[Avodah] Tzitzit tucked in
Isaac Balbin
isaac at balb.in
Thu Feb 14 19:02:44 PST 2013
RZS stated in response to RLP
LP: In general, we say one should tuck in their Tzitzit in a cemetery to
not upset the dead, who no longer have the ability to do mitzvot. Would
this also apply at maarat hamachpela?
ZS: In Me`arat Hamachpela does one ever come within four amot of a grave?
On this basis, would we not see all Cohanim with their Tzitzis dangling
out, as opposed to the Amcho who have them in? I (as a Cohen) have never
seen it, and always tuck mine in just before I walk through the entrance of
the Beis HaChaim.
Similarly, a Cohen would technically not need to wash their hands netilas
yodayim as they walked out of a Beis HaChaim, but I see all Cohanim do that
anyway, and I recall Achronim saying that it's better that they do so.
Although one might technically argue that there are loopholes, such as
Daled Amos, I think that the notion of Al Tifrosh Min HaTzibur, and even
more importantly, making sure that these minhagim are ingrained into every
type of person who comes to a Beis HaChaim, should imply that it is
definitely a proper hanhogo to put your Tzitzis inside. Certainly, the
reasons for putting them out in the first place (as per the Mishna Brura)
don't make too much sense in a Beis HaChaim, but davka taking them out when
you leave a Beis HaChaim is making a statement, and in my opinion, a proper
statement. (I wear my Tzitzis out, as it turns out, in general). Of course
none of this applies to those who never do anyway (eg Sfardim)
PS. For this reason, I was also and remain against the set ups for a Levaya
where the Niftar is in a glass encased "outer" room so that the Cohanim can
sit with everyone else during the Hesped. Even not yet frum Cohanim, should
get used to the notion that they should not approach the Niftar, and having
the Cohanim in a glass encased outer room makes much more sense to me. This
used to be the case in Melbourne, until a recent renovation
On 15 February 2013 12:56, <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..."
>
>
> A list of common acronyms is available at at
> http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
> (They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Shiur of an Etzbah(finger) (Zev Sero)
> 2. Re: Re Hecksher question (saul newman)
> 3. Tzitzit tucked in (Liron Kopinsky)
> 4. Re: Tzitzit tucked in (Zev Sero)
> 5. Re: keri'ah and berikha (Elazar M. Teitz)
> 6. Re: Tzitzit tucked in (Micha Berger)
> 7. Re: Shiur of an Etzbah(finger) (Micha Berger)
> 8. Ghost Rabbis [in the sky] (Jonathan Baker)
> 9. Re: Ghost Rabbis [in the sky] (Zev Sero)
> 10. Mussaf After Minchah (Moshe Y. Gluck)
> 11. Re: Mussaf After Minchah (Micha Berger)
> 12. Re: Mussaf After Minchah (Zev Sero)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:09:45 -0500
> From: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
> To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Shiur of an Etzbah(finger)
> Message-ID: <511909B9.6060707 at sero.name>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> RYGB wrote back on 30-Nov-2001
> > <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol08/v08n063.shtml>:
> >> Minhag Yerushalayim, which
> >> is based on the Rambam's measure of an etzba, which in turn was based,
> >> IIRC, on the size of the Egyptian drachma.
>
> The Rambam gave the shiur of a revi'is as 27 dirhams, by which he
> presumably
> meant the Egyptian ones of his day. But the minhag Y'm, which RACN
> defended,
> was based on the Ottoman dirham, which was about 15% bigger than the
> Egyptian
> one that the Rambam knew, and thus all their shiurim were actually bigger
> than the Rambam's, though they probably didn't realise it. The Rambam's
> etzba was thus approximately 19.1 mm rather than the 20 that RACN gives.
>
> --
> Zev Sero A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
> zev at sero.name substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
> exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
> the reason he needs.
> - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 08:02:12 -0800
> From: saul newman <saulnewman18@ gmail.com>
> To: martin brody <martinlbrody at gmail.com>
> Cc: avodah at aishdas.org
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Re Hecksher question
> Message-ID:
> <CAB5=
> LYiyarQ15iyABzGG0TbUHLUPDNh8bxKX0ffVn-wGX+11bg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="cp1255"
>
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 2:56 PM, martin brody <martinlbrody at gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >> "a NYC glatt restaurant with a hechsher 'we don't rely on' is
> having
> >> a special Valentines day meal service.
>
> > Tierra Sur at the Herzog Winery in Oxnard have in past had Valentines Day
> > dinners promoted as such.(And other non Jewish days such as New Years
> Eve,
> > Mother's Day etc)
> > Tierra Sur is supervised by the OU.
>
> not neccesarily , because that is a geographically isolated institution
> that probably has a sizable gentile clientele i would assume... of
> course xmas dinner wouldnt pass muster.. and even that was interesting
> question because on the Chowhound Kosher list last year someone asked
> about where he could take out a gentile friend for a kosher dinner
> appropriate for xmas....
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:13:45 +0200
> From: Liron Kopinsky <liron.kopinsky at gmail.com>
> To: A High-Level Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Subject: [Avodah] Tzitzit tucked in
> Message-ID:
> <
> CACR9KZANA9_3XrmYFNPv+EPL9kdbMVhx4mHZHeht7mPQdmZG-g at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> In general, we say one should tuck in their Tzitzit in a cemetery to not
> upset the dead, who no longer have the ability to do mitzvot. Would this
> also apply at maarat hamachpela?
>
> Kol tuv,
> Liron
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130211/975e1d17/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 13:15:35 -0500
> From: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
> To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Tzitzit tucked in
> Message-ID: <51193547.6080300 at sero.name>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 11/02/2013 9:13 AM, Liron Kopinsky wrote:
> > In general, we say one should tuck in their Tzitzit in a cemetery to not
> upset the dead, who no longer have the ability to do mitzvot. Would this
> also apply at maarat hamachpela?
>
> In Me`arat Hamachpela does one ever come within four amot of a grave?
>
> --
> Zev Sero A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
> zev at sero.name substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
> exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
> the reason he needs.
> - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 18:54:46 GMT
> From: "Elazar M. Teitz" <remt at juno.com>
> To: avodah-owner at lists.aishdas.org
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] keri'ah and berikha
> Message-ID: <20130211.135446.19840.0 at webmail14.vgs.untd.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="cp1255"
>
> RArie Folger asked:
> > The Midrash Rabba Bereishit 39:12 includes a discussion about bowing...
> > Rabbi Chiya Rabba her'a kheri'ah lifnei Rebbi venitrape; uvar Sissi her'a
> > verikha lifnei Rebbi venifsach velo nitrape.
>
> > Question: what was the likely nature of their injuries? Why was R'
> Sissi's
> > injury worse?
>
> Other than noting that both R. Chiya and Bar Sissi both became lame (the
> word "v'nifsach" was inadvertently omitted in the above quote in its
> description of what befell R. Chiya), I have no idea what the physical
> nature of the disabilities was. It is not clear that Bar Sissi's injury
> was worse; all the midrash states is that it wasn't healed, and according
> to the commentaries on the Midrash Rabba, the answer is in the g'mara.
>
> We know Bar Sissi better by his given name, Levi, rather than
> his patronymic. The m'farshim identify the incident in the midrash
> with that related in Ta'anis 25a, that Levi performed kidda in Rebbe's
> presence and was lamed. (The m'farshim equate kida -- digging one's toes
> into the ground and bending down to kiss the ground -- with b'richa.)
> The g'mara says that he was lamed because of a combination of two acts:
> the kidda, and for having been "matiach d'varim k'lapei Ma'ala." As the
> g'mara says, "Ha v'ha garmu lei." R. Chiya, on the other hand, did not
> warrant permanent injury, since all he did was a harmful physical act,
> and did not show disrespect k'lapei Ma'ala. .
