Certainly a complex halachik area.

Is using a bongo permitted? If not, why do you only say that beating on the table with a utensil is a problem?

What about the macro issue of why in some cases rishonim (e.g. tosfot) could say "well the reason doesn't apply", while in others they/we won't. If you will posit a general rule (e.g. it's only where chazal gave the original reason) how do you account for counter-examples.

KT
joel rich | 11.15.07 - 8:45 am | #

What is the difference between a door knocker and the bells on the sefer-torah?
Benny | 11.15.07 - 8:57 am | #

I object to Ari saying the shitta that allows for clapping on Shabbos and Yom Tov as "progressive". The Shulchan Aruch saw the Tosafos in Beitzah and nevertheless felt it applicable in his day. I think its a machlokes in metzius, and I've been at less religious places for shabbos where it went amazingly close to someone picking up a guitar. Asu S'yag La'Torah
Yosef Chaim | 11.15.07 - 9:08 am | #

...even the earliest of the Talmudic commentators argued that clapping and dancing should be permitted given that the concern which led to the decree was no longer relevant. These sages felt that since nowadays very few people are skilled in instrument repair there was little reason to fear that someone would come to repair an instrument which had broken.

If the concern was towards fixing instruments, and the concern is no longer relevant, why then does this not matir musical instruments in general?
zach | 11.15.07 - 9:28 am | #

What about the macro issue of why in some cases rishonim (e.g. tosfot) could say "well the reason doesn't apply", while in others they/we won't. If you will posit a general rule (e.g. it's only where chazal gave the original reason) how do you account for counter-examples.

Different cases were asked in different circumstances to rabbis with different approaches. What we do today is an agglomeration of customs derived from the rulings they made. Admittedly, not all of these rulings and customs proceed from the same philosophical or halachic assumptions. So what?
Ariel | 11.15.07 - 9:28 am | #

IIRC the Tiferet Yisrael, dispite the cited Rema , permitted the use of a doorbell (which in his day was a bell with a clapper) arguing that the takana referred to musical instruments rather than devices used to make noise to attract attention.
Mike S. | 11.15.07 - 9:40 am | #

Asu S'yag La'Torah
Yosef Chaim | 11.15.07 - 9:08 am

Different cases were asked in different circumstances to rabbis with different approaches. What we do today is an agglomeration of customs derived from the rulings they made. Admittedly, not all of these rulings and customs proceed from the same philosophical or halachic assumptions. So what?
Ariel
===========================

Fine with me, but what do all those who say halacha is primarily a n objective process say to those who want to change things the first group doesn't want to change?
joel rich | 11.15.07 - 9:53 am | #

Is it only repairing broken instruments (like a string that snapped off) that is forbidden deoraisa or is tuning forbidden to the same degree? Because this second case is much more frequent. And come to thnik of it, "very few people are skilled in instrument repair" is a statement that should be revised nowadays when anyone can replace a guitar string. Or is replacing a string also not forbidden deoraisa, and it's only when the neck breaks off?
Chanokh | 11.15.07 - 9:53 am | #

Dear KT/Joel Rich

Re: Bongos

It is automatically forbidden as a musical instrument regardless of how primitive it may be.

The issue of when "times change", and the like, including the numerous inconsistencies is an area that I am not going near any time soon…..

Dear Benny-

A door knocker would be considered a musical instrument. i.e. an item intended for a particular sound.

Dear Yosef Chaim-

I accept your rebuke – "progressive" may not be the ideal word to have used. I'll change that in the future editions of the article.

Dear Zach-

I though of that too, and my only take is the leniency that we don’t know how to fix musical instruments in our day was enough to allow clapping but not use of instruments themselves. (i.e. clapping is still 'once removed'. Any other ideas?

Chanoch-

Good point. It seems that only repair would be the issur d'oraisa
Ari Enkin | 11.15.07 - 10:04 am | #

A. These sages felt that since nowadays very few people are skilled in instrument repair there was little reason to fear that someone would come to repair an instrument which had broken.

I learned that tuning an instrument was a violation of makeh b'patish (final finishing step in the production of a particular product.)

B. The tuning forks that are often used by Chazzanim are permitted by some authorities but forbidden by others.

See "Chazan's Watch Revisited" at http://www.ottmall.com/ mj_ht_arc...v33i76.html#CYG for another option, for those who do not want to be maikil.
Danny Geretz | Homepage | 11.15.07 - 10:31 am | #

>A door knocker would be considered a musical instrument. i.e. an item intended for a particular sound.

