[Aspaqlaria] Aspaqlaria

[Aspaqlaria]

Aspaqlaria

///////////////////////////////////////////
Something Else to Throw into the Bonfire
 
Posted: 24 Jul 2007 09:26 AM CDT
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2007/07/something-else-to-throw-into-the-bonfire.shtml


Saul Mashbaum wrote the following back during the should we burn the wigs? period a few years ago. I think its still quite apropos, a reminder of our priorities.
SOMETHING ELSE TO THROW INTO THE BONFIRE

Sources close to several major poskim have claimed that they have declared a new chovat biur. After examining the situation carefully, we have come to the conclusion that all Jews have an obligation to eradicate all sinat chinam in their possession said the poskim This obligation is more stringent than that of sheitels: it applies to all forms of sinat chinam - vadai, safek, chashash, and taarovet sinat chinam - whatever its source. The obligation is incumbent on every Jew - men and women alike - at all times and in all places.

Shortly after this announcement was made known, bonfires appeared in Jewish neighborhoods everywhere as masses of Jews rushed to respond to the   gdolims call. The crush was such that many had to wait hours on line for the opportunity to cast their sinat chinam into the flames.

Here and there tears could be seen in the eyes of the participants. I hate to say it, but Im really going to miss my sinat chinam someone told our reporter. Its been part of me for so long, I cant imagine being without it. But if the gdolim say its got to go, its got to go.

Our reporter in the metivta drakea says that the famous tzaddik, R. Levi MiBerdichev, has already made an appearance before the Heavenly Court in response to this dramatic development. Mi keamcha Yisrael, said the ohev Yisrael with tears in his eyes. Your holy people have gladly cast off a precious and intimate part of themselves for the sake of Your Divine Name. Surely You will have mercy on Your people.

Halevai shenitzke lkach.
 


///////////////////////////////////////////
The Last Tishah beAv
 
Posted: 23 Jul 2007 11:13 AM CDT
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2007/07/the-last-tishah-beav.shtml


I recall one year I had just started a new camp. I was davening in the evening, at the very beginning of Tishah beAv, and I heard a shofar blow. After a moment, I realized it was the PA system, that this was the camps siren marking the beginning of the fast. I have no idea how deep my belief in the constant possibility of mashiach really runs today; I have no way of checking how far down it reaches. But for that one beautiful moment, I believed.


 


///////////////////////////////////////////
Hilkhos Mashiach
 
Posted: 23 Jul 2007 09:54 AM CDT
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2007/07/hilkhos-mashiach.shtml


On Avodah, Saul Newman gave the following summary of halakhos related to bias hamashiach from an article in the Yated. I found that the pragmatic halachic discussion gave some mamashus  (tangibility) to the idea.

In conclusion, we may recite a total of eight special brachos when Moshiach

arrives, in the following order:

When we first hear from a reliable source the good news of Moshiachs

arrival, we will recite Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech Haolam hatov vehameiteiv.
When we see the huge throngs of Jews assembled to greet him, which will no doubt number at least 600,000 people, one recites, Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech Haolam chacham harazim.
When one sees the rebuilt Beis Hamikdash or rebuilt shuls or batei medrash, one recites, Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech Haolam matziv gevul almana. Theoretically, one might recite this bracha before the bracha Chacham harazim, if one sees the rebuilt Beis Hamikdash before one sees the huge throngs.
When we actually see Moshiach, we will recite, Baruch Atah Hashem

Elokeinu Melech Haolam shechalak mikevodo lireiav.
Immediately after reciting this bracha, we will recite the bracha,

Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech Haolam shechalak meichachmaso lireiav. According to some poskim, one may recite these last two brachos when aware that Moshiach is nearby, even if one cannot see him.



Michael Kopinsky noted on this item that it presumes that the melekh hamashiach will be a rabbinic figure as well as king. This was true for our greatest kings  David and Shelomo  but it is not a prerequisite for the job. As he asks, Was Bar Kochva, for example, eligible for the bracha of shechalak meichachmaso? and yet that didnt prevent Rabbi Aqiva from deciding Bar Kochba qualified to be mashiach.


When one actually sees Moshiach, one should recite Shehechiyanu.
, 8. According to the Lev Chaim, on the anniversary of Moshiachs arrival,

we will again recite Shehechiyanu to commemorate the date, and we will

recite a long bracha mentioning some of the details of the miraculous events of his arrival. This bracha will close with the words, Baruch Atah Hashem Goal Yisroel.


 


///////////////////////////////////////////
Hashem is Righteous
 
Posted: 23 Jul 2007 09:53 AM CDT
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2007/07/hashem-is-righteous.shtml


Eli Turkel summarized some thoughts from the 100 pages introduction to the sefer The Lord is Righteous in All His Ways, from the notes of R JB Soloveitchikztl. The format isnt the usual for this blog, being more like his notes, but then, it wasnt written for this blog either.

 Questions:

Many things are missing from the Tisha Baav tefila: Tachanun, Avinu Malkenu, Titkabel (in the morning), Neilah (unlike a taanit tzibur over rain)
We dont sit on chairs only until noon unlike other dinei aveilut that apply the whole day. Nachem only in the afternoon.
A mourner is prohibited in all work while on Tisha Baav only work that disturbs ones concentration. One should cry on tisha baav but there is nothing equivalent for a mourner.
The kinot do not stress the absence of korbanot and other avodah in the Temple unlike musaf of Yom Kippur.
Moed in the Eichah has nothing to do with happiness. How can Tisha Baav be considered a happy day.