>
> EMT
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:36:05 -0500
> From: Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org>
> To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Tzitzit tucked in
> Message-ID: <20130211223605.GB20752 at aishdas.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 04:13:45PM +0200, Liron Kopinsky wrote:
> : In general, we say one should tuck in their Tzitzit in a cemetery to not
> : upset the dead, who no longer have the ability to do mitzvot. Would this
> : also apply at maarat hamachpela?
>
> I assume your question is really about how to behave when within 4 amos
> of a niftar whose petirah preceded the giving of the mitzvah of tzitzis.
> Zev is probably right that this wouldn't come up in the real world. Maybe
> at Qever Rachel, one gets within 4 amos of the ground above her qever.
>
> I think that the missed opportunity to do a mitzvah in the here-and-now
> is there whether or not they had that mitzvah in their lifetimes. One
> could argue that it would be more accute, since the soul missed ever
> having a chance to do it. Or that it's less accute, like someone who
> was "blind from birth" not really knowing what they're missing. (Or
> "Flowers for Algernon".) But in either case, you are reminding them of
> your opportunity to do a mitzvah that they lack.
>
> Of course, WRT Qever Rachel, she would have been an einah metzuvah ve'osah
> even if we were speaking of a woman born after Matan Torah. But I think
> we would tuck in tzitzis when visiting a woman's qever even if she were
> not buried amongst man.
>
> Which brings us to a parallel case that could more readily come up:
> Is there any difference between tucking in tzitzis before Avraham, who
> could only have worn them as an eino metzuveh ve'osah, or doing so
> before the qever of a woman?
>
>
> Aside: I do not think the issue is as much upsetting the deceased as
> practicing one's empathy (midas rachamim, written here in English to be
> clear I don't mean "mercy"). We've discussed what meisim know of
> the events of this world beyond the environs of their qever. But do we
> think they really forget what mitzvos were between reminders? (Do they
> even experience time as we do? Relativity would have us believe that
> any time in shamayim would be different in kind than time welded to the
> space of olam hazah.)
>
> -Micha
>
> --
> Micha Berger "'When Adar enters, we increase our joy'
> micha at aishdas.org 'Joy is nothing but Torah.'
> http://www.aishdas.org 'And whoever does more, he is praiseworthy.'"
> Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 18:02:25 -0500
> From: Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org>
> To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Shiur of an Etzbah(finger)
> Message-ID: <20130211230225.GC20752 at aishdas.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 10:09:45AM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> > The Rambam gave the shiur of a revi'is as 27 dirhams, by which he
> presumably
> > meant the Egyptian ones of his day. But the minhag Y'm, which RACN
> defended,
> > was based on the Ottoman dirham, which was about 15% bigger than the
> Egyptian
> > one that the Rambam knew, and thus all their shiurim were actually bigger
> > than the Rambam's, though they probably didn't realise it. The Rambam's
> > etzba was thus approximately 19.1 mm rather than the 20 that RACN gives.
>
> Which, as I noted in the past, would make the 1,200 amos that the length
> of Chizqiyahu's Tunnel was given as on the inscription in shiloach
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siloam_Inscription>
> 1200 * 24 * 19.1 = 550 m
> The tunnel is actually 533m, but presumably 1,200 is rounded. This is
> an error of only 3%, perfectly normal if rounding to the nearest hundred
> (2 digit precision), and the closest possible hundreds to round to.
>
> Whereas, if we use RCN's measure, the tunnel's length would have been
> rounded down to 1,100 amos (528m, only 5m less -- <1% difference) rather
> than 1,200 (576m / 8%).
>
> IOW, based on the water tunnel, all of the common shitos for ammah are
> too long, but the Rambam's -- assuming you know that the Ottomans did
> let the dirham drift in size -- is plausible.
>
> I made a similar case based on distances between markings on Har haBayis
> that recur in multiples of 43.5 +/- 2mm, that imply a given ammah. Or
> a given ammah plus 1/2 etzba safety (Pesachim 86a). But that's only a
> 1.8 mm etzba (a shade above or less, depending on whether the marking
> reflect the extra half-etzba). And also only if the markings are really
> as old as Bayis Sheini.
