quote:

Originally posted by Dovi:

Regarding the points that RAv Alter brought up:

1) I was refering to the incident you told us, where your granddaughter told you about a shul in 'A'. You didn't seem to indicate that you saw it yourself.

I took pains not to name the rav involved. Not even to identify the country he is in. I think that should be sufficent to remove any suspicion of LH. And in my previous discussion of the two rabbanim who talked during qaddish, I also did not give any identifiying details. But just to make it clearer, they were not in South Africa.

quote:

(That answers points 1 and 2)
To accept lashon hora of a talmid chacham is even more bad."

Who says these gentlemen are talmidei hakhamim? I would think that their behaviour shows them to be otherwise.

quote:

(A side point: One would think that the big shuls, and the kiruv organizations, are considered sha'as had'chak, right?)

The word is qeruv (or keruv), but not kiruv.
I don't know about big shuls in this regard, but the qeruv question is indeed relevant. If you want to tell me that ploni almoni davened already, and therefore can feel relatively free to speak during the other peoples' davening, you may have a point. But to the extent that he makes people think that his behaviour is the norm, without informing them that he has already davened, he runs the risk of "lifnei iver."

quote:

5) Regarding the Rambam, a Rav 'sheaino holeich b'derech tova'. Does speaking during Kaddish mean he's going on that derech? He doesn't keep the haloch in that specific area! I agree, it is a very bad thing to speak during kaddish, and a Rav, who should be an example definitaly shouldn't, but does it become so bad that you consider him going 'off the derech?'

The Rambam quotes Hazal (Hilkhot Talmud Torah 4:2) àîøå çëîéí, àí ãåîä äøá ìîìàê ä' öáàåú, úåøä éá÷ùå îôéäå; åàí ìàå, àì éá÷ùå úåøä îôéäå that if the rav is like an angel of the L-rd of Hosts, then we should learn from him; but if not, then we should not learn Torah from him. I think that if a rav does indeed violate the Shוlhan Arukh, then he has forfeited his angel status.

quote:

It is indeed a sad situation today that a stam Rabbi of a shul is not considered a tzaddik (by tzaddik I mean that he is careful to keep the mitzvos, and has middos tovos)....

I shan't comment on your definition. But I think you are on the wrong track if you consider every rav to be a tzaddiq. Perhaps that is the root of all your understandings and misunderstandings, if any.

Hi Dov, hope your fast was meaningful. I always get nervous when people talk about Tzaddikim and Beinonim. There is a famous Gemarah in Rosh Hashana (think it's 17) which goes into a very in depth discussion on this subject. Because by simple Pshat we should be able to tell who is a Rasha (because after YK) they should die !. But this clearly is not the case. A Rabbi does not, by virtue of being a Rabbi need to be considered a Tzaddik. Also, if a Rabbi is talking during a time which is inappropriate, he will be able to accept a rebuke (albeit a gentle one, we shouldnt forget who WE are), or tell you why he did what he did. The best way to give the benefit of the doubt is to ask the Rabbi what is the halacha concerning talking at that time.

quote:

Originally posted by Mark G:
Firstly I think its a Kol Vachomer if you do not count someone who is mehalel Shabbat as part of a tzibbur then a Kohein who is mehalel Shabbat should not bless the congregation so it is not a further proof.

Not so obvious, since Harav Ovadia says that we should [try to] convince him not to bless. Implying that if he still insists we should permit him.

quote:

A question, the MB also brings down that a person who is considered a true mechallel Shabbat b'farhesia in the original sense is required to always deem them to be mechallel Shabbat and then where does that leave Baal Teshuva's in that case ? Obviously unable to be counted for a minyan.

You may want to bring citations that prove that the Hafetz Hayyim was unwilling to accept ba`alei teshuva in a minyan forever and ever.

quote:

the MB and Shulchan Aruch consider a person who is mechalel Shabbat (b'farhesia)as a person who denies Hashem and is in the same category as one who does avodah zarah and has the din of a non jew and cannot be counted for a minyan. But today, this is not the case, someone who is mechalel Shabbat still turns up to shul to pray and therefore cannot be put into the category of deny Hashem, but rather they dont keep Shabbat because they were not properly educated.

How about the case where we have 5 Jews who want to pray and we go out to look for another 5? They didn't come to us to pray. We sought them out.

quote:

Another thought - how do we mekarav people if we take such a hard line

How about if we impress them with the fact that to be counted they must already be observant? Then they have a real goal; not as if we accept anyone no matter what. Anything that takes effort is regarded as worthy of acheiving.

quote:

Originally posted by Mark G:
A Rabbi does not, by virtue of being a Rabbi need to be considered a Tzaddik.

Which is what I said.

quote:

Also, if a Rabbi is talking during a time which is inappropriate, he will be able to accept a rebuke (albeit a gentle one, we shouldnt forget who WE are), or tell you why he did what he did. The best way to give the benefit of the doubt is to ask the Rabbi what is the halacha concerning talking at that time.