Answer: The essence of Tisha Baav is Sattom Tefillati On Tisha Baav we mourn not the destruction of the Temple but rather the result that we are distant from Hashem. While between Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur we are close to Hashem on Tisha Baav we are at the other extreme. Hence, it is not appropriate to add requests like Neilah, Tachanun, Avinu Malkenu or Titkabal. RYBS refused to say a request for a sick person on Tisha Baav.  [I]t is a day far away from approaching G-d with Teshuva. RYBS interpreted Moed in the original sense. Tisha Baav is an appointed time - for destruction and removal from this time. Thus we dont say Tachanun because it is a holiday but rather because of our distance from Hashem.

We mention other tragedies like the Crusades since the essence is not the Temple but what can happen when G-d is distant.

A mourner is not required from the din to not sit on chairs. Hence the requirement on Tisha Baav is not because of aveilut which in fact would last the whole day and similarly for work. Rather we dont sit on chairs because we are banned from Hashem and working would disturb are kinot. A mourners main obligation is aveilut be-lev. Inward and not crying. On Tisha Baav the mourning is not natural and so we force ourselves to cry. Similarly the 3 weeks build up to the highest level slowly as we learn intellectually about our distance from G-d. A mourner is emotional and begins with the worst and slowly acclimates to the world. Kinot and Eichah are central to Tisha Baav but not to a mourner because we must cause ourselves to feel the loss of the Temple while for a mourner it is natural.

After Mincha we begin Nechama. Paradoxically this occurs when the fire was set to the Temple. Hence we are comforted that G-d chose to destroy wood and stone rather than the nation. In the morning it was not clear what the punishment would be. [Emphasis mine. -mi] So the afternoon changes from stressing our distance from G-d to a more normal aveilut of other fast days though the 5 iyunim  of a taanit tzibur continue but not sitting on the floor or titkabel and now we can say nachem.
 


///////////////////////////////////////////
Safeiq deRabbanan
 
Posted: 16 Jul 2007 03:14 PM CDT
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2007/07/safeiq-derabbanan.shtml


R Aharon Rakeffet has a 10 year series on responsa literature and the art of making a halachic rulings. The classes are available on YUTorah.org. The following is primarily from his shiur of Dec. 19th, 1994 Safek from Torah or Rabbanan (starting at around 52 min. in). As is my norm, I add bits here and there.

The Rama writes that if one can not find a reason to choose one side of a machloqes (dispute) over another, he must use the rules of doubt.  Which means that if the halakhah is fiscal, then the person holding the money keeps the money (hamotzi meichaveiro alav haraayah -  he who wants to take from his peer has the burden of proof, posession is 9/10 of the law); when it is Torah prohibition or obligation, one must rule strictly; and in rabbinic prohibitions or obligations, one is supposed to be lenient. And thus much of responsa literature is about figuring out whether the prohibition is Torahitic or rabbinic. And once you find out its derabbanan, you can start adding up senifim lehaqeil, flaws in taking the law for granted, until one can consider the cumulative doubt sufficient to say safeiq deRabbanan lehaqeil.

But why do we rule leniently for a  rabbinic law? Isnt every rabbinic law really a Torah law of do not veer from what they tell you, neither to the left nor to the right?

1- Ramban (on Seifer haMizvos, shoresh 1):  The same Rabbis who made the rabbinic prohibitions and duties made them only applicable in the case of certainty. They desired to make a clear distinction between Torah and rabbinic law.

2- [My own addition] R Shimon Shkop allows us to say the same thing, 180º off. In Shaarei Yosher, he asks the question of why a sefeiq sefeiqah (a doubt added upon a second doubt) is ruled leniently.

The Rashba (Shut 1:401) holds its a variant on the notion of relying on majority. If the first doubt is roughly 50:50, and the second doubt is roughly 50:50, the chance of violation is 1/4, and therefore ignorable. However, Rav Shimon asks, why then do we have the rule miut bemaqom safeiq lo amrinan  we do not speak of a minority added to a safeiq? After all, if the first doubt is 50:50, any minority to whittle away at one side would make a majority? And yet, a case of doubt plus minority is no more lenient than without the minority?

Rav Shimon explains sefeiq sefeiqa on other grounds. Who said that a doubt in Torah law must be ruled stringently? It wasnt the Torah, it is rabbinic! And therefore, a second doubt on top of that first one is a doubt in a rabbinic law  and therefore we rule leniently.

(This reasoning also argues for accepting a sefeiq sefeiqa sheeina mis-hapekhes (an issue at the core of eating chadash), but that discussion would take us even further afield.)

So, rather than the Rambans limiting the specific prohibition to only cases where we are certain about the realia, its possible that we could limit the rabbinic enactment of ruling stringently on Torah law to have only been made about the other 612 laws. With the same consequent rationale.

3- Rav Meir Simchah haKohein miDvinsk (Meshekh Chokhmah, Devarim 17:11): A Torahitic prohibition describes something that is inherently wrong. The universe is made such that combining meat and milk is a problem (metuaf, meshuqatz).