>
> -Micha
>
> --
> Micha Berger "'When Adar enters, we increase our joy'
> micha at aishdas.org 'Joy is nothing but Torah.'
> http://www.aishdas.org 'And whoever does more, he is praiseworthy.'"
> Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 15:59:54 -0500 (EST)
> From: "Jonathan Baker" <jjbaker at panix.com>
> To: jjbaker at panix.com (Jonathan Baker)
> Cc: avodah at lists.aishdas.org, Jonathan Baker <jjbaker at panix.com>
> Subject: [Avodah] Ghost Rabbis [in the sky]
> Message-ID: <20130212205954.5CB9633C8C at panix2.panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> From: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
> > Subject: Re: [Avodah] Is Panentheism Heresy
> >
> > On 10/02/2013 10:33 PM, Lisa Liel wrote:
> > > On 2/8/2013 3:47 PM, Zev Sero wrote:
>
> > >> That's not metaphor, and it's not nevuah, it's a claim (true or
> > >> not) of an actual visitation by a neshomo, just like Rebbi used
> > >> to come home to make kiddush, or R Elozor br Shimon used
> > >> to pasken shaylos from the attic after his passing (which
> > >> you surely agree happened).
>
> > > Why surely? I'm not at all convinced that this happened literally.
>
> > Really? How can those two stories be read non-literally?
>
> Saying kiddish is already non-literal.
>
> How could Rebbi say kiddush for anyone, it's like a goy saying kiddush
> the dead are NIFTARIM, patur from mitzvos.
>
> Maybe Mrs Rebbi felt her husband's presence at lichtbenchen. In fact,
> that seems pretty likely, given that (according to Dan Rabinowitz,
> it's not the Gemara that says he made kiddush, it's the Sefer Chasidim.
> The Gemara just says that he visited the house on Shabbos. And he was
> invisible to the visiting neighbor. So already the kiddush story is a
> non-literal reading. R' Reuven Margulies apparently spends som time on
> "how can the dead make kiddush" in his edition of the Sefer Hasidim, #1129.
>
> http://seforim.blogspot.com/2006/11/ghosts-demons-golems-and-their.html
>
> --
> name: jon baker web: http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker
> address: jjbaker at panix.com blog: http://thanbook.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:15:12 -0500
> From: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
> To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Ghost Rabbis [in the sky]
> Message-ID: <511AF730.5010005 at sero.name>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 12/02/2013 3:59 PM, Jonathan Baker wrote:
> > From: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
> >> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Is Panentheism Heresy
> >>
> >> On 10/02/2013 10:33 PM, Lisa Liel wrote:
> >>> On 2/8/2013 3:47 PM, Zev Sero wrote:
> >
> >>>> That's not metaphor, and it's not nevuah, it's a claim (true or
> >>>> not) of an actual visitation by a neshomo, just like Rebbi used
> >>>> to come home to make kiddush, or R Elozor br Shimon used
> >>>> to pasken shaylos from the attic after his passing (which
> >>>> you surely agree happened).
> >
> >>> Why surely? I'm not at all convinced that this happened literally.
>
> >> Really? How can those two stories be read non-literally?
>
> > Saying kiddish is already non-literal.
> > How could Rebbi say kiddush for anyone, it's like a goy saying kiddush
> > the dead are NIFTARIM, patur from mitzvos.
>
> On the contrary, the Sefer Chassidim uses the fact that he was motzi them
> with kiddush to demonstrate that tzadikim bemisoson keruyim chayim, and
> therefore he was chayav in kiddush and could be motzi others.
>
>
> > Maybe Mrs Rebbi felt her husband's presence at lichtbenchen.
