[Avodah] Dancing on Shabbos

[Micha Berger]

On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 12:44:42AM -0400, Richard Wolpoe wrote:
: >  Please see the article "Clapping and Dancing on Shabbos" at
: > http://www.cckollel.org/html/parsha/vayikra/shemini5763.html
: > The author, Rabbi Weinrib, learns full time in the [Chicago Community]
: > Kollel.

: BUT
: I heard a Rabbi who is a Phd explain this w/o all of the frumkeit
: implications
: In places like Spain dances used to fabricate home-made castinets whilst
: dancing, it was  the WAY they danced to make a rhythmic sound with a
: home-made instrument - while in France no one danced with castinest So
: Tsaofos indeed saw this G'zeira as irrelevant.

As RAWeinrib writes, the notion that dancing here only includes dancing
to produce a rhythm (with or without castinets) can be traces back to
the Y-mi. Tosafos not holding like the gemara, and sure enough it fits
the Y-mi.... Now where did I hear that one before?


On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 12:53:12AM -0400, Richard Wolpoe wrote:
: If  Micha's model of fuzzy is good, then feminists would have far more
: resonance in claiming it is a form of misogyny for poskim to feel
: constrained from solving the Aguna issue. OTOH, if you say precedent IS
: BINDING, then poskim would have had an objective reason for not complyingto
: Aguanh advocates all along....

I dealt with this case in our original discussions.

A straight textualist would find nothing wrong. He has no reason to assur.

A minhag avos-nik would either say that there is no minhag and thus it's a
reshus, or that there is a minyag against. How does one assess an absence?

An aggadic value person would either bolster the women's AYH or that it
destroys notions of tzeni'us, of Yahadus being about the rest of life
rather than shul, issues of the frustration of such a derekh, since full
equality is impossible (dayenes?), etc...

I don't see this as relevant to the distinction between our positions.

I also disagree with your impression that the majority today are in the
third camp. The 19th century was dominated by Isms, and (aside from
Brisk) was when halakhah was shaped by those considerations. During our
lifetimes, it's the textualists who have been dominating pesaq. And
textualists without koach deheteirah produce chumrah-of-the-month.

: is Boolean per se, but that either precedence is binding or it isn't.   If
: it isn't, or even if ti is only PARTIALLY binding then then eis la'asos!

And if it's taken they way you would, close down the Beis Yaakov's. It's
provably not all-or-nothing.

: And  poskim would have more than yir'as Shamayyim impelling them to free
: agunos, it would be tsa'ar ba'alei Chayyim of the highest order!

This is a return to "if you don't have all, you have nothing". A fuzzy
system differs from anarchy. But that just returns us to the circular
debate.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 25th day, which is
micha at aishdas.org        3 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Netzach: When is domination or
Fax: (270) 514-1507                          taking control too extreme?