A rabbinic prohibition lacks that reality. Chicken and milk isnt inherently damaging, it is that it leads to error through habit or accident. Therefore, one neednt the same care when dealing with rabbinic extension as when dealing with the damaging or refining thing itself.

4- Rav Elchanan Wasserman (Qunterus Divrei Soferim): Of course there is a reality to rabbinic statements. It is all revealed from the Creator, all the Ratzon Hashem yisbarakh (the Will of the Creator, blessed be He).  The difference between a derabbanan and a deoraisa is the explicitness. Therefore it is less sacred, and violation involves lesser realities. A difference of quantity, not quality.

Rabbi Rakeffet links Rav Elchanans position to his belief in daas Torah; both imply a belief that there is revelation of Hashems Will today through the rabbis.

5-  Shulchan Arukh haRav [another addition not in the lecture]: In a rare case of where the Shulchan Arukh haRav discusses the purpose of a law rather than just codifying practice, he discusses the significance of yom tov sheini shel galiyos, the observance of a second day of Yom Tov outside of Israel.

He explains that there is no time in the heavenly realms. The supernal Pesach is not associated with any particular time. Hashem made a connection between that Pesach and the 15th of Nissan, giving us a worldly manifestation within time. The SAhR continues that the 16th of Nissan is connected to the very same supernal Pesach. The seder on the 2nd night is a manifestation of the same metaphysical reality. What differs is  who draws down the connection, not what it is we are connected to.

Perhaps this is generalizable to rabbinic legislation in general. This would result in an opinion similar to Rav Elchanans in that it gives a reality to rabbinic law, rather than their just being pragmatics for how to keep Torah law. However, the opinions are also quite different in that it makes the rabbinic legislator a metaphysical engineer, building the reality, rather than a conduit of Hashems revelation of that reality.

And, to continue R Rakeffets thought, Chassidic attachment to the Tzaddiq is not the same as the Yeshiva Worlds notion daas Torah.

6- Seifer Meiras Einayim (SMA, ChM 67, #2): The berakhah that Hashem gives to those who keep shemittah , that they will have sufficient crops in the 6th year for the 6th, 7th and 8th years, is only when shemittah is mandatory by Torah law. (I.e. when the majority of the tribes are in their lands, and therefore there is a yoveil every 50th year.) Today, someone who keeps rabbinic shemittah gets no such guarantees.

7- Chazon Ish (Desheviis 18, #4): The blessing did apply during the 2nd Temple and after its destruction, for the heavenly court fulfills based on whats decreed down below.

Rabbi Rakeffet identifies the SMA with the position of the Meshekh Chokhmah, and the Chazon Ish with R Elchanan Wassermnns. To my mind, its possible that his position is more like the Shulchan Arukh haRav.

However, this explains why the Chazon Ish was so willing to be stringent when it came to keeping shemittah. Had he felt that the observance didnt come with insurance from the A-lmighty, perhaps he would have ruled leniently.
 


///////////////////////////////////////////
TIDE, variants on a theme
 
Posted: 12 Jul 2007 04:00 PM CDT
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2007/07/tide-variants-on-a-theme.shtml


In an earlier post, I raised one very fundamental difference between Rav Hirschs Torah im Derekh Eretz (Torah with culture, hereafter TIDE) and Rav JB Soloveitchiks attitude toward the secular, which YU titles Torah uMadda (Torah and other knowledge, TuM).

TIDE is a lifestyle that is wholly Torah and wholly derekh eretz, in that the Torah is what gives form and function to a cultured life, and culture is the substance to which one applies Torah.

Rabbi JB Soloveitchik, on the other hand, spoke in terms of unresolvable dialectics. One of his few talks on TuM is commonly referred to as “Ramatayim Tzofim” — two peaks from which to look out over the landscape, using a phrase from Shemu’el I 1:1. Man is torn between two peaks, which stand distinct. And in fact, it is the free will that emerges from choosing between these alternatives that is man’s “image of G-d”, our entire calling.

 Rav Hirsch speaks in terms of theory, defining the ideal human being as one living a life that is entirely Torah and yet composed of Derekh Eretz, whereas Rav Soloveitchik describes the reality, and living with the conflicts that we actually confront. The ideal may be one of unity, but life is a process of reaching for an ideal; not actually ever getting there. Thus, the two perspectives need not be taken as contradicting.

(At least, not on this point. TIDE and TuM differ in other ways. A topic for another entry.)

This is another entry.

There is something deeply in common between TIDE and the Slabodka school of Mussar. Both focused on self perfection in all ways. Slabodka students took care in dressing with dignity and according to the latest style. (Students of other yeshivos would poke fun at it.) And while Slabodka did not have secular classes, it was presumed that students learned such things informally. Rav Avraham Elya Kaplan describes his peers heated debates on the merits of Kant, Hegel, Freud and Marx. The ideal Slabodka student had a character refined by Mussar, spent most of his day studying Torah, was admirable even in the secularly cultured persons eyes, and dreamed of revolutionizing the world.

We also explored Rav Hutners notion of living a broad life. In the contrast made above, this idea is clearly more akin to Rav Hirschs unity than Rav Soloveitchiks coexistence. Perhaps this is because of the similarity (and yet quite different!) between Slabodka, which was where Rav Hutner studied, and Hirschs TIDE.

