- This topic has 46 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 5 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
My son just told me that his Yeshiva will not allow someone to lain Sepharadi trope because the Ashkenazim wouldn’t be yotzei. Has anyone else heard of such of thing? It’s a Litvish Yeshiva.
Are they concerned about the trope or also about the pronunciation?
I don’t know what others hold but my rav said it’s not a problem.
There are many SHU”Tim saying that it’s perfectly fine and you are of course Yotzei no matter what (assuming the only pronunciation issues are Taf versus Saf and maybe how letters are slightly pronounced). I have seen that the Chassidish pronunciations might be more of a problem because they really change the meaning according to how others pronounce it. But the Poskim quote the Misrash that each Shevet had their own path through the Yam Suf to show that everyone is Yotzi with the different pronunciations.
I personally find it ridiculous and offensive (not to me, but to others) when people who aren’t Makpid on proper Dikduk decide that they have to correct when someone says a Taf instead of a Saf. He’ll change the meaning of every word in Davening but Chas Veshalom if someone makes an inconsequential difference that this person feels defines who he is.
That is probably not what they said. They probably said they won’t allow someone to lein with a sfardi trop and pronunciation, because that is not our mesorah, and we should seek to protect our mesorah.
There are halachos about when to be machzir the baal koreh.
I too am annoyed when people who do not understand the topic
correct for minor inconsequentials.
Just the same, If I myself am reading, i will almost always
say over when corrected in this way. I do not want to discourage
a valid correction.
It’s a Chumra with little-to-know basis in Halacha that causes nothing but division and Sinas Chinam.
Popa: Wish that was the case but I asked my son straight out if it is a Yeshiva Mesorah issue. He said no. The Rabbaim there apparently hold that Sephardim listening to Ashkenazi leining are not yotzei as well and they have separate minyanim. This infuriates me and I need to dig deeper to find out what’s really going on (as the resident Yekkish Litvak Sepharadi)
Interesting. I have never heard of that, but I suppose it is possible that some shittos hold that. I mean, you can find a shittah for just about anything (???? YCT ????) And if there is such a shittah, maybe some people have that minhag.
(???? YCT ????)
ROTFL
…because the Ashkenazim wouldn’t be yotzei…”The Rabbaim there apparently hold that Sephardim listening to Ashkenazi leining are not yotzei as well”
If this is indeed the Rabbaim’s psak, it is an incorrect psak. It cannot stand up to any serious scrutiny, and it is very unfortunate that these Rabbaim came to this wrong conclusion. V’shari lehu marah.
maybe cuz the sphardim dont pronounce the kumutz ever. could change words,no?
Perhaps he heard from his Rebbe a Sephardi Sefer Torah, and understood it to mean Trop?
It is a given that the Sephardim have more correct pronunciation than the Ashkinazim (with the AYIN & whatnot).
There is a well known letter fom the Steipler, printed in Kraina D’igrisa (or karyana d’igarta for the dikduk police who seem to be active on this thread) where he says that when the Shem Havaya, which we pronounce as Adnus, is pronounced as the sephardim do, (with the ending vowel sound as ai, rather than oy) one is not yotze whatever one is trying to be yotze.
old man- “If this is indeed the Rabbaim’s psak, it is an incorrect psak. It cannot stand up to any serious scrutiny, and it is very unfortunate that these Rabbaim came to this wrong conclusion.”
Was your comment based on your in depth learnig of the sugya, or are you just quick to condemn anything you havent heard of?
Rav Ovadia Yosef has paskened numerous times in the past that a sefardi cannot be yotzei listening to an ashkenazi leining, it would come out from that that an ashkenazi cannot be yotzei from a sefardi leining. (I don’t think Rav Yosef would agree though, as he holds the ashkenazi mesorah is wrong)
Do they have an equal problem for both sfardim and ashkenazim?
what about an ungarischer listening to a litvak and vise versa?
the psak seems very strange to me, but just the same
I again wonder if this is the place to announce that some psak is wrong or right. Should someone change his practices because an anonymous poster in the coffee room pronounced that his rabbi was wrong?
rescue37: R’ Yosef said that an Ashkenazi can be yotze with the Sefardi pronunciation because the Sefardi way is the correct way.
As and aside, almost all the havaros, sfardic, ashkenazik and whatever have provable or near provable shibushim.
best is undoubtedly tamani, but I don’t know if that is perfect either.
I am too old to respond to adolescent taunts.
I would like to add that my opinion also holds for D’oraisa readings such as Parshas Zachor and Parshas Parah. All properly read (trop is definitely not me’akev) Torah readings of all sects, ethnic groups and mesoros are acceptable to all Jews and all are yotzeh with any of these readings. Sefardi, Teimani, British, American, Brooklyn, Litvish, Hungarian, and even those with a lisp. For the historically inclined, even the “chesim” and “he’im” . The list is very long. They are all acceptable.
Just one more comment:
Seeing the post form OLD_MAN and the rebuttle from YUNGERMAN1,
Is this some kind of role reversal?