>
> That's not a possible reading of the gemara, let alone of the Sefer
> Chassidim. The gemara says that his return every Friday was the reason
> why he ordered that his light be kept lit, his table be set, and his bed
> be made, is that he would come home every Friday night. If he was just
> a feeling why would he need those things? And it's not just that his
> wife did these things out of sentiment, he specifically ordered it.
> Also, if it was just a feeling of his presence, why did the visits have
> to stop after they became known?
>
>
> > In fact, that seems pretty likely, given that
> > it's not the Gemara that says he made kiddush, it's the Sefer Chasidim.
>
> How does that make it likely? First of all, the Sefer Chassidim is not
> a source?! He didn't know what he was talking about?! Second, how does
> the version that's explicit in the gemara indicate that he wasn't really
> there?
>
> > The Gemara just says that he visited the house on Shabbos.
>
> Yes, and that for this reason he needed a light, a set table, and a made
> bed.
>
> > And he was invisible to the visiting neighbor.
>
> What are you talking about? The gemara says no such thing. Bepashtus,
> had the maid let her in, she would have seen him just as everyone else
> did, including the maid herself. And note that the maid said Rebbi was
> sitting, not just present, so he wasn't just a feeling.
>
>
> > So already the kiddush story is a
> > non-literal reading. R' Reuven Margulies apparently spends som time on
> > "how can the dead make kiddush" in his edition of the Sefer Hasidim,
> #1129.
>
> Not much time. It's footnote 9 on this page, and carries over to the next
> page. http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=41862&pgnum=475
> He just points out that RYhCh is going leshitaso that Rebbi was chayav
> bemitzvos, cites a Tosfos to explain how, in that case, he could be
> buried in shatnez tachrichim, and then asks a question from David Hamelech,
> who is "chai vekayom", and yet the gemara says that after his life was over
> he was patur min hamitzvos. That's the extent of the discussion.
>
> --
> Zev Sero A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
> zev at sero.name substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
> exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
> the reason he needs.
> - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 22:06:26 -0500
> From: "Moshe Y. Gluck" <mgluck at gmail.com>
> To: "The Avodah Torah Discussion Group" <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Subject: [Avodah] Mussaf After Minchah
> Message-ID: <00f101ce0997$1ee0e550$5ca2aff0$@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> As per the SA OC 286:4, someone who didn't daven Mussaf yet, and it's
> already past Minchah Ketanah, should daven Minchah first, and then daven
> Mussaf. Here's a question I've had a long time which I've never seen
> addressed. Someone who davens Nusach Ashkenaz says Shalom Rav at Minchah;
> here, where he says Minchah first, should he say Shalom Rav at Mussaf also?
>
> (My only thought on this is that the minhag - as codified in the siddur -
> seems to be that he should say Sim Shalom. My R'ayah L'davar is that I've
> never seen a siddur that brought an option to say Shalom Rav at Mussaf.)
>
>
>
> KT,
>
> MYG
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130212/5da75c4d/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:02:40 -0500
> From: Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org>
> To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Cc: jjbaker at panix.com
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Mussaf After Minchah
> Message-ID: <20130213110240.GA46540 at aishdas.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 10:06:26PM -0500, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
> : As per the SA OC 286:4, someone who didn't daven Mussaf yet, and it's
> : already past Minchah Ketanah, should daven Minchah first, and then daven
> : Mussaf. Here's a question I've had a long time which I've never seen
> : addressed. Someone who davens Nusach Ashkenaz says Shalom Rav at Minchah;
> : here, where he says Minchah first, should he say Shalom Rav at Mussaf
> also?
>
> According to the Rama OC 127:2 <http://j.mp/Z9S3KM>, Ashkenazim say
> Shalom Rav whenever we mention duchaning with "EvE"A borkheinu..." which
> is any time ra'ui for duchaning.
>
> My 2c: So really, the default would have been "Shalom Rav", which was
> nusach EY, and to accomodate those Ashk who came from Bavel, we use Sim
> Shalom when duchaning -- as it echoes Birkhas Kohahim.
>
> The Rama continues "Yeish maskhilim 'Sim Shalom'" for Shabbos Minchah
> because there is leining.
