<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 5:35 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;">
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
<br>
</div>I also feel he shoehorned things that didn't really match, which is why<br>
I will open with a request that one of RYBS's chassidim field this one.<br>
<br>
But obviously he didn't give a shiur on the subject without lengthy<br>
background. Rashei peraqim: RYBS defines aveilus as only coming in three<br>
flavors: </blockquote><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><ol><li>shiv'ah,</li><li>sheloshim,</li><li>ad shanah. </li>
</ol></blockquote><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">And thus, miqtzas aveilus would<br>
be a term for the least level. Same as his model for the differences<br>
between bein hametzarim, the 9 days, and 9 beAv itself.<br>
<br>
Tir'u baTov!<br>
-Micha<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
--</font></blockquote></div><br>Prolbme with is a MINHAG not halachah. As such waht was acceptecd IS wahgt was accepted. Such shoehorning is imposing a structure that does not belong.<br><br>The accepatnce as a MINHAG is a flavor of NEDER. In fact when you surrender a MINHAG you need hattaras nedarim. In the land of neder the historical fact of WHAT neder was taken trumps any sevara of what that neder of aveilus SHOULD have looked like.<br>
<br><br><br>It's like saying If I make a private pre-nup with my wife it MUST conform to structures and stricutres in maseches kesusbbos. this is IMHO a silly imposition<br><br>Not to mention that most of the stictures in elu megalchin are cconstrued by ashkenazim as local minhag to begin with! When's the last time you have seen one bare their shoulder doing aveilus! <br>
<br>And on this matter both Tur and Kitzur echo the same model despite about 550 years between them! <br clear="all"><br>It's nice for the Rav to define ONLY 3 options from a menu but WAS ANY Rishon or Acharon aware of this stricture?<br>
<br><br>Frankly I do NOT buy the entire methodology of coming up with a brand new structure and super-imposing it retroactively OTOH if fyou have early sources to at least demonstrate that it USEd to be that way once upon a time that is different.<br>
<br>For example See Doniel Godlschmidt on mah nistana showing most rishonim saw this as the leader's part NOT the kid's questions. it is to be said ONLY the in basence of a question from a child. That is restoring a structure leyashno.<br>
<br>I fail to see the Rav doing that here. If he is, plz show me the sources. [At least wtih 2 matzos instead of 3 that CAN be shown to be the Rif/Rambam model] <br>-- <br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br>RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com<br>
see: <a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a>