And the bells on a Sefer-Torah? How is a door-knocker different than one knocking with his hand on the door?
Benny | 11.15.07 - 10:37 am | #

The door knocker's purpose is to make the sound. The bells are primarily decorative, and only incidentally make a sound. Furthmore, you intentionally knock the knocker. The bells are only "rung" indirectly when you move the torah, which is you primary intention.
MDJ | 11.15.07 - 11:12 am | #

Joel listen to this shiur by Rav Sacks http://www.yutorah.org/ showShiur...d_Amirah_Laakum
cazzie | 11.15.07 - 12:12 pm | #

R' Enkin, what about banging on a table with one's hands? (Most commonly seen at a Shabbos table, particularly in yeshivos where a lot of people will do so to make a 'rhythm'.)
Ezzie | Homepage | 11.15.07 - 1:07 pm | #

I seem to recall hearing from RHS that in Germany the poskim permitted the use of a door knocker on Shabbos.
Shlomo | 11.15.07 - 1:14 pm | #

A ban? On musical instruments? Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! How dare they! Now all yidden will go off the dereck! Like Gene Simmons, Peter Green, Marty Friedmann, Rod Morgenstein... see!
Yossi(Joe)Izrael | Homepage | 11.15.07 - 1:30 pm | #

Ezzie,
Pls see my bongo question above.
KT
joel rich | 11.15.07 - 1:32 pm | #

Conversely, some have suggested that even according to Tosfos it's possible that the decree DOAS apply in our times, since musical instruments have become a lot more ubiquitous, in the form of Casios, pianos etc. and possibly even radios and tape recorders etc., and these are often tinkered with on an ad hoc basis.

ISTM that the widespread leniency in this area is likely the influence of chassidim, who are lenient. Since chassidim are widely perceived as being stringent, anything that they're lenient about is assumed to be no big deal.

Although it should be stressed - and R' Enkin erred by omitting this from his article - that the primary (or at least one of the primary) - bases for dancing on Shabbos is the position of the Maharshal et al that dancing for a simcha shel mitzva is permitted. (I'm pretty sure the Mishne Brura cites this, which makes its omission all the more surprising.) So this means that you can't extent the leniency to other forms.

Also, R' Enkin's citing of the AHS as: "it was only clapping and dancing to instrumental music which was prohibited, not dancing to the tunes of vocal song", is clearly incorrect, because according to this there would be no point of prohibiting dancing at all, once playing instruments is already forbidden. IIRC the AHS actually says that the type of dancing that we do (possibly that is not TYPICALLY done to music?) is OK as it is lower key but not since it is not actually being done to music.
Fotheringay-Phipps | 11.15.07 - 1:41 pm | #

R' Enkin, what about banging on a table with one's hands? (Most commonly seen at a Shabbos table, particularly in yeshivos where a lot of people will do so to make a 'rhythm'.)

I don't allow it in my house.
Gil | Homepage | 11.15.07 - 1:51 pm | #

This conversation makes me want to be chassidishe!

What would banging on the shabbos table be a problem?
RMS | 11.15.07 - 2:16 pm | #

I applaud this discussion...

...but not on Shabbos.
charedilite | 11.15.07 - 2:28 pm | #

"because according to this there would be no point of prohibiting dancing at all, once playing instruments is already forbidden."

I'm not sure why this should necessarily follow.
Ari Lamm | 11.15.07 - 2:55 pm | #

"I don't allow it in my house."

Boooooring!
Ari Lamm | 11.15.07 - 2:57 pm | #

"I don't allow it in my house"

What a surprise.
moC | Homepage | 11.15.07 - 3:08 pm | #

The idea that something once prohibited can never be permitted, even if the original reason no longer applies, is EXTREMELY suspect. There are numerous examples where this rule was flat-out ignored, from aveilus to shabbos to shatnez, and everywhere in between. The Pischei Teshuvah on the first siman in hilchos shatnez brings down some examples.

Among the reasons brought down to disrgard this rule are when we are aware of the original reason, or when the reason is not common/"lo shchiach". If you look at the sources it is clear these grounds were just offered by achronim after the fact. In reality, the rishonim frequenly did not even consider this idea of refusing to repeal an obsolete law. As time progressed, and we became ever more machmir, achronim began to question these rishonim, and were forced to come up with rationales to explain away the rishonim. Look up the sources in the PT and you'll see what I mean.