There is a tshuva from Rav Moishe Feinstein ZT”L in his Igros where he addresses this issue and comes to the conclusion that if a certain havara is being used by a major portion of Klal Yisroel, it has a din of Lashon Hakodesh for everyone, and thus, a Sefardi could be yotzei from an ashkanazi and vice-versa.
His ra’aya is from Chalitza which has to be said, al pi din, in Loshen Hakodesh. Now, supposing the woman’s normal havara is Galiciana, while her deceased husband’s brother’s havara is Litvish- does that mean that the Chalitza is invalid because the woman’s havara is not Lashon Hakodesh to the man and vice-versa? No one has ever heard of such a psak. So, concludes Rav Moishe, this is proof that all havaros and dialects that are being used in Klal Yisroel have a din of Lashon Hakodesh, and one could be yotzei Krias Hatorah from someone with a different havora.
Feif Un: That’s why I added in parenticies that R’ Yosef would not agree. The problem with R’ Yosef is that the Ben Ish Chai says that enunciating the pasach as ahhh instead of ohhh is incorect and that he would change his kehillah to ohhh if he could.
Reb Moshe zt”l’s psak mentioned above is remarkable for a different reason. His “proof” is that “no one has ever heard of such a psak”. He could easily have said that the chalitza is invalid, and this is the psak, and now you heard it. In other words, you married outside of your social circle and you have to suffer the consequences.
The point that Reb Moshe made is that such a psak would be inconceivable. So too with the Rabbeim’s psak in the OP; it is inconceivable.
to old man
a) you missed his point, even though you started a paragraph with,” The point that”.
b) but I guess it doesnt matter, since you yourself are just as capable of ruling on this.
last
I learnt that Ashkenazim could be yotzei with Sephardim but Sephardim can not be yotzei with Ashkenazim…
midwesterner:
When the Steipler zt’l paskened that one cannot be yotzei with the Sephardic pronunciation, was the Steipler applying his psak only to Ashkenazim or was the Steipler saying even Sephardim are not yotzei with the Sephardic pronunciation?
Thanks
My Rosh once paskined on this ( litvish listener/high speed chasidish reader) He said: firstly, it is a chovas tzibbur, and not a chovas yochid, and that if you can understand the reader that is enough, provided that not all the tzibbur not understand the reader. Most folks with any ‘exposure’ would generally understand the other-region dialect so it strikes me as preposterous that there are often multiple reading by zachor. I, once upon a time spent part of the year with a sfardi minyan, and I was sometimes, as the only moomche there, asked to read. When I would bluff a sfardi leining, they would tell me to go back to normal. I have made a casual study of Mizrachi Trop (all fourteen flavors) and I can do a better fake today than before, but in the very mixed minyan I lein for now, they acutally are very accepting of my o cholam, my attention to dagesh, ayin and the rafeh of all six beged kefes. My pronunciation is a kibbutz galuyot, just Teimani is a hurdle, and I have never heard or seen a transcription of Portugese nusach.
I would like to clarify what I had reported in the name of Rav Moishe Feinstein ZT”L yesterday. In the third Cheilek of Orach Chaim, Siman 5, he clearly says that all havaros that are used by major kehilos in Klal Yisroel are considered Lashon Hakodesh, the proof being Chalitza as I had indicated in my previous post. However, he does also state that it is forbidden for an individual to change his havorah from his mesorah, either from Ashkenaz to Sfard or vice-versa.
In the fourth Cheilek of Orach Chaim, Siman 65, he deals with the issue of a Bar Mitzva boy who is used to the Sefardic havora, and wishes to lain in an Ashkenazic shul with the Sefardic havora. Rav Moishe discourages it, but is matir it “mipnei hasholom” provided that a second minyan is made in a second room in the shul where the sedra will be lained with the Ashkenazic havora.
It is not clear from Rav Moishe whether or not you are yoitze b’dieved with the kria. Maybe you are, as he states that the Chalitzos of Ashkenazim are valid for Sefardim to rely on and vice-versa. But from the two tshuvos that I had mentioned, it is clear that he does not l’chatchila approve of a Sefardishe Kria in an Ashkenazic Shul and probably not vice-versa.
Zecharya, yosh on th3 mareh mkomos. Could be Rav Moshes kpeida on the other minyan is that the minhag hamakom should not go wanting, not that the bar mitzvsh minyan was not yotze.
Zecharya- Thanks.
Old man- Do you want to retract your statement, or do you disagree with R’ Moshe zt”l as well? (assuming Zecharya quoted accurately)
Sam2- You may also want to retract what you said.
Can someone address the difference in the sifrei torah themselves? The word “dakkoh” in Ki Tseitzei is spelled differently in the ST of sephardim and ashkenazim. A misspelled word in a ST is a pessul. Is it apropriate for one to use the ST of the other?
People here seem to be confused.
A shul must adhere to its minhagim as much as possible. That is a minhag issue.
As far as being yotzei leining/davening, every type of havoro is legitimate and all are yotzei l’chatchilah in all circumstances.
That is the only reasonable psak.
