<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:v =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml"><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23569">
<STYLE>@font-face {
font-family: Cambria Math;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Calibri;
}
@page {mso-endnote-separator: url("cid:header.htm\@01CF43C0.0EC0EC60") es; mso-endnote-continuation-separator: url("cid:header.htm\@01CF43C0.0EC0EC60") ecs; }
@page WordSection1 {size: 612.0pt 792.0pt; margin: 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt; }
P.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
LI.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
P.MsoEndnoteText {
FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"; MARGIN-LEFT: 0cm; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0cm; mso-style-priority: 99; mso-style-link: "Endnote Text Char"; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
LI.MsoEndnoteText {
FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"; MARGIN-LEFT: 0cm; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0cm; mso-style-priority: 99; mso-style-link: "Endnote Text Char"; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
DIV.MsoEndnoteText {
FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"; MARGIN-LEFT: 0cm; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0cm; mso-style-priority: 99; mso-style-link: "Endnote Text Char"; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
A:visited {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline; mso-style-priority: 99
}
SPAN.EndnoteTextChar {
FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-style-priority: 99; mso-style-link: "Endnote Text"; mso-style-name: "Endnote Text Char"
}
SPAN.EmailStyle22 {
FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d; mso-style-type: personal-reply
}
.MsoChpDefault {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-style-type: export-only
}
DIV.WordSection1 {
page: WordSection1
}
</STYLE>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-GB link=blue bgColor=#ffffff vLink=purple>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Again, I apologize for the tardiness of my
reply. Life keeps getting in the way of the important things!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<P
style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-pagination: none"
dir=ltr class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">In our paper we
argue that for the <I>oleh’s</I> <I>berakha</I> not to be a <I>berakha
le-vatala</I>, the <I>oleh</I> and <I>ba’al korei</I> must both be obligated in
<I>keri’at haTorah</I> (Major Male) so that the <I>ma’aseh ha-mitsva
</I>(reading aloud) is transferred to the <I>oleh</I> who makes the
<I>berakha</I>. Thus, a blind man may receive an aliyya and make the
<I>berakha</I>, since he is obligated in <I>Keri’at haTorah</I> and the <I>ba’al
korei</I> can read for him and transfer the action to him. A women who is not
obligated, may not read for others. [We do reaffirm, however, that a woman and a
minor may read for themselves.] </SPAN></P>
<P
style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-pagination: none"
dir=ltr class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">Ms. Chana Luntz
correctly notes that if this analysis were correct a minor could not serve as a
<I>ba’al korei</I> for others. Yet, she testifies that in many sefardic
communities minors indeed <U>do</U> read for others. Over the past few
days, Dov and I have spoken to many Sefardic Rabbis who have confirmed that
this practice is indeed found in <U>some</U> sefardic communities, though it is
certainly a minority practice - not the general custom. Several of these
Sefardic Rabbis were adamant that such a practice is
forbidden.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P
style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-pagination: none"
dir=ltr class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">Indeed, the
analysis in our paper follows the lead of<I> Magen Avraham</I> (<I>O.H</I>.,
sec. 282, no. 6) and the overwhelming majority of <I>posekim</I> who rule that
neither a minor nor a woman can serve as <I>ba’alei keri’ah</I> for others. They
base their stance on the grounds that women are not obligated in <I>keri’at
ha-Torah</I>, while minors bear, at most, a lesser obligation than majors. As a
result, neither <I>shelihut</I> nor <I>shome’a ke-oneh</I> are effective
mechanisms to enable a woman or a minor <I>ba’al keri’ah </I>to be<I> motsi
</I>an <I>oleh</I>. In the paper we cite a list of more than 30 leading scholars
who completely prohibit a minor (and a woman, who is similarly not obligated)
from reading for others including the following <B>Sefardic Poskim</B>: R.
Hayyim Joseph David Azulai (Hida), <I>le-David Emet</I>, sec. 5, no. 27;
<I>Erekh ha-Shulhan</I>, <I>O.H. </I><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>sec. 139, <I>s.v. </I>“<I>Din
bet</I>”</SPAN><SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: HE">
and </SPAN><I><SPAN style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">O.H.</SPAN></I><SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">, sec. 282, no. 4; R. Jacob Hayyim Sofer,
<I>Kaf ha-Hayyim</I>, <I>O.H</I>., sec. 282, no. 2, n. 23 (as the view of the
majority of codifiers); R. Ovadiah Hadaya, <I>Resp. Yaskil Avdi</I>, VII,
<I>O.H.</I>, sec. 5 and VIII, <I>O.H.</I>, sec. 36; R. Matsli’ah Mazuz, <I>Resp.
