<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Micha Berger <<a href="mailto:micha@aishdas.org">micha@aishdas.org</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 02:24:28PM -0500, Richard Wolpoe wrote:<br>
: Tanegntially since minhag avos was throwrn out with regard to Baruch Hashem<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d">: l'olam and Tefilln on Hulo shel Moed, why bother keeping it with Kitniyyos?<br>
<br>
</div>I would argue that you're still conflating definitions of the word<br>
minhag. But either way...<br>
<br>
What outweighs minhag WRT qitniyos? Tefillin on chol hamo'ed violates<br>
an aggadic value,</blockquote><div><br>and is omitting a mitzva d'orraiso!<br><br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
if you base your agadic values on the Zohar,</blockquote><div><br>When did the Zohar become an authoritative text in Ashkenaz! <br><br><br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
and not<br>
saying Barukh H' leOlam is in contrast to the textual sources.</blockquote><div><br>Aderabba! going from Shomer amo yisorle lo'ad to Amidah inwith an intervening Kaddish is hefsek betwen G'ula to Tefilah. But since Barcuh Hashem is aquasi Tefillah there IS not kaddish that is mafsik Sources actually support either<br>
<br>Straight ot Amidah<br>OR<br>Saying Baruc hshem in lieu of Amidah<br><br>Textual sources are against wht SEpharad/Ari/Gra do as a hefsek beteen g'ulah litfilahh<br><br>Rabbi Yohcan exmpts hashem Sefasai tiftach as an exception. The Gmeram makes NOT exmption for kaddish which is JSUT as Ga'onic AS Baruch hashem l'olam anyway<br>
<br>.<br><br><br><br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Qitniyos<br>
violates what? Simchas Yom Tov?</blockquote><div><br>Minhag Ta'us.. Vilates nothing buit if minahg avos is dsiposable why keep a minhag Ta'us? se Beis Ysoef! <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
...<br>
: At least for the most part [excpet probably for the innovation of dancing<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d">: on Simchas Torah] Yekkes are pretty consistent.<br>
<br>
</div>Only because they share your weighting of minhag avos over nearly everything<br>
else. Although RSRH was known for establishing new minhagim.</blockquote><div><br><br>Sources please?!Aside from madding Choir what minhag did he innovate? Klugman said he REFUSED to tinker with piyytim and he DEFEINTELY said Baruch Hshem L"olam etc.<br>
<br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> I think because<br>
of the aggadic value factor, that will be true for any founder of an Ism.</blockquote><div><br>Aggadic values place a high priority on al tiosh Toras imecha [2 sugyas in shas with Rabbi Yochanan that go undisputed!]<br> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><font color="#888888"><br><br></font><font color="#888888">
--</font></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br><a href="mailto:RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com">RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com</a><br>see: <a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a>