In any event, even if we limit ourselves to the grounds offered by the achronim, clapping and dancing is permissible. In the yeshiva educated communities, many if not most are aware of the reason of "shema yisaken keli shir". Even if not, it is certainly rare that someone jump up fom a taple where guys are klapping, to spontaneously put together a trombone.
DF | 11.15.07 - 3:39 pm | #

Farbissene Litvaks
Anonymous | 11.15.07 - 4:25 pm | #

What would banging on the shabbos table be a problem?

Banging on the table per se is fine. Banging on the table to a tune is like banging on a drum, and part of the original gezerah.

The idea that something once prohibited can never be permitted, even if the original reason no longer applies, is EXTREMELY suspect. There are numerous examples where this rule was flat-out ignored, from aveilus to shabbos to shatnez, and everywhere in between.

It isn't suspect at all because it is an explicit Gemara. There are exceptions, which leads one to find a distinction between cases. I believe the Malbim in his Artzos Ha-Chaim has a great discussion of this, as do many other acharonim.

The fact that Chassidim do not follow this halakhah is justifiable according to some opinions, but leads me to personally wonder whether the justification came before or after the practice.
Gil | Homepage | 11.15.07 - 4:31 pm | #

The idea that something once prohibited can never be permitted, even if the original reason no longer applies, is EXTREMELY suspect. There are numerous examples where this rule was flat-out ignored, from aveilus to shabbos to shatnez, and everywhere in between.

A wonderful shiur I referenced above by Rabbi Saks. It appears to be a machlokes Rishonim with perhaps at least 4 -5 different opinions. Shatzez could be an exception to a lo plug because the takana was oker davar min haTorah. Anyway I urge all interested to listen to the shiur.
cazzie | 11.15.07 - 5:56 pm | #

I think the question is, if there's a known leniency by dancing on Simhhas Torah, would it be logical for that leniency to extend to clapping, thumping, and similar simple forms of 'music' (banging improvised drumsticks on a table?), if you hold by Shabbos in general that all that is asur?
Steg (dos iz nit der šteg) | Homepage | 11.15.07 - 6:05 pm | #

"Banging on the table to a tune is like banging on a drum, and part of the original gezerah."

Whaaa?... Have you consulted a drummer about this?
Ari Lamm | 11.15.07 - 6:08 pm | #

>"It isn't suspect at all because it is an explicit Gemara. There are exceptions, which leads one to find a distinction between cases."

You're right it's an explicit Gemara. My point is, the "exceptions" are all obviou ex post facto rationales given by achronim, to explain many cases where rishonim had no problem aborogating halachos on the basis that the original reason no longer applied. So, though you are right it's a gemara, rishonim in many cases simply didn't follow it. It is not the only Gemara they didnt follow.
DF | 11.15.07 - 6:11 pm | #

DF,
Put another way, if one empirically lists all the abrogated cases, the explanatory function is very complex.
KT
joel rich | 11.15.07 - 7:37 pm | #

If you want a clear example, by an unimpeachable source of a decree we no longer follow because the reason is no longer applicable, look at the Rema to YD 132:2 (at the end of a long haga'ah, starting with where the marking for #25 in the Gr"a's notes.) regarding selling wine that a Gentile has touched to said Gentile.
Mike S | 11.15.07 - 8:42 pm | #

The Shulhan Arukh is clear that clapping, dancing and everything else listed by the Mishnah is still forbidden on Shabbat.

The Beit Yosef himself discusses why this gezeirah is still in effect despite Tosafot's claim that today we don't know how to fix musical instruments, whereas the gezeirah of giluy, concern for snakes in liquids, is no longer of concern. The Beit Yosef was aware of the question and dealt with it.

All Sephardim permit clapping and dancing and keeping a rhythm, etc. on Simhat Torah (See חזון עובדיה סוכות for rather extensive sources).
David | 11.15.07 - 9:00 pm | #

The Pischei Teshivah I mentioned earlier in the work day is YD 298:1. Chazal prohibited silk with wool b/c of maaris ayin, but the Mechaber says nowadays silk is very common, and so there is no more gezeirah. The PT asks the question, that law once decreed cannot be repealed, but cites other places where this law was not applied. Again, the force of this law is very suspect. If it can be disregarded in so many places, it can be disregarded in the case under discussion, for the reasons I mentioned earlier.
DF | 11.15.07 - 10:32 pm | #

"ISTM that the widespread leniency in this area is likely the influence of chassidim, who are lenient. Since chassidim are widely perceived as being stringent, anything that they're lenient about is assumed to be no big deal."