Ish Matsli’ah</I>, I, <I>O.H.</I>,<I> </I>sec. 10 (as the view of the majority
of codifiers); R. Isaac Nissim (as the view of the majority of codifiers) cited
in R. Solomon Yaloz, <I>Resp. Asher le-Shlomo</I>, I, <I>O.H.</I>, sec. 3; R.
Mordechai Eliyahu cited in R. Shlomo Moshe Amar, <I>Resp. Sheima Shlomo</I>, IV,
sec. 5. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P
style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-pagination: none"
dir=ltr class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">We cite anoter
list of </SPAN>more than 20 scholars <I>posekim</I> who prohibit a minor to
serve as a Torah reader, unless it is a<I> she’at ha-dehak</I>:<I> </I>R. Hayyim
Joseph David Azulai (Hida), <I>Birkei Yosef</I>, <I>O.H</I>. sec. 282, no. 8;<I>
Hazon Ovadya</I>, <I>Hilkhot Shabbat</I>, part 2, <I>Hilkhot Keri'at
ha-Torah</I>, sec.<I> </I>9, n. 9; R. Ovadiah Yosef,<I> Yehavveh Da’at</I>, V,
sec. 25; R. Ovadiah Yosef, <I>Livyat Hen</I>, sec. 282, no. 19;<I> </I>R. Isaac
Yosef, <I>Yalkut Yosef</I>, II, sec. 135, <I>Seder ha-Olim le-Sefer Torah</I>,
sec. 33, and<I> </I>IV, <I>Hilkhot Shabbat</I>, part 1, sec. 282, <I>Dinei
Keri’at ha-Torah be-Shabbat</I>, n. 15; R. Isaac Yosef, <I>Yalkut Yosef, Dinei
Hinnukh Katan u-Bar Mitsva</I>, <I>Dinei Keri’at ha-Torah</I>, no. a and b, 43;
R. Moses Malkah, <I>Resp. Mikveh Mayyim</I>, VI, <I>O.H</I>., sec. 11 (see,
however, III, <I>O.H</I>., sec. 26); R. Shlomo Moshe Amar, <I>Resp. Sheima
Shlomo</I>, IV, sec. 5.<SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P
style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-pagination: none"
dir=ltr class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">Nevertheless,
there are indeed <I>poskim </I>who permit minors to serve as <I>ba’alei
keri’a</I> for others – and it is presumably on these minority opinions that the
communities Chana Luntz refers to rely.<I> </I>This group includes the noted
halakhicists </SPAN>R. Israel Jacob Algazi and R. Joseph <A
name=_Ref139907562>Te’omim</A> (R. Israel Jacob Algazi, <I>Emet le-Ya’akov</I>,
<I>Dinei Aliyyat Keri’at ha-Torah</I>, sec. 27; R. Joseph Teomim, <I>Pri
Megadim</I>, <I>O.H.</I>, sec. 282,<I> Eshel Avraham</I>, no. 6 and
<I>Mishbetsot Zahav</I>, no. 3<SPAN style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">). This
is also the opinion of <SPAN style="COLOR: black">Rav Moshe Malka, <I>Resp.
Mikveh Mayim</I>, III, O.H., sec. 26. </SPAN>They opine that, since a minor is
rabbinically obligated in <I>mitsvot </I>(<I>hinnukh</I>),<I> </I>he is
empowered to assist others in fulfilling their rabbinic obligation of <I>keri’at
ha-Torah.</I> However, as discussed in section II of our paper, this position
has remained well outside the halakhic consensus for three primary reasons.
Firstly, many authorities refuse to accept</SPAN> the initial premise, that a
minor is rabbinically personally obligated. But even were we to accept this
assertion, the minor still possesses a lower level of obligation in <I>keri’at
ha-Torah</I>,<I> </I>one resulting<I> </I>from two rabbinic edicts (<I>trei
de-rabbanan</I>),<SPAN style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"> and cannot assist a
major whose obligation is greater (<I>had de-rabbanan</I>). Finally, </SPAN>as
discussed above, the overwhelming consensus of the codifiers is that the concept
of <I>arevut</I> does not apply to minors whatsoever.<SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"> For this reason, the position of R. Algazi
and R. Te’omim has been generally rejected and invoked, if at all, only in
pressing circumstances (<I>she’at ha-dehak</I>), i.e., when there is no one else
available to read and the Torah reading will be cancelled as a result.
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P
style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-pagination: none"
dir=ltr class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P
style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-pagination: none"
dir=ltr class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">But the
critical point is that even were we to accept the correctness of R. Algazi and
R. Teomim’s assertion, <U>this would only empower minor males to serve as
<I>ba’alei keri’a</I>, because they are rabbinically obligated.</U> Women,
however, are not obligated whatsoever! <o:p></o:p></SPAN></B></P>
<P
style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-pagination: none"
dir=ltr class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" dir=ltr
class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">In her recent post, the
truly erudite Ms. Luntz makes a very novel suggestion, namely: “</SPAN><SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: HE; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"
lang=EN-GB>Even if the oleh does not actually read along (at least somewhat) in
the Torah, so long as he is able to perform the <I>ma'aseh mitzvah</I>, it
can be argued that he can still make the brachos on the basis of Rav Zera’s
principle of <I>kol hara’ui l'bila ain bila makeves bo</I>.”