I already stated what I did. After the davening (which was very shortly after these two colleagues were talking during qaddish), I said to one, "I heard that it is not permitted to talk during qaddish." First he asked, "What?" I repeated my statement, and he turned and walked away. Is that called accepting rebuke? Or explaining his actions?

Hi Dov, I concede to you, your actions seem to be above board and unfortunately this Rabbi did not do so well. Perhaps he has had a very bad day or week. I know that one of the Rabbi's I am very fond of was uncharacterisically short to me a while back, I was hurt, but accepted that this was not his usual style. I found out later that he had been busy councelling a family who had just lost a loved one through tragic circumstances and was emotionally distraught. I also apologise to you for not reading your link properly else I would have picked up on what you said !

Hi Rav, I am not sure I understand, as far as I understood, if we do not accept a 'normal' person who is mechallel Shabbat, then we cannot under any circumstances accept a Kohein who is the same to bless a congregation, is that not the Halacha ? So how come you would only try to convince him not to ? this does not follow. As for the case of the 5 Jews, this may be the case at that time HOWEVER, you would probably find that on Yom Kippur for example all those jews would still be at shul OR an alternative is that if they truly dont believe in Hashem, they would refuse to make up the minyan if they were called upon. As to the last point I respectfully disagree with the Rav. If you impress upon people they amount of work they need to do in order to be Torah observant Jews, they will realise that the work load is huge and soon come to feel the task is insurmountable. Also if they fall (which happens !), then they will feel that it is too far to climb back up again, this is especially the case if the people are not so young (i.e. late 30's on). You are talking about people with little or no Torah background. I understand because I am a Baal Teshuva and I had to learn to read Hebrew at 28 years old. This was an achievement for ME. For me to learn a Blad in a month is a celebration, for a FFB at 11 years old that would be basic. Kiruv needs to be based on bringing people in slowly and letting them digest it (tam) and then feeding them more. Cant imagine telling a secular woman, oh Torah says that you need to wear a sheitel, throw away your pants, obey the laws of Tzneiut and Taharat Hamispacha etc in one shot. PS I am sometimes the Sheilach Tzibbur for my congregation does this then mean that based on our discussion that I should stop. Each time stand in front of the Amud and daven, each word I utter is a victory for me over the pull of the Chol and the sweetness of dwelling in the house of Hashem.

quote:

Originally posted by Mark G:
Hi Rav, I am not sure I understand, as far as I understood, if we do not accept a 'normal' person who is mechallel Shabbat, then we cannot under any circumstances accept a Kohein who is the same to bless a congregation, is that not the Halacha ? So how come you would only try to convince him not to ? this does not follow.

There are two issues involved here. One is who may be counted in a minyan, and the other is who may bless the congregation. As a general rule, any Kohen may bless us, provided he has not killed anyone. So that it appears that the rules for Kohanim may be less stringent.

quote:

As for the case of the 5 Jews, this may be the case at that time HOWEVER, you would probably find that on Yom Kippur for example all those jews would still be at shul OR an alternative is that if they truly dont believe in Hashem, they would refuse to make up the minyan if they were called upon.

Again, there are many reasons that Jews show up at prayers. One of them is that they are asked to make a minyan. Whether they are in shul at Yom Kippur hardly seems relevant to what we do when we need a tenth (or a fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth) to make a minyan on some day other than Yom Kippur.

quote:

As to the last point I respectfully disagree with the Rav. If you impress upon people they amount of work they need to do in order to be Torah observant Jews, they will realise that the work load is huge and soon come to feel the task is insurmountable. Also if they fall (which happens !), then they will feel that it is too far to climb back up again, this is especially the case if the people are not so young (i.e. late 30's on). You are talking about people with little or no Torah background.

Whom do you respect more, a physiican who studied and interned and residented for 15 years before he could practice his profession, or a quack who studied by correspondence for 6 months?

quote:

I understand because I am a Baal Teshuva and I had to learn to read Hebrew at 28 years old.

That is indeed an accomplishment. One is reminded of Rabbi Aqiva, who at the age of 40 had not known a Hebrew letter.

quote:

Kiruv needs to be based on bringing people in slowly and letting them digest it (tam) and then feeding them more.

That is very likely right. But just as conversion is a long process and we don’t afford the privileges of being a Jew to one who is in the midst of the conversion process, perhaps a nonobservant Jew also cannot assume all the privileges right at the outset of his return.

quote:

I am sometimes the Sheilach Tzibbur for my congregation does this then mean that based on our discussion that I should stop.

The halakha is quite clear on who may serve as sheli'ah tzibbur. I don't think that there are any inconsistencies between what we have said here and halakha lema`aseh (practical Jewish law).

quote:

The word is qeruv (or keruv), but not kiruv.

I think you'll find it is kiruv, as in "kiruv rechokim." That, anyway, is how the Olam says it.

quote:

Originally posted by Rav Alter:
I have a story to match yours. One Shabbat I davened in a shul not far from my house, although this was the first time I had davened there on a Shabbat. Besides the ballebatim who talked, during Kaddish two rabbbis were talking to each other. After the end of prayers, I went over to one and said "I heard that we are not permitted to speak during Kaddish." He asked me "What?" I repeated this, and he turned and walked away.

