whoa.
not that i care.
i do it with money ;-) .
There is a long-standing debate whether Maran wrote the headings of his chapters and this one in particular has been a major player in it.
Tangential comment - is there a list somewhere of places where we (or rov amcha, or different groups) hold by the SA instead of MB? Or vice versa?
I'm waiting for someone to tayna that 'שטו doesn't mean שטות.
As a prior commenter noted, some actually use this heading to claim that that R. Karo could not have written the headings, instead, they were put in by his printer. The argument goes since this custom is mentioned by the Rishonim thus it is impossible that R. Karo would call it minhag shtus.
This is not the only questions raised with regard to the authorship of the Shulchan Orach. Others claimed that not only did R. Karo not write the headings, some of the laws (mainly those which conflict with his statements in Bet Yosef) were written by someone else.
Of course, this all seems rather questionable in light of the fact the Shulchan ORach was published in R. Karo's lifetime.
For a complete discussion see Benayahu's book on R. Karo - "Yosef Bechiri" where he discusses the above as well as other questions of the accuracy and authenticity of the Shulchan Orach.
Wow.Where do you find this stuff?Good work.
The reason it is called a minhag of shtus is that it is ridiculous that an entire chicken in Har Nof costs roughly 20 shekels, yet a crappy etrog in Mea Shearim that is barely kosher for a bracha costs 70 shekels.
It is certainly possible that the phrase was inserted improperly rather than excised improperly. If it was the author's intention, I'm curious as to why Rav Karo did not include the phrase in the text. The term "yesh limnoa" pales in comparison.
It isn't only in this one edition. It's in all early editions, until it was excised--in Europe, where the practice was common and justified by the Rema.
So while all the above discussion is worthwhile, it's not impossible that it was removed rather than initially improperly inserted.
"So while all the above discussion is worthwhile, it's not impossible that it was removed rather than initially improperly inserted."
Seems to me quite possible it was improperly inserted AND removed (properly or otherwise).
The question is what did the word "shtus" mean at the time of R Karo's writing, and what does it mean in his writings in particular, how was it understood by his audiences, and are these meanings significantly different from "yesh l'mnoa". Maybe "shtus" meant "shitos" - individual opinions, non-normative. Semantical change might explain the motivation to remove "shtus" as offensive.
What difference does it make? It was removed from the heading, but anyone who reads either the Bet Yosef or the first halacha of the siman gets the point - it's Darkei Haemori!
I remember my 11th grade rebbe telling the class about this.
perhaps it wasn't excised "improperly" but rather because it no longer correctly summarized the siman, once the Rema was present. Whoever made the change might not have considered it integral to, or part of Rav Yosef Karo's work, but rather a convenient summary of the contents, and without those words it more accurately summarizes the entirety of the siman.
(courtesy of )
S, generally "courtesy of" implies you have asked, and received, permission of the insitutions to copy their material. Since -- please correct me if I am wrong -- I doubt this was done, the more proper term might be "care of..." or just a hyperlink. (I do not mean to imply you have done anything illegal, as the material is small enough to be under fair use, but, well, call it a minhag shtus if you will but it is the more proper way to caption borrowed material :) )
-mivami
Of course it was removed after the Rama was published. It wouldn't make any sense to leave it in when the Rama says it is a valid minhag.
MY edition brings the first edition text in their Hagahos Veharos they bring a Shut Shemesh Tzedaka that basicly says what Dan said
The whole statement strikes me as being out of character for headings in the SA. Are there other examples of headings that make (strong) statements, as opposed to just describe the contents of the siman?
God didn't say in the beginning
let there be light and all that shit
for saying so would be sinning
against the world and you in it.
With pale and nauseated look
the Bible's dry, it's hair thinning,
the flakes are falling off the book
but images that float are spinning
through DSL to Herman Wouk.
To follow up tk's comment, see Z'chor L'avraham 5760-61 pg. 111 f. where MY prints various teshuvos (at least two of which have since been reprinted in the authors' seforim) as to whether they should print the origninal heading.
yet a crappy etrog in Mea Shearim that is barely kosher for a bracha costs 70 shekels.
I've never seen that, and I'm there quite often. a crappy etrog can be found for about the price of a chicken.
Maybe "shtus" meant "shitos" - individual opinions, non-normative.
I've never seen that use of the word shtus, and it would have a yod in it if it was, and "shitos" always comes with a qualifier, and never with "minhag". That's a crummy suggestion, and we all know what שטות means. comes from שוטה. sorry.
Why would someon abbreviat a four-letter word into thre?
>Why would someon abbreviat a four-letter word into thre?
You had to when you had to count type.
Rashi in Chumash notes that shema means either listen or accept. He differentiates based on whether Unkelos translates shema or kabeil.
The idea that Shema - in this particular instance - has the multiple meanings of hear, understand and accept, is a T'shuvos Harashba. (I can find the exact source, if someone needs it.)
Sorry about the previous post - wrong blog.
Meir Hershkowitz in HaDarom (forgot which issue) brings an article from Yaakov Reifman tracing Kapporot to an ancient Greek custom.
FRED:
please email me. i have some goodies for you
I bought a very good lulav and estrog last year from Meah Shearim.
The Estrog was almost perfect and undoubtly kosher. The set cost me 100 shekels.
Hehe. My FIL calls it kefirah. (Note that my family does it with money.)
The lashon of the later printing is a bit awkward and not consistent with other places in SA (it seems). If the M'achber wanted to simply tell us that there was a minhag (but not to comment on the minhag in the title) he would have said "nohagim" or "yesh nohagaim".
The price of an Etrog in Mea Shearim fluctuates. For those on Gemach, it is reasonable and not nonsensical. For those who are North American Jews who are taking a leave of absence from a successful life and are studying in yeshiva, the price is much higher. This is manipulative and a Hillul Hashem, in the words of Rabbi Sheinberg Shlita. That an entire chicken is less than a lulav or hadassah is definitely nonsense. A chicken's life is worth more. In other words, those doing Kaparot with money are not only sparing a chicken from a sweaty swing but are no doubt much more generous.
"This is manipulative and a Hillul Hashem"
If they are overcharging the Americans, I hear the problem, but if they are undercharging the ones on Gemach, what's the problem?
"That an entire chicken is less than a lulav or hadassah is definitely nonsense. A chicken's life is worth more."
this is an economic theory? a chicken's life might be worth more than a diamond too. I think it's an injustice that diamonds are not a dollar twenty nine a pound.
um, I would point out that the chapter headings come origionaly from the tur, and not from the shulchan aruch. (although there were some changes.)
I saw an old tur, like from the 1400s that had its own chapter headings.
Commenting by HaloScan