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" dir=ltr
class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: HE; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"
lang=EN-GB>Such a position is problematic for several reason. <U>Firstly</U>,
Rav Zera’s priniciple of <I>kol hara’ui l'bila ain bila makeves bo</I> is a
<I>mahlokes</I> <I>Rishonim ve-Aharonim le-halakha </I><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>whether it applies <I>be-khol haTorah
kula </I>or only where the Torah is <EM>megaleh.</EM>
<U>Secondly</U>, Ms Luntz is suggesting is that one can make a
<I>birkat ha-mitzva</I> and never actually do the mitzva – and yet the berakha
would not be a <I>berakha levatala</I> because he <B><U>could</U></B> have done
the mitsva. So, for example, one could make a <I>le-Shev ba-Sukka</I> and never
sit in it, simply because he <U>could</U> have. Or similarly, one could make
<I>le-Hadlik ner shel Hanukka</I> and never light the candle; yet the
<I>berakha</I> would not be <I>le-vatala</I> since one <U>could</U> have made
the <I>berakha</I>. <SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN><U>Finally</U>,
the Rosh says that if the oleh doesn’t read along, his <I>berakha</I> is
<I>le-vatala</I>. But why? He <U>could</U> have. The Rosh, nor any subsequent
authority ever entertained the application of <I>kol hara’ui lebila</I> to
keri’at haTorah.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" dir=ltr
class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: HE; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"
lang=EN-GB>My brother Dov discussed Ms Luntz’s suggestion with Rav Asher Weiss,
who summarily rejected it. He posited that <I>kol hara’ui l'bila </I><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>only applies to <I>Dinim</I> (status) not
to <I>mitsvot</I>. He even cited a Ritva to Hullin 106b where one washes his
hands for bread and makes <I>al netillat Yadayyim</I> – and then changes his
mind and decides not to eat bread.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>The Ritva says it is not a <I>Berakha le-vatala</I>, nor do
we require the individual to eat bread, because he actually did the mitsva
action appropriate for the <I>berakha</I>. But, says Rav Asher, had he not
done the mitsva action of washing, then obviously the <EM>berakha</EM>
<U>would</U> have been <I>le-vatala</I>, even though he <U>could</U> have
washed.</SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" dir=ltr
class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: HE; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"
lang=EN-GB>Kol Tuv</SPAN></P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" dir=ltr
class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: HE; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"
lang=EN-GB> Aryeh (from home; For Aryeh and
Dov)</SPAN></P><SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: HE; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"
lang=EN-GB>
<DIV><FONT size=2
face=Arial>--------------------------------<BR>Prof. Aryeh A.
Frimer<BR>Chemistry Dept., Bar-Ilan University<BR>Ramat Gan 5290002,
ISRAEL<BR>E-mail (office): <A
href="mailto:Aryeh.Frimer@biu.ac.il">Aryeh.Frimer@biu.ac.il</A><BR></FONT></DIV></SPAN>
<P
style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-pagination: none"
dir=ltr class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"
lang=EN-GB><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=Chana@kolsassoon.org.uk href="mailto:Chana@kolsassoon.org.uk">Chana
Luntz</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=frimera@zahav.net.il
href="mailto:frimera@zahav.net.il">'Esther and Aryeh Frimer'</A> ; <A
title=avodah@lists.aishdas.org href="mailto:avodah@lists.aishdas.org">'Avodah
Avodah'</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=DFrimer@FrimerLaw.com
href="mailto:DFrimer@FrimerLaw.com">'Dov Frimer'</A> ; <A
title=wolowelsky@yahoo.com href="mailto:wolowelsky@yahoo.com">'Joel B.
Wolowelsky '</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, March 20, 2014 12:10
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: Aliyyot to the Blind vs
Aliyyot for women vs Aliyyot for minors</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<P class=MsoNormal>RAF writes:<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 4.8pt" class=MsoNormal>> It is
very important to appreciate that the gemara in Megilla is talking about
a system in which each oleh/olah read <B><U>for
themselves</U></B>. Women (<B>if not for Kevod
haTsibbur</B>) and Minors could get aliyyot - provided they read for
>themselves. We make this >point very clearly and repeatedly in
the paper. How someone not obligated (woman or minor) can read for the
tsibbur is also discussed at length. <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>I agree, the discussion in the gemara in Megilla is indeed
talking about a system in which each oleh/olah read for themselves.