>
> RJJB writes on his blog at <
> http://thanbook.blogspot.com/2007/08/from-germany-to-poland-simshalomrav.html>
> that's it's an East European vs Germany
> thing:
>
> According to the notes in [Siddur Eizor Eliyahu], western Ashkenaz
> said Sim Shalom at Shabbat Mincha, while Poland said Shalom Rav at
> Mincha. To quote the Rema (R' Moshe Isserles, Cracow, 16th century)
> in Orach Chaim 127: "We are accustomed to say at Shacharit 'Sim
> Shalom', and also every time we say 'Elokeinu ...' [the priestly
> blessing]. Otherwise we say 'Shalom rav'. Some say at Shabbat mincha,
> 'Sim Shalom', because the paragraph includes 'in the light of Your
> Face you gave us...', which is the Torah, which is read on Shabbat
> afternoons."
>
> Old siddurim of the Western Rite have Sim Shalom, old siddurim of the
> Polish rite have Shalom rav. Testimony from students of the Gra tells
> us that he himself davened Nusach Poland, whatever the modern siddurim
> in his name say to do. The editors of EE thus brought both versions
> at Shabbat Mincha - one as Nusach Germany, one as Nusach Poland.
>
> Many machzorim have Sim Shalom for Shabbat Mincha on Rosh Hashanah/Yom
> Kippur. I wonder if this is included as a survival of "Old Ashkenaz"
> as we also say "Oseh hashalom" at the conclusion of the bracha ...
>
> See there, or maybe R' Jon (CC-ed) will reply with more info.
>
> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha
>
> --
> Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs,
> micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines.
> http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller
> Fax: (270) 514-1507
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:40:35 -0500
> From: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
> To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Mussaf After Minchah
> Message-ID: <511BDE23.5070704 at sero.name>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> On 12/02/2013 10:06 PM, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote:
> > As per the SA OC 286:4, someone who didn?t daven Mussaf yet, and it?s
> > already past Minchah Ketanah, should daven Minchah first, and then daven
> > Mussaf.
>
> You mean mincha gedola. (The yesh omrim says that if you don't have to
> daven mincha yet then it's optional, and the Rema says on that that after
> mincha ketana it's not optional even according to the yesh omrim.)
>
> > Here?s a question I?ve had a long time which I?ve never seen addressed.
> > Someone who davens Nusach Ashkenaz says Shalom Rav at Minchah; here,
> > where he says Minchah first, should he say Shalom Rav at Mussaf also?
>
> No, because there is still nesias kapayim at mussaf. (Even on Simchas
> Torah, when we don't actually duchen, we say nesias kapayim because it's
> the time for it, and if we had a cohen who had not yet made kiddush we
> could do it.)
>
>
> > (My only thought on this is that the minhag ? as codified in the siddur
> > ? seems to be that he should say Sim Shalom. My R?ayah L?davar is that
> > I?ve never seen a siddur that brought an option to say Shalom Rav at
> Mussaf.)
>
> That's not a proof, because the siddur isn't designed to cater for such
> unusual cases. For that matter, how many Ashkenazi siddurim for chu"l
> have you seen that have birchas kohanim in shacharis? And yet we do it
> on Simchas Torah.
>
> In fact I rarely see a bencher that has the brachos to say before the
> fourth bracha if you realise just at that moment that you forgot to say
> retzei or yaaleh veyavo. I suppose the reason most benchers omit them
> is that it's unusual to remember just at that moment, and once you've
> gone past "Hashem" in the fourth bracha it's too late, but still they
> should be there.
>
>
> --
> Zev Sero A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
> zev at sero.name substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
> exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
> the reason he needs.
> - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Avodah mailing list
> Avodah at lists.aishdas.org
> http://www.aishdas.org/avodah
> http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
>
>
> End of Avodah Digest, Vol 31, Issue 24
> **************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130215/5fd31dd4/attachment-0002.htm>
More information about the Avodah
mailing list