" Sefardi
> daven
> for the Amud. Should I answer Amen or not? Usually I do not answer Amen.
>
>
>
> >Not so long ago the fellow who davened Maariv in a shul not far from me
> used the Sefardic pronunciation of HaShem's name. I brought this to the
> attention of the Rov, and he said he would look into it. I told him the
> story about Rav Teitz. He has yet to get back to me.
>
>
>
> My answer to this was: "sufficiently Torah related to warrant the extra
> attention and wider audience of Avodah." And so I am presenting it here:
>
>
>
> When Rav Teitz was the rav of Elizabeth, and I presume that then most of
> the
> minyanim and pronunciation was ashkenzis, as was in the 50s, 60s and
> perhaps
> early 70s. Nonetheless, there are teshuvot from rav kook zt"l Orach
> Mishpat, no. 16,17; Seridei Eish 1:6; ziz Eliezer 7:28 dealing with the
> issues with the Seridei Esh being most lenient (however cf. igrot moshe,
> orach chayim 3:5, 4:23 and then 4:65 which tends to be more lenient). See
> also Har Zvi, I, no. 4 that the only issue seems to be the name of G-d
> (Adnus, noi at the end or nai).
>
>
>
> However, nowadays, when one is brought up with Sephardic pronunciation of
> Hebrew both in the states or in Israel, I have heard of no one who has
> called their pronunciation into question.
>
>
>
> In my minyan here in bnei brak, where rav chayim kanyevski's son is the
> Rav,
> harav Shlomo Kanyevski, rosh yeshiva of tiferet zion and kiryat melekh, one
> prefers that the chazzan daven with an ashkenazic pronunciation, but no one
> has held it to be meakev. Moreover, all the Sephardim, teimain, etc who
> join us in our minyan pronounce their berachot in their native nusach, and
> we all answer amen to their berachot. On the contrary, it would probably
> be
> forbidden not to answer amen. We includes two grandsons of rav Elyashiv,
> the above mentioned rav shlomo kanyevski and his cousin the mot"z rav
> avraham zvi yisraelson. So it would be pretty clear that one should answer
> amen to any bracha made by a sephardi Yemenite or someone brought up with a
> Sephardic pronunciation.
>
>
>
> I will add, that many gedolim here hold and actually practice that for
> parshat zachor, one should hear other readings by those who have ancient
> traditions such as Yemenite.
>
>
>
> Like I said, eretz yisrael is more chareidish and chenyukish than chul, and
> I have yet to see someone not duchan or get an aliya because of Sephardic
> pronunciation or anyone would not answer Amen. The most chassidish satmer
> or chanyakish man will daven with a sefardi chazzan at the kotel.
>
>
>
> Elsewhere, from Jerusalem to bnei brak, to nyc and most other towns outside
> of NYC, I have not seen such kepeida in the past 20 years, and consequently
> one should answer amen to those brachot and not separate himself from the
> zibbur.
>
>
>
> The only place where one must be scrupulous (contrary to the chumra
> mentioned above) is in parashat Zachor which is the only kriya that is
> d'oraita (and maybe parashat para according to tosophot) that one should
> hear in his native pronunciation (and then if possible to hear it in
> Yemenite, adenite, gerbanite, Iranian, etc). [see Mikrai Kodesh by Rav Zvi
> Pesach Frank, purim, p. 88 for the stringency of Zachor, and then p. 97 for
> megillah reading and notes there].
>
>
>
> In most of the stringent rulings, the question was should one change his
> pronunciation, and those answers said no, but no one said that if he did
> change you could not answer his bracha.
>
>
>
> Rav teitz's ruling seems to be a da'at yachid only applicable to Elizabeth
>
> (then?) and it would appear that what rav teitz did appears to be
> applicable
> ONLY to his own town, just as he had the authority to prohibit meat that
> did
> not his have approval to be sold there. Nonetheless, I am not so sure
> other
> posekim would hold of his pesak. Since I know that most rabbanim may not
> care to oppose a legitimate mesorah of pronouncing hashem's name of adnus,
> I
> doubt that most or even any of them would agree with this pesak (cf eg
> Igerot moshe, even haezer, 4:108 at the end).
>
>
>
> In any case, I would be interested if :
>
>
>
> 1) there are really other posekim who say not to answer amen to a
>
> different pronunciation?
>
>
>
> 2) What is the actual practice today throughout the world, especially
>
> the yeshivashe world? Are they machmir on the accepted practice of what the
> Olam of all colors, creed, race, and eidah, does at the Kotel?
>
>
>
> Bebirchot haTorah
>
>
>
> Shlomo Pick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090111/93a2ad21/attachment.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avodah at lists.aishdas.org
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>
>
> End of Avodah Digest, Vol 26, Issue 7
> *************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090111/12be98d2/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Avodah
mailing list