Did you happen to overhear their conversation? If not, how do you know that it wasn't about something urgent that couldn't wait? You know, the old "dan l'chaf z'chus".

quote:

Originally posted by Yisroel Phillips:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rav Alter:
. . . during Kaddish two rabbis were talking to each other. After the end of prayers, I went over to one and said "I heard that we are not permitted to speak during Kaddish." He asked me "What?" I repeated this, and he turned and walked away.

quote:

Did you happen to overhear their conversation? If not, how do you know that it wasn't about something urgent that couldn't wait? You know, the old "dan l'chaf z'chus".

Very fine of you to judge these fellows positively. However, when I approached one to ask if we are not prohibited from speaking during Kaddish, he could have answered that they were talking about something urgent that couldn't wait. That would certainly have given me something to think about. But he simply walked away. That made me draw the opposite conclusion.

Especially since their conversation took place almost at the end of prayers, and I didn't see them running off to take anyone to the hospital. Rather, they withdrew to the kiddush to continue their conversation.

While your approach has much to commend it, we have the old midrashic saying that “one who is merciful to . . . .”

quote:

I had written, "The word is qeruv (or keruv), but not kiruv."

quote:

Originally posted by Yisroel Phillips:
I think you'll find it is kiruv, as in "kiruv rechokim." That, anyway, is how the Olam says it.

I think you'll find that the resh (which cannot take a dagesh hazaq) following the qof changes the hiriq that we would ordinarily place under the qof to a tzere. (We say sippur, with a hiriq, but berur, with a tzere.)

At least that's what the dictionaries and grammarians say.

The "olam" (a Yiddish expression) also says "hamesh shekel." Go to the Carmel Market to check, if you wish.

quote:

Originally posted by Rav Alter:
I think you'll find that the resh (which cannot take a dagesh hazaq) following the qof changes the hiriq that we would ordinarily place under the qof to a tzere. (We say sippur, with a hiriq, but berur, with a tzere.)

At least that's what the dictionaries and grammarians say.

You are absolutely right! I just checked the on-line Jastrow at http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Jastrow/PDFs/1368.pdf and it is spelt as keiruv.

You learn something new every day! Kol HaKavod.

MAYBE it is keiruv NOT kiruv.

FOR SURE it's spelled not spelt.

Unless you're talking about one of the seven grains of Eretz Yisroel that people with wheat allergies eat.

quote:

One is obligated to remain quiet unless one has reason to believe that their words will have a positive impact. When in doubt, remain silent. It's a very difficult mitzvah to fulfill.

I really doubt there are too many talkers in shul who would change their ways because "one of those killjoys" went over to them. Perhaps if you were the shul's rav, or a close friend, or even part of his chat group who is trying to get the whole crew to switch over. But in most cases, I do not see how tokhachah would apply.

I agree whole heartedly. I'm just as annoyed as the next Jew when there's talking in shul during davening and especially during laining. But you know what? I'm just as annoyed by people telling other people to be quiet. It does no good and it makes more noise.

Another point about fulfilling the mitzva of tochecha -- it's not supposed to be done in anger.

quote:

Originally posted by Neve Girl:
MAYBE it is keiruv NOT kiruv.

FOR SURE it's spelled not spelt.

Unless you're talking about one of the seven grains of Eretz Yisroel that people with wheat allergies eat.

Your point being?

quote:

Originally posted by Neve Girl:
MAYBE it is keiruv NOT kiruv.

FOR SURE it's spelled not spelt.

Unless you're talking about one of the seven grains of Eretz Yisroel that people with wheat allergies eat.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=spell

spell1 (spl) Pronunciation Key Audio pronunciation of "spell" [P]
v. spelled, or spelt (splt) spell·ing, spells
v. tr.

1. To name or write in order the letters constituting (a word or part of a word).
2. To constitute the letters of (a word): These letters spell animal.
3. To add up to; signify: Their unwise investment could spell financial ruin.

I have no point, or should I say "poined"?

I checkt on line after I done post (posed?) my comment. (Commened?) I should have checkt it before. It seems you Brits have your own way of speaking. I have learnt something new today.

But seriously, when it comes to Hebrew, in aleph-beis there is a right way and a wrong way to spell a word. Once you transliterate a Hebrew word into English, I think pretty much anything goes. Kiruv. Keiruv. Queeruv. Whatever.

And vice versa. How would you transliterate "outreach" using aleph-beis? Pretty much any way you want to that gets the point across.

And, that's my point. Take it for what it's worth.

quote:

Originally posted by Neve Girl:
Kiruv. Keiruv. Queeruv.

Keyroof

I find it ironic that this room is called 'mussar' room, and yet people are continually taking a dig at others. Relax, take it easy and enjoy and take a bit of good criticism, its really good for your soul !. PS we have JUST left the Days of Awe, perhaps, we need to be a bit introspective >

I absolutely agree with Neve Girl, once a hebrew world is transliterated (almost) anything goes, and I dont think one needs to worry overly much about the way its spelt as long as it sounds like the hebrew. You say potatoe I say potatoe, lets call the whole thing off......