A second fundamental difference is rolled into the definitions I gave above for derekh eretz and mada respectively - culture vs. secular wisdom. Rav Hirsch is idealizing a person who is a refined and upstanding member of his society. Rav Soloveitchik is speaking about knowledge. It was quipped on Avodah once that both want to produce the Rabbi Dr., however TIDE wants an MD whereas TuMs doctor would be a PhD.

Derekh Eretzs refined member of society is not merely phrased in terms of taking the ennoblement that society has to offer. It also means contributing back to it. In Rav Hirschs ideal, the Jewish people are to be societys moral voice. As Noach blessed his sons, The aesthetics of G-d are with Yefes, and dwells in the house of Sheim. We, carriers of Sheims mission, are to bring G-dliness into the social structures Yefes gifts to society.

This question isnt directly addressed in R JB Soloveitchiks TuM. Academics are known for their challenge of having to escape the ivory tower and live in the real world, and so this question isnt central to the whole TuM formulation. However, we already discussed his brother Rav Aharons  outspokenness on Vietnam and Biafra. I would therefore judge universalism to be part of the American Soloveitchiks worldview, but from the concept of kavod haberios (the dignity of man) and not necessarily a direct expression of TuM. (Or perhaps someone can show a significant rift between their understandings of TuM, something I am taking for granted is minimal.)

Then of course there are other Torah and models:The Chazon Ish promoted Torah vaAvodah (used to mean something different than the Bnei Akiva motto)  Torah and productive work. The fusion of Torah with earning a living. In his utopia, not everyone is in kollel.

The Chazon Ishs notion is pragmatic. As the gemara puts it, there was a debate between R Yishmael and R Shimon bar Yochai as to how to live. R Yishmael advised getting a job, and Rashbi advocated full time study. The gemara concludes many tried to live as R Shimon but few succeeded. Life isnt designed to be Torah only, thus it cant be its Designers ideal that a full time life of learning is for all but those few.

The Vilna Gaon argued that all knowledge had essential unity. That its impossible to know Torah without knowing what one can of everything else  its all one thing.

It was usual (or perhaps: a pearl) in [the Vilna Gaons] mouth, that a measure that a person is lacking in the treasured knowledge of the forces of nature, will be lacking 100 fold of the wisdom of Torah.
- Qol haTor pg 123


Thus theGaons ideal is also shaped by the pragmatic, but in a very different way than the Chazon Ishs. The Chazon Ish speaks of how to succeed at living. Vilna Gaon is asserting that there is no way to succeed at Torah while pursuing a Torah only curriculum.

Perhaps related to the Gra position is the Rambams identification of maaseh hamerkavah (Ezekiels vision of the Divine Chariot) with metaphysics and theology, of a maaseh bereishis with the study of natural philosophy (roughly what we today would call science).

Rav Kook dismissed Torah and as being fundamentally illusory. Everything is from G-d and therefore inherently holy. There is only the obviously holy and that in which the sanctity is less visible. Everything one does that furthers Hashems goals are therefore of value. Even if the person doing it doesnt realize his aims in those terms. This is how Rav Kook spoke of the holiness of the non- and anti-religious chalutz, who served Hashems aim of returning us to our land even while rl denying His Existence.

And so, in Rav Kooks worldview, harmony reigns, not Rav Soloveitchiks notion of halakhah guiding one on how to choose between conflicting values. Secular knowledge is only seeming secular; in truth it is holy. Thus the conclusion is much like the Vilna Gaons  the unity is inherent in the material. However, Rav Kook provides a mystical explanation for the unity, whereas the Vilna Gaons was a pragmatic one about the nature of being knowledgable.

Rav Kook similarly sees that underlying holiness in participation in the best of contemporary civilization. Of course, he would say the best would be to do so in the context of developing Eretz Yisrael and Am Yisrael, a factor not addressed by TIDE or TuM.

My own inclination, for what little its worth, is that the ideal is one of unity. I am not sure a human being can ever reach that ideal, but in any case, I am not there. And so I must recognize that to me Torah, mada and derekh eretz will at times yield conflicting priorities, and I must follow halakhah to decide among them.  Going beyond the Brisker outlook, I would say that I must also follow mussar, an awareness of where I need to grow at this point in my life, to provide guidance where halakhah does not.

I do not see how mada has value in and of itself, I am more inclined to value it as the Vilna Gaon does  knowledge is all one piece, and knowing more of one thing makes you more able to understand everything else.

Similarly, once one listens to mussars call to be a mentch and madas call to be a knowledgable one even beyond the boundaries of the Torah, the call to derekh eretz to Yefes style refinement, has already been heard.

I am similarly unsure of the inherent value of derekh eretz. Derekh eretz, though, overlaps greatly with both with mussar and being a mentch and with mada. And in terms of high culture, much of it s mada
 


///////////////////////////////////////////
Noach and the Use of Wine
 
Posted: 09 Jul 2007 02:08 PM CDT
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2007/07/noach-and-the-use-of-wine.shtml


We were discussing on Avodah the origins of the idea of Qiddush. I argued that the notion of celebrating or thanking G-d with wine would seem to be one people would stumble upon naturally, arguing from Noachs instinct to plant a vineyard.