PAssfan: I deliberately danced around that issue. As it happens, the Steipler zt’l addressed the issue to sephardim as well. However, Rav Yehuda Tzadka zt’l wrote back to the Steipler and they argued vehemently about the issue as it applies to sephardim. I am not aware that the Steipler ever backed down. Maybe someone knows a confirmed resolution of this debate between a gadol of the Ashkenazic world vs. a gadol of the Sephardic world, rather than just throwing around what one or another anonymous commenter considers to be a “reasonable psak.”
I tend to agree with Old Man in light of the way people conduct themselves within our own Ashkenazic community.
Litvishe/Yeshivisha daven and hear Krias Hatorah (even Parshas Zachor) in Chassidishe Shuls, and Chassidim daven in Litvishe yeshivos, and no one makes an issue about whether you are yoitze or not. In fact, in some shtieblach during the weekdays, you can have one minyan laining with a Galiciana Havora, while a half-hour later, another minyan could have a Litvishe kria. It is all accepted, and no one makes a fuss about it.
The issue on this thread, however, was whether the Roshei Yeshiva in an Ashkenazic yeshiva have overstepped their bounds in not allowing a Sephardi Krias Hatorah. Based upon Rav Moishe’s tshuvos, it appears that they are standing on solid ground, and they do have a right as to how they conduct their tefillos and minhagim in their own yeshiva.
old man: Just as you are moida that a shul must adhere to the shul’s minhag in havara, so too in the case of the OP’s Yeshiva they are correct for insisting that they adhere to the Yeshiva’s minhag in havara.
old man: Just as you are moida that a shul must adhere to the shul’s minhag in havara, so too in the case of the OP’s Yeshiva they are correct for insisting that they adhere to the Yeshiva’s minhag in havara.
So the yeshiva is now a Sem teacher, making things up and saying they are assur so that the students should follow what they personally think should be done?
You are being Motze La’as on the Yeshiva! If it was a minhag, they would have said so, not said the students are not Yotze.
(And yes, this is common from stories I have heard from sem girls, so it is not Motzi La’az. I have just never heard this behavior happening in yeshivos, where they respect Halacha).
I do not retract anything. The Yeshiva very incorrectly said that you are not yotzei. If they had said they have a Minhag and want to keep it that’s fine. That’s different than saying you are not Yotzei with each other.
May I suggest that, possibly, the yeshiva told the child that it wasn’t their minhag — but the child misunderstood the instructions as being advised he wouldn’t be yotzei? Just a thought.
(i am permitting myself to post again even though I wrote ‘last’
in previous post, because someone raised a new issue/topic)
Squeak wrote:
Can someone address the difference in the sifrei torah themselves? The word “dakkoh” in Ki Tseitzei is spelled differently in the ST of sephardim and ashkenazim. A misspelled word in a ST is a pessul. Is it apropriate for one to use the ST of the other?
this is very difficult to address since it is simply the best we can do.
and it is even worse. that is not the only word whose spelling is in question. there are a few others.
in one case, the difference in spelling would cause a difference
in saying and a slight difference in meaning!
but: ain zeh makom l’haarich!
End of my comments on this topic.
Finding out that a Sefer Torah and/or laining was possul because of that word would be rather crushing for me…
BTW, per the minhag hamokem a Sefardic bochur who is davening in an Ashkenaz Shul shouldn’t wear a Talis, and an Ashkenaz bochur who is davening in a Sefard Shul should wear a Talis. Since everyone davening in that Makom should keep that Makom’s Tefilah-related Minhagim (like wearing a Talis or whether to say Nakdishach instead of Nekadesh -or vice versa- in Kedusha).
Now that the discussion has turned to minhag, I’ll offer my opinion on this issue.
A shul or yeshiva has the right to adhere to its minhagim. However, this adherence must be limited to a shliach tzibbur and ba’al koreh. Does anyone in his right mind think that if Rav Ovadiah Yosef were a guest in Lakewood that when given an aliyah he would make the brachos as if he were in Kovno?
In addition, this adherence should be limited to nusach, the words themselves, not the havoro, pronunciation. If the Satmar Rebbe had to daven maariv in a litvish yeshiva because he had yahrzeit, would they really make him say “nu” and not “nee”?
I know of a brilliant Ashkenazi boy with yiras shamayim and excellent midos who applied to a Litvish Yeshiva. His crime? He davens with a “tuh” and not a “suh”, that is, he davens havarah sefaradit. They were eager to accept him, but informed him that he would never be shliach tzibbur and never be given an aliyah.
In my opinion, this yeshiva should be ashamed of itself.
The all-too-common feeling that “Retzon Hashem is defined by what I do” is repugnant.
A shul or yeshiva has the right to adhere to its minhagim. However, this adherence must be limited to a shliach tzibbur and ba’al koreh.
Interesting halacha you invent. I’m curious where you got your smicha.
The all-too-common feeling that “Retzon Hashem is defined by what I do” is repugnant.
The all-too-common feeling that “retzon Hashem is defined by what will make me feel good” is just as repugnant.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.