It's also my impression that yeshivishe have become more lenient about dancing than they were in the past, due to chassidic influence.
Anonymous | 11.15.07 - 10:39 pm | #

Coming from one who has an infant, two recent poskim have permitted the use of rattle. Rav Shlomo Zalman is cited in SSC (Ch 16 Footnote 11)as permitting b/c everyone knows that rattles are not kli shir and only used for babies. Mishne Halachot 6:74 says that one can use a rattle to calm a crying baby if done kilachar yad.
Chananya | 11.15.07 - 11:06 pm | #

RE: Banging on the table to 'the tune'-

It seems that most of the 'mainstream' literature would be against banging on the tbale, though I do see it fitting very nicely with Minchat Elazar O.C. 1:29 and therefore permitted. Certianly a limud zechus.

The Lubavitcher and Bobover Rebbes [both ZTLLH"H according to my understanding of the definition of 'death'] both banged-to-the-tune on their tables on Shabbat.

Ari
Ari Enkin | 11.16.07 - 2:33 am | #

. Rav Shlomo Zalman is cited in SSC (Ch 16 Footnote 11)as permitting b/c everyone knows that rattles are not kli shir and only used for babies.

-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------

RE: Banging on the table to 'the tune'-

It seems that most of the 'mainstream' literature would be against banging on the tbale,

==================================
very interesting juxtaposition - pertinent to our discussion elsewhere on making haklacha.


KT
joel rich | 11.16.07 - 5:41 am | #

Ari Lamm: ""because according to this there would be no point of prohibiting dancing at all, once playing instruments is already forbidden."

I'm not sure why this should necessarily follow."

Because there's no point of a prohibition on something that only applies when you are already violating some other prohibition.

I looked up the AHS last night, and my recollection was accurate. The AHS suggests that the only prohibition is on dances that are tailored to the songs, as opposed to "the type of dancing we have nowadays". He's not talking about whether they are actually playing instruments at the time.
Fotheringay-Phipps | 11.16.07 - 9:05 am | #

Something worth keeping in mind is that the Gemara in Beitzah makes it clear that the gezeira against dancing and clapping was largely ignored by the masses even during the times of the gemara. It almost implies that the gezeira against clapping and dancing, as opposed to playing instruments, was never really adhered to, or was observed in the breach all the way back at the textual point of origin.

IIRC, that is the idea behind Reb Moshe's lenient attitude towards the gezeira.
Raphael Davidovich | 11.16.07 - 9:43 am | #

Raphael,
If so, the gezeira should never have taken force under the rules of not being accepted by the majority?
KT
joel rich | 11.16.07 - 11:29 am | #

So "yidden" is out on shabbos, even according to the AHS.
MDJ | 11.16.07 - 3:25 pm | #

Gil, why are you so convinced that banging on the table is exactly like banging on a drum?
one is a clei shir and one isnt?
and an amud is not a table?
Brad | 11.20.07 - 4:19 pm | #

Is banging on a table somehow better than clapping your hands, which the Mishnah specifically prohibits?
Gil | Homepage | 11.20.07 - 4:28 pm | #

Is banging on a table somehow better than clapping your hands, which the Mishnah specifically prohibits?

Gil,
Good question. Most poskim allow knocking on the door w/o a banger, for example. It seems at least plausible the mishna SPECIFICALLY prohibited clapping your hands, as opposed to tapping rhythmically on the table.
pro-human-rights | 11.20.07 - 5:52 pm | #

Because you don't knock on a door to a tune. Those same poskim prohibit knocking on a door with your hand to a tune, as well as clapping your hands to a tune.
Gil | Homepage | 11.20.07 - 5:56 pm | #

i think there is what to be said that banging on the table is not like clapping your hands. and to quote one of my rebbeim in yeshiva "when you see certain dinim derabbanan that do not seem to make sense any more--you do exactly what it says but not more". Thats why i thought there is certainly room to be maikel on something that was not included in the takanah if the sibat hatakanah does not apply anymore.
brad | 11.21.07 - 3:13 pm | #

they had a chance to include shulchan in the takanah--they included amud and thighs--if they didnt I dont think it needs to be extended.
brad | 11.21.07 - 3:14 pm | #

"One should not use forks, knives, or other tableware in order to make a beat or rhythm while singing.[15]

[15] Bnei Banim 1:12 where it is suggested that doing so may be an issur d'oraita"

On what basis does the Bnei Banim say that it may be an issur deoraysa? Is it not the case that only fixing the instrument is deoraysa?
Adam H | 11.26.07 - 12:04 am | #