Rn Toby Katz noted that I was making an unsupported assumption:

Celebrating?  as Noach celebrating the human condition of  having almost everyone you know dead in a world-wide catastrophe, and desperately wanting to escape the pain and grief of it all?

Interesting question: Was Noach drinking to forget, or to thank G-d for being saved? I really just assumed the latter. But looking at the context, I can see why I did so.Here is the sequence. Noach:

- gets off the ark,

- brings olos (entirely consumed offerings) thanking Hashem for being saved, and

- enters into a covenant with HQBH.

This covenant ends with peru urevu  umoraakhem vechitekhem (a repetition of the blessing to Adam to be fruitful, multiply, and dominate the creatures of the earth). In

short, the attention is firmly on rebuilding a future. As it is the introduction to the story about Noach getting drunk, where Hashem again lists those who left the ark, and introduces Kenaan.

So that explains why my mind went in that direction.

Looking at Rashi to answer this question, I also noticed the following:

Rashi makes a point of telling you that Kenaan is introduced because this story explains the root of Kenaans cursed state. Notice that it all starts with wine.

In saying Noach returned to his tent, the word ohaloh is oddly spelled with a final hei rather than ending with a vav to complete a full cholam, the usual suffix for his. Rashi tells us this is a reference to the 10 Shevatim, who were also called Ahalah  after the Shomeron. (A nickname for the Northern Kingdom that finds its way into Yom Kippurs Qinos.) And why? Because the 10 Shevatim were lead astray through grape - hashosim bemizreqei yayim  who drink wine from bowls and annoint themselves with the first of the oils, but are not pained by the downfall of Yosef (Amos 6:6).

There would seem to be an implied undercurrent of the 10 Tribes being accused of assimilating the attitude toward wine their Canaanite neighbors picked up from / demonstrated in this story.

And, judging from Amos, the problem with wine that Rashi is focusing on when explicating the story of Noach is inappropriate revelry.
 


///////////////////////////////////////////
Benching Gomel
 
Posted: 09 Jul 2007 12:53 PM CDT
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2007/07/benching-gomel.shtml


I just wrote the following in an email to some friends. I thought it might interest others.

First, note that its called gomel, from a key word in the text of the berakhah. But its the same /גמל/ as gemillus chasadim. It means to support over time, rather than a single moment of loving-kindness. (The same root yields gamal, camel.) We make the blessing when we can feel G-ds chesed, but the topic of the blessing is the continued chesed we get over an entire lives.

The gomel blessing is associated with life-saving situations. Which then raises the question of whether crossing the sea or the desert by airplane should really be on the list.

However, those who coined the berakhah were doing so as a stand-in for the qorban Todah, the Thanksgiving offering, which in turn was associated in particular with four kinds of rescue. In other words, anyone may offer such a sacrifice, but anyone who experienced one of these four were obligated to.

Rav Yehudah says in the name of Rav (Berakhos 54b): Four must express gratitude: Those who go down to the sea, those who cross the desert, one who was ill and was cured, and one who was imprisoned and was released.

(In Igeros Moshe (Orach Chaim 2:59) R Moshe Feinstein rules that the rule about saying gomel whenever crossing the sea is really about whenever one isnt on land. Historically, this meant being over water, but today would include airplane flight. He therefore requires gomel after transcontinental flights even if no major bodies of water are crossed. Another modern debate is that many who do not rule like Rav Moshe Feinstein still require benching gomel when crossing the Great Salt Lake in Utah, whereas others do not. What is a sea for this purpose?)

This list is based on Psalms 107s descriptions of the times we called out to Hashem during the Exodus and He saved us.  The connection to the Psalm is also cited by Rashi on the verse describing the offering, Lev. 7:12.

The Vilna Gaon spells out how Ravs list occurred in the Exodus: (1) Going down into the Red Sea, (2) crossing the Sinai desert, (3) being cured from the whipping and other torture of the Egyptians, and (4) leaving servitude.

Connecting the sacrifice and therefore the blessing to the Exodus would make the fact that there are four items on the list more tantalizing. It echoes the four cups of wine at the seder, and the explanations and meanings given for them.

But what all this says to me (now for the personal observation) is that gomel isnt only about being saved. The Exodus was a visible demonstration of the Hand of G-d in history and in human events. The visible demonstration which is placed at the foundation of Judaism. Gomel is particularly mandatory when we have a shadow (I already used echoes last paragraph) of that experience in our own lives.

Combining this with my opening thought about gomel and the idea that the blessing is really about the constant chesed in our lives that just happens to be more obvious at the moment, and we get:

Bentching gomel is a recognition that all those little gifts from G-d that are all to easy take for granted are no less thanks-worthy than this major event which I cant overlook, and teach me the lesson of the Exodus  that Hashem is constantly bestowing His Good to me.
 


///////////////////////////////////////////
Be a Jew Through and Through
 
Posted: 05 Jul 2007 06:28 PM CDT
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2007/07/be-a-jew-through-and-through.shtml


Another guest entry. The following was originally submitted to (but not picked up by) Hamodia.Rav Hirschs quoted words are clearly the predecessor of R Breuers talk on Glatt Yoshor, which was also posted to this blog from an email by R Dr Levine.

-micha 
Be A Jew Through and Through!