<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>However the minhag amongst Sepharim, as evidenced by the
katan who read when the Chief Rabbi came to visit a few weeks
ago, includes for katanim to read *for gedolim* (as well as, sometimes,
for themselves, and sometimes having an aliya when a gadol reads).
Indeed, were a katan to be limited to only reading for himself, he would only
end up learning one aliyah in a given parsha. What the system produces,
however, are katanim who, by the time they are 10 or 11 and have been
reading for 3-4 years, know virtually the entire Torah, with trop. It is
an extraordinarily effective chinuch system, and sets the boy up for
life.<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>This (ie katanim reading for gedolim) is a widespread
practice in numbers of Sephardi communities, and we have absolutely no reason
to suspect that it has not been going on ever since the split between the oleh
and the ba'al koreh occurred over a thousand years ago. And this is the
first suggestion, as far as I am aware, that there is any problem with the
common practice (once it is accepted that katanim can have
any involvement in the Torah reading at all). ie this is the first
suggestion that distinctions need to be made within the roles that katanim can
take vis a vis the Torah reading.<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 4.8pt" class=MsoNormal>>
But focus of our paper is not on this issue but on the question of
how the <B><U>Oleh</U></B> can make a berakha when he is not the one
who >does the ma'aseh mitsva, i.e., the one who reads aloud - but the
ba'al korei. The institution of Ba'al >Korei did not exist
at the time of >the Talmud and was introduced around the year 1000 just
before the rishonim period. Once there is a bifurcated system, with one
>individual making the berakhot and another doing the ma'aseh haMitsva
-<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>And the majority rishonim, including the Rosh and
the Beis Yosef, are fully cognisant of this problem, and resolve it by
explaining that the oleh does do the ma'aseh mitzvah, he reads from the Torah
- albeit quietly along with the ba'al koreh. Nothing has changed in that
regard, just that the tzibbur does not hear him, rather they hear the ba'al
koreh who is likely to be a more fluent reader who is more pleasant to listen
to.<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Even if the oleh does not actually read along (at
least somewhat) in the Torah, so long as he is able to perform the ma'aseh
mitzvah, it can be argued that he can still make the brachos on the basis
of Rav Zera’s priniciple of kol haroyi l'bila ain bila makeves
bo.<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>The problem is with a blind man who *cannot* perform the
ma'aseh mitzvah. Some other solution has to be found if one is to allow
for a blind man to have an aliyah. One suggestion posited by the
minority rishonim and various achronim to allow a blind man specifically to
have an aliyah is to rely in this case on shomea k'oneh. But there is no
need, nor any suggestion, that thereby they are undermining the position of
the majority rishonim that in the normal case the basis for the brochos is the
quiet reading by the oleh. <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>In other words, the simplest and most straightforward
reading of all the sources is that the majority position stands for the normal
case, and in the special case of a blind man and similar, an alternative
halachic justification and mechanism has been found, relying on minority
opinions.<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>However, what you appear to be arguing for is a situation
where allowance in the special case is then used to dismiss the majority
understanding in the normal case, and posit the special case as
normative. And the fundamentally problematic nature of such a suggestion
is that it thereby illegitimates practices that go back hundreds if not
thousands of years in many communities involving katanim layning
and gadolim getting the aliyos.<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 4.8pt" class=MsoNormal> >
"However, at this juncture we need to distinguish between minor males and
adult women. Regarding minors, while they are not >fully obligated, there
is an obligation for majors to educate them (hinnukh) in the fulfillment of
mitsvot – >including keri’at ha-TorahThis educational obligation is
sufficient to validate a one-directional transfer from the major to the minor.
<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>But it is not one-directional as evidenced as
above. If you want to argue that shomea k'oneh is the dominant
mechanism even for normal aliyos, then you are ruling out the widespread
minhag of katanim reading for gedolim across the Sephardi world. .
I do not believe the Meharil or the Rema (who according to the Aruch
HaShulchan (Orech Chaim siman 137 si’if 7) accepted the minhag of giving
aliyos to blind men only reluctantly, it not actually being his opinion set
out in the Darchei Moshe) ever intended or contemplated such a
wholesale rejection of the majority rishonim and Shulchan Aruch.
Rather they were merely allowing for a particular set of exceptional cases,
and in those exceptional cases only, they were prepared to allow for minority
halachic mechanisms such as shomea k'oneh that could run side by side with the
normative majority supported ones that applied in the normal case. But
such an understanding means that the normative situation remains: and katanim
can read for gedolim, and ketanim can say brachos on their quiet reading from
the Torah while a gadol ba’al koreh reads out loud, without needing to resort
to questions of one directional transfer.<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P style="MARGIN-LEFT: 4.8pt" class=MsoNormal>>Prof. Aryeh A.
Frimer<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Regards<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Chana<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>