Dr. Yitzchok Levine

Department of Mathematical Sciences

Stevens Institute of Technology

Hoboken, NJ 07030

llevine at stevens.edu

A number of years ago we had a student from Stevens as our guest for the last days of Pesach. He came from a non-religious home and had become observant. At one point he confided in me, “My father once told me that every time he had business dealings with an observant Jew he felt that he was being cheated.”  To put it mildly I was taken aback by what he had said.

I explained to him that what his father told him was clearly a broad generalization that could not be the truth about how all observant Jews behaved in their business dealings. I also pointed out that the Torah requires us to deal honestly and fairly with all people – Jew and Gentile.

Nonetheless, what he said has remained with me, and even now I find such a statement disturbing. Sadly, there are some “frum” Jews whose dealings with others are not in accordance with what Yiddishkeit demands from its adherents.

Recently I came across something from the writings of Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch that deals with this topic. In his essay “Tammuz I” found in the Collected Writings of Rabbi Samson Rafael Hirsch, Volume I, pages 279 – 281, Rav Hirsch points out that one of the five tragedies that took place on the Seventeenth of Tammuz was that “The tablets [Luchos] were broken when Moshe descended from the mountain.” He then goes on to point out

“And the tables were written on both their sides, , on the one side and on the other were they written.” (Exodus 32, 15.)

The word from Sinai must not grip us only superficially and one-sidedly. It must penetrate us through and through, it must set its stamp indelibly on every part of our being, and whichever way we are turned the writing of God must everywhere be visible on us clearly and legibly. See the Divine tables of testimony! On them there was no above and below, no front and back. The writing pierced right through them, and yet they could be read on both sides. This must be a model for you. Be a Jew through and through. Whichever way you are turned, be a Jew. Do not engrave the Divine writing only on one side, one part, one aspect of your being, so that you will appear a Jew and a missioner of the Divine name and the Divine will only when regarded from one side and one aspect, but when you turn your back and enter into other relationships you will appear as anything but a Jew, a missioner for anything but the name and the will of God; or at any rate you will not be so completely a Jew, you will not be so clearly stamped as a missioner of Gods will. Be a Jew through and through on all sides and in all aspects. And do not esteem one side as facing more directly towards the Godhead. Do not imagine that you have received the stamp of the Divine word with more emphasis on this one side, and that you can allow the other side to be content with the after-effects of this stamp and with the mere traces of this imprint. Do not think that people as they look on one side can discern that the force of the Divine word has penetrated to the other, when you speak of what you call the main sides and the main periods and the main items and the main articles of your Judaism. In relation to God there is no reverse side and no opposite side; everything is turned to God and must be taken equally seriously, on every side the stamp of the Divine will is to be placed with the same force and care and directness. Let yourself be penetrated through and through from all sides with the Divine word!

We have recently observed the Fast of the Seventeenth of Tammuz and are now in the midst of the Three Weeks. It should be a time of introspection for all of us, given the calamities that we have experienced during this sad period. Perhaps each of us should now commit to striving to be a Jew through and through in all that we do.
 


///////////////////////////////////////////
Rebbe
 
Posted: 25 Jun 2007 02:41 PM CDT
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2007/06/rebbe.shtml


Here is another guest post. This time, two biographies. Hopefully beH work will slow down to the point where I can return to writing.

Today is the 14th yahrzeit of Rav Dovid Lifshitz, a man who tried so hard to be my rebbe despite by inability to really listen to what he was telling me (Some say he was niftar on the 10th of Tammuz, but the Ezras Torah calendar writes that it was the 9th. As Rav Dovid led Ezras Torah for decades, I am taking their version as correct.)

But the closing lines of this article are ones I can attest to. Getting mussar from Rav Dovid meant that he sat close to you, held your arm affectionately, and you really knew that rebbe was expressing the pain of watching someone he cared about go amiss.

By the time I had gotten to rebbes shiur, he had given up on filling a shiur in YU if he were to continue in Yiddish, and so rebbe gave shiur in Modern Israeli Hebrew. At least, once rebbe sat down and replaced his hat with a Lithuanian style hoich-kapl (high yarmulka). Rav Dovid tended to walk in the door greeting us with, ShaLOIM BUCHrim! Mah NISHmuh? (caps used to illustrate European-style word stressing), which brought a smile to the face (at least the first few times).

Another memory I feel compelled to share were the first two questions on every final.  I think Rav Dovid would have preferred something more traditional, but YU required formal written finals. Before giving out the papers, rebbe would ask us who slept eight hours the night before? If you didnt, rebbe would send you back to the dorm  you need your sleep even during final week! The second question was who ate breakfast? And if you skipped that under the pressure of finals, rebbe handed you a few dollars and sent you to the cafeteria. Ones grade in shiur was correlated to how rebbe thought you were doing (generally an A), not the final anyway.

This last anecdote is something I since found out that Rav Dovid may have learned from his rebbe, Rav Shimon Shkop. A student arrived at Grodno, obviously tired from the long trip. Rav Shimon told him he could attend the yeshiva only if he correctly answered the two questions of his farhehr (oral test): Does he need a rest? Does he need some food?
And with that I give you two biographies of Rav Dovid Lifshitz. The first is by R Chaim Waxman, written  And with that, I give you R Chaim Waxmans intimate portrait, written for the August 30th, 2004 issue of The Commentator (the Yeshiva College newspaper). This is rebbe as painted by a talmid  and later son-in-law who didnt share my greater interest in the computer room than the beis medrash.Reb David - Harav David Lifshitz, zl: An Intimate Portrait

 Chaim I. Waxman

Issue date: 8/30/04

This is anything but an objective portrait. Reb David was, after all, my rebbi and my father-in-law with whom I was very, very close. And yet, I hope that what follows is not too far from the mark and will offer some insight into the significant role he played at Yeshiva University for almost 50 years. I begin with a brief biographical sketch.

Harav David Lifshitz was born in Minsk, Russia, in 1906. In 1919, his family moved to Grodno, where he was a student of the famed Rabbi Shimon Shkop at his yeshiva, Shaarei Torah, there. He later studied in the Mirrer Yeshiva, where he stayed until 1932 and received semikha. In 1933, he married Cipora Joselovitz, the daughter of the renowned rabbi of Suwalk (a provincial capital in northwest Poland/Russia), Rabbi Joseph Joselovitz. Upon the untimely death of his father-in-law, in 1935, Rabbi Lifshitz became chief rabbi of the city and its 27 congregations, where he developed the reputation of being a warm, involved spiritual leader, concerned with not only his own congregants but with all Jews, and until his death he served as president of Suwalki Benevolent Society in the United States.

In the autumn of 1939, when war broke out, and Jews were being rounded up by the Germans, Rav Lifshitz chose to stay with his community even though he had opportunities to leave. After the death of his infant child, however, the citys Jews compelled him to escape. He, his wife, and surviving daughter ultimately secured a U.S. visa, traveling through the Soviet Union, to Honolulu, then to the U.S. mainland.

>From 1941 to 1942, he and his family lived in New York, then moved to Chicago, where he was a rosh yeshiva at the Hebrew Theological College until 1944. During World War II, he was active in Vaad Hatzalah, the official Jewish rescue organization.

Dr. Samuel Belkin [Ed: second president of Yeshiva] actively sought to have him join the RIETS faculty and, in 1944, he came to RIETS as a rosh yeshiva, occupying a position which his mentor, Rabbi Shimon Shkop, had filled twelve years earlier as a visiting rosh yeshiva. He taught upper-level shiurim, primarily in masekhtot Kidushin, Gitin, Ketubot, Shabat, and Hulin.

In many respects, Reb David, as he was affectionately known, helped preserve the old Eastern European yeshiva tradition at RIETS. He had a full beard, dressed in the traditional garb, spoke in Yiddish, and his shiurim consisted of detailed examinations of the gemara as well as the opinions of the major Rishonim and Ahronim on the topic discussed. He also had a distinct stature to his presence. He was always meticulously dressed and he walked in a princely manner.

He was a constant presence in the yeshiva. He lived nearby and, from the time he moved in, the beit medrash was also where he davened. He was at his regular seat in the corner alongside the Aron Kodesh every morning and evening. Indeed, he was typically among the first to arrive before Shaharit and among the last leave after Maariv.

He manifested a unique combination of Lithuanian yeshiva intellect and the spirituality. In addition to his bekiut, encyclopedic knowledge of Talmud and Halakhic literature, he was a very spiritual person. This manifested itself most clearly in his highly inspiring tefilot in the beit medrash, especially during the Yamim Nora-im. His rendition of Avinu Malkenu on Yom Kippur is unforgettable for its awe. Likewise, in the way his entire body shook as he shook the Lulav and Etrog during the Succot tefilot.

He is probably best-remembered as an incredibly warm individual who was genuinely concerned with the well-being of every talmid in the yeshiva. I recall numerous occasions when he would stop students on the street and tell them that they shouldnt go out without a jacket in the cold of the winter.

His home was always open to his students, and he concerned himself not only with their performance in his class but with every aspect of their lives. Many would consult with him about every conceivable personal question, and he genuinely shared in their all of their achievements and losses.

On the evenings of Chanuka and Purim, chagigot for students, present and past - once you were his talmid, you were always his talmid - were held in his home. The tables were filled with refreshments prepared by my mother-in-law, and the students would talk and sing together for hours. Reb David would have each student there sing a line from one of the songs he selected, and then he gave an inspiring sicha, a talk which usually lasted for close to an hour.

Though he had his own chagigot, he was always present at those held in the Beit Medrash for the entire student body of the yeshiva, and he would always lead the singing and dancing there.

Every year, on Rosh Chodesh Adar, he would have signs posted in the hall near the beit medrash announcing the annual Hasmada Drive, his personal campaign to encourage the talmidim in the yeshiva to learn more. His primary focus was always on sacred learning.

Throughout his years at RIETS, he also played a leadership role in communal affairs, especially in Agudat Harabanim, Union of Orthodox Rabbis, and Ezrat Torah. These activities added further to the presence of the old yeshivishe world and RIETS.

At the same time, Reb David was quite progressive, especially for someone with his background. When, in the 1960s, he realized that most of his students did not understand the language, he stopped giving his shiurim in Yiddish. However, in contrast to other rabbeim in RIETS, he gave them in Hebrew. Many were very surprised to learn that he was fluent in Ivrit and, to this day, many are unaware that at the age of 12, he co-authored a commentary on the Mishlei (Proverbs) and Daniel, together with his childhood friend, Avraham Rosenshtein, who later Hebraicized his name as Even-Shoshan and authored the most important Hebrew dictionary of the twentieth century.

Few are aware that Reb David was fluent in Hebrew literature and poetry, and that he was able to engage in conversation with students at TI (now IBC) on material they studied in their classes. I vividly recall one day in the summer of the early 1980s, when I drove him from Yerushalayim, that he burst out in praise of the view by reciting a poem on the subject by none other than Chaim Nachman Bialik.

After the establishment of Medinat Israel, Reb David was active in guiding the relationship of American Orthodoxy to Israel. In the early 1950s, he helped create the movement in Israel for a coalition of all religious elements, both Zionist and non-Zionist. The high esteem which he enjoyed in all religious circles enabled him to help establish the Hazit Datit (United Religious Front) which ran on a single slate for the Israeli parliamentary elections.

Eretz Israel and Medinat Israel were among his greatest loves throughout his adult life. His first visit there was in 1952 and, in later years, he spent almost every summer and more there, and he frequently began his first shiur of the academic year with reminiscences of his latest stay in Israel and with a song of love for the country.

Reb David was the unique embodiment of that very special elite type of leader who was combined or synthesized, if you will, the role of rosh yeshiva and the role of rav. Even as rosh yeshiva, he was known as the the Suvalker Rav. He never relinquished that title. Nor did he ever relinquish his dedication to the rabbinate and his total dedication in carrying out the duties of a rav.

Although Reb David encouraged students to continue learning and, ideally, to become either rabbeim in yeshivot or shul rabbis, he understood that not everyone was cut out for those positions. When he sensed that a student was not going to enter those sacred positions, he encouraged him to do well in his general studies, to go to graduate school, and to be become the best professional he could while, of course, not forsaking regular sacred learning.

Finally, he was a model of beautiful behavior in his interactions with his neighbors, Jewish and not. Anyone who saw him in his many daily walks from his house to the yeshiva could not but be impressed with his warm greeting of everyone he met along the way, in his building, on the street, and in the yeshiva buildings. His very presence and demeanor were a true kiddush HaShem and a rare model.

How fortunate were we to have known him. To know him was to love him and to be loved by him.

Chaim I. Waxman, YC 63, is a professor of Sociology and Jewish Studies at Rutgers University.
And here is a more summary, overview, biography sent by R Shlomo Katz in the 14 Tammuz 5767 edition of  Hamaayan / The Torah Spring. Aside from giving an overview rather than R Chaim Waxmans detail, he also includes a thought that I also recall dearly (see my entries Yom Yerushalyim and War for thoughts based on this theme) and I think R Katz found an appropriate quote that characterizes Rav Dovids thought.

R Lifschitz, known as the Suvalker Rav, was a important figure in American Jewish life for nearly five decades, as a rosh yeshiva and as president of the Ezras Torah welfare organization from 1976 until his passing. He was born in Minsk in 1906, but moved to Grodno as a child, where he later studied in Yeshivat Shaar Hatorah of R Shimon Shkop zl. From there he transferred to the Mir yeshiva where he studied under R Eliezer Yehuda Finkel zl and Rav Yerucham Levovitz zl.

At age 24, R Lifschitz married Zipporah Chava Yoselewitz, daughter of the rabbi of Suvalk. Two years later, in 1935, R Lifschitz succeeded his father-in-law as rabbi of Suvalk, a title he carried for the rest of his life.

R Lifschitz suffered tremendous persecution at the hands of the Gestapo before the Jews were expelled from Suvalk. One-half of Suvalks 6,000 Jews (including the Lifshitz family) escaped to Lithuania. In June 1941, R Lifschitz arrived in San Francisco on a boat that carried several other leading sages. R Lifschitzs first position was in Chicago, but he soon moved to Yeshivat Rabbeinu Yitzchak Elchanan (the rabbinical school of what later became Yeshiva University), where he remained for the rest of his life.

R Lifschitz passed away on 9 Tammuz 5753 / 1993.

A small number of R Lifschitzs shmuessen / ethical lectures were printed posthumously under the title Tehilah LeDavid. Several of these relate to the subject of shalom, such as one from Yom Kippur 1974 when he said:

When we say Shalom aleichem, we are not merely greeting someone; we are blessing him. Shalom is a name of G-d, meaning completeness. Shalom / Peace means that the whole cosmos has achieved a state of completion through uniting to serve G-d. Whereas man was created lacking, it is his job to complete himself . . .

Israel today [one year after the Yom Kippur War] is in a state of truce. There are agreements, but is that peace? Is a cease-fire peace? Real shalom can exist only when Hashems awe is over all His handiwork, united to do His will (paraphrasing the Yom Kippur prayers). Shalom cannot be just the absence of war, because peace is completeness, a name of G-d.

 


--
You are subscribed to email updates from "Aspaqlaria."
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubcribe now http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailunsub?id=317024&key=izo%2Byu3%2FM71F48ktt9O6JA%3D%3D 

If you prefer to unsubscribe via postal mail, write to: Aspaqlaria, c/o FeedBurner, 549 W Randolph, Chicago IL USA 60661

This Email Delivery powered by FeedBurner.
	
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/private.cgi/aspaqlaria-aishdas.org/attachments/20070725/6666cbb6/attachment.htm>