From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 08:09:35 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 01:09:35 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: This year's incarnation of the Gebrochts discussion attempts to discuss the Halacha and I think traverses territory not clearly enunciated in the past. Also I would not characterise this as Gebrochts-bashing; I dont believe anyone is troubled by those who say, "My Rebbe/My tradition is not to eat whatever it may be" the issue is that Gebrochts is promoted as Halachically legitimate and therefore preferred if not mandated. The ShA HaRav declares firstly, that as far as the Halachah is concerned, there is no concern with Kneidlach during Pesach, see the link - http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=25074&st=&pgnum=486 He does however advise that it is a valid stringency his first observation/proof however is that flour can be found on the surface of the Matzos and later on says this is quite common However, A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years B] no other Posek ever verified this claim this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within the finished Matza - but C] there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already been made D] even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link provided - It is universally accepted these days that flour is not added to a dough already made and there is no Matza baking program that permits adding flour to the already made dough Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 18:30:38 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 21:30:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The not-Korban Pesach Message-ID: I had asked: : It has come to me attention recently that the Torah never refers to : the Pesach as a Korban... : My question is this: Whatever reason it was, why the Torah avoided : using that word in this context ... why did Chazal feel differently? Upon further research, it seems that my question was based on the *mistaken* assumption that the Pesach was unique in this regard. It turns out that while the Torah does use the word "korban", it never uses phrases such as "Korban Tamid", "Korban Todah", or "Korban Musaf". These were referred to simply as the Tamid, the Todah, and the Musaf, just as the Pesach was. Apparently, construction of the phrase came much later, and was applied to them all. Exception: The "Korban Mincha" is mentioned three times in Vayikra 2, but that would change the whole question drastically. I should also clarify: these phrases aren't missing only from the Torah, but from the whole Tanach. They seem to have arisen after the Tanach. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sun Apr 1 20:40:08 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 23:40:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b27445d-5dde-c27e-a809-871e12258604@sero.name> On 01/04/18 11:09, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years Who is "we"? > B] no other Posek ever verified this claim > this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within > the finished Matza - but > > C]? there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not > thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product > the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already > been made Perhaps you mean no *other* posek, because this one clearly says it. It's no surprise that nobody before him mentions it, because he says it's a recent phenomenon. > D]? even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link > provided - This is a bizarre claim. The teshuvah "admits" no such thing. First of all, the footnote is obviously not part of the teshuvah, not by its author, and thus completely irrelevant to anything. Second, the footnote does not "admit" such a thing either. It brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 1 21:12:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 06:12:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions, one that basically is an exception that proves the rule and the other is a real exception. 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. 2) Powered chalav nochri. Labels here are supposed to state that a product containts powered chalav nochri (if it does). This was the result of a lawsuit.? I guess that no one wants to start listing every possible kula that goes into a food product. OTOH? if meat isn't halaq, labels generally don't state it. They only state the meat's halaq status if it is halaq. Ben On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: > I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the > lines to fine, or it becomes unusable. Once it's certifying a product > as lacking qitniyos, it might as well stick to avoiding all qitniyos > rather than having a confusing (to some) explanation on each package > which minhagim can or can't use the product. > > The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that > in a number of ways. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 1 18:58:35 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 21:58:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which >is eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give >his full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are >15,000 Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. Have patience and watch developments. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 2 07:10:57 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:10:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 01/04/18 21:58, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >> I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which is >> eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give his >> full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are 15,000 >> Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. > > Have patience and watch developments. Do you claim prophecy, or are you breaking silence on some vast and hereto unsuspected conspiracy? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 3 08:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180403150030.GA23693@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 06:12:23AM +0200, Ben Waxman wrote: : On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: :> I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the :> lines to fine, or it becomes unusable... :> The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that :> in a number of ways. : I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions... I think what I said is really particular to the US, or maybe chu"l as a whole. Where people who keep kosher will suffer with less, and people who don't won't care what has a hekhsher and what doesn't. Few people will make a less observant choice if an Amerucan hekhsher chooses to be more machmir than their own minhagim require. Non-Mehardin rabbanut has a strong motive away from least common denominator. They have a responsibility to a large population that will buy with a hekhsher IFF and only if the sacrifice is not too onerous. : 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that : they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that : proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any : case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically : stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. I recall the marshmallows sold in the US with a long explanation as to why the mei qitniyos they contain are a non-issue. Tha candy with a teshuvah on every wrapper. (Even better than Laffy Taffy or Bazooka Joe!) Unfortunately, they all have the same one. Pretty much the same thing. But didn't work in the US in the long run, as the rightward drift continued. :-)||ii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 3rd day micha at aishdas.org in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Chesed: What is perfectly Fax: (270) 514-1507 balanced Chesed? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 3 21:58:05 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:58:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin Message-ID: One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, he does this privately, since the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was sitting up front without wearing tefillin. When I asked his brother, who does put on tefillin during Chol Moed, about this, he told that the rabbi put on tefillin during Chol Moed until he married. "Our minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed," he said. My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in the ladies section. Thus I do not understand how the rabbi of the shul that I davened in yesterday could sit up front facing everyone without wearing tefillin. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 06:28:11 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:28:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Professor L. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 12:58 AM > My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them > in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put > on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should > not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in > Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in > the ladies section. This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom came from different places with different minhogim. According to halokho, what the acharonim say about wearing t'fillin or not halakhically does not apply here. Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where there was a mnhag hamokom. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 4 07:44:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:44:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin References: Message-ID: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 09:28 AM 4/4/2018, Mandel, Seth wrote: >This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." >But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from >Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom >came from different places with different minhogim.... >Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where >there was a mnhag hamokom. If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 08:07:12 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 15:07:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: , <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: From: Prof. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 10:44 AM > If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section > than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin > can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section Any shul has the right to set up its own rules, and anyone who davens there has to follow its rules. That is also halokho. Even if they were to make a rule, for instance, that one must wear green on Chanukka. Or that the shul must say the prayer for the State of Israel. But to claim that it is halokho that in America people who daven with t'fillin may not daven together with people who do not is wrong. There is no such halokho in America. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 4 20:58:28 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 05:58:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6b0af463-987c-0e3e-d5a2-27cb630b86ba@zahav.net.il> On 4/4/2018 6:58 AM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is > to put on tefillin during Chol Moed,? he does this privately,? since > the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. > > > Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin > during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was > sitting up front without wearing tefillin.? When I asked his brother . > . . . . > Wouldn't the rav in question be the proper person to ask? ?Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at mail.gmail.com Wed Apr 4 23:46:31 2018 From: meirabi at mail.gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: The ShA HaRav does not initiate this ban on Gebrochts as his own, rather he bases himself upon the propositions of Poskim which we are now exploring, and it seems that they actually do not support the proposition to create a ban against Gebrochts. A] The observation made by the ShA HaRav, which is central to his anti-Gebrochts argument - is un-supported. Our Poskim and our personal experience, has verified that there is no such thing as flour being found on the surface of baked Matza. B] The ShA HaRav does not issue his own assessment [other than observing flour on the surface of baked Matza] but relies upon other Poskim to support the proposition that flour remains within the finished Matza. However, no such thing is found in the Poskim, other than in situations where flour is added to a dough which is ALREADY formed. No Posek ever suggested that a normal dough may not be thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product. And the ShA HaRav admits this by saying that nowadays the dough is made very hard, dry, with very little water i.e. it is not surprising that Poskim have not discussed this as it is a concern that is due only to this recent change. But no other Poskim from his time endorsed the reasoning that flour is found on the surface of baked Matza etc. C] it is surprising to hear a devoted Chabadnik suggesting that the footnotes found in the KeHos, the official Chabad publishers' publication - are completely irrelevant to the Teshuvah. There are 2 versions to understanding note 33 on the link provided = here is the gobbledigook version - "it brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions" = here is the plain speak version - "this is the best we can find to support the proposition" which is, however which way you turn it, no support at all for this new concern of flour remaining within the baked Matza. One can hardly but suspect that the footnote was added because the Taz and MaAv that the ShA HaRav next refers to, is no support at all for banning Gebrochts, because their observations are exclusively applicable to thick soft Matzos that were under suspicion of having had flour added to the dough during its kneading - and as we mentioned - this had already been comprehensively stamped out by the times of the ShA HaRav. Remember, they were kneading soft dough for soft Matza and it was quite likely that the dough may have been a little too loose and one would be tempted to add more flour to it. So there we have it - if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not - then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha - then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Apr 7 20:38:51 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 23:38:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Isru Chag Message-ID: <64A81636-64D4-4FF1-B35D-C25381E32A1C@cox.net> The gematria for Isru Chag is 278, the same gematria for l'machar found in Bamidbar, Ch.11, vs.18. This is in the Sidra, Beha'alotch, where God has Moshe establish a Sanhedrin because Moshe complained that he could not carry on alone. God says to Moshe: "To the people you shall say, 'Prepare yourselves for tomorrow and you shall eat meat..." There is an interesting tie here. The day after a festival is the "morrow" and even though the holiday is over, we must always be preparing ourselves. As a matter of fact, in counting the omer, we are preparing ourselves for mattan Torah in 50 days. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Sat Apr 7 21:15:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 14:15:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 "Rabbi Meir G. Rabi" wrote: > So there we have it -- if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your > parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o > Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and > enjoy Pesach Is RMG Rabi's post on Gebrokts consonant with the comment of the Mishna Brura. The Chafetz Chaim stated that even though one may have doubts as to the Halachic imperative of being careful (yes, perhaps needlessly) about Matza Shruya, nevertheless, "one should not be MAZNIACH [translate as you will] those who have this Chumra" In particular, it seems to me that the practice of actually keeping Shruya is very much in line with many other Chumras that people have. Consider Garlic on Pesach, for example. I would posit that today the chance of garlic inducing Chametz is akin to itinerant matza flour being present on a baked Matza. Nonetheless, those who have this Chumra, keep it. They keep it because of the Minhag to be Machmir on Pesach! That Minhag, by its nature is concerned with the infinitessimal. There are many other examples. The Belzer don't eat carrots because of a Chametz incident. They were Machmir from then on. Lubavitchers has an incident with sugar and were Machmir from then on to pre-cook it. Halacha on Pesach does admit the concept of remote Chumras! Yes, for those who look at things from a non Pesach purist halachic view, may well scratch their heads. Nonetheless, the Chafets Chaim taught us that we should not be Mazniach. The idea that Pesach cannot be enjoyed without Kneidlach is fanciful, and not directly born out by plain Halacha. The Halacha specifies Meat and Wine as primary inputs from Gashmiyus food that give rise to happiness. Yes, B'Sar Shlomim (not chicken) and wine (good enough for Nisuch Hamizbeach?) To state "if you are CONCERNED about Halacha... eat Kneidlach" is perhaps a worse actualisation than "Mazniach" as it implies that such people are acting in perhaps some antinomian-like chassidic voodoo practice. [ One can argue quite cogently, for example, that wearing a Gartel today is also "not in line with the Halacha". (We wear underpants!) We do not, however, dismiss such practices. [On Shruya see also Gilyoney Hashas from Rav Yosef Engel Psachim 40b]] The Ari z'l stated that he would never 'talk against' a minhag yisrael/chumra on Pesach. In summary, and I've felt that RMG Rabi, Halacha is not a pure science which leads to a true/false conclusion for every question that is investigated using the rules of the Halacha. Admission: My father a'h had the Minhag from his family (likely via Amshinover fealty) not to eat Gebrokts. This is Toras Imecha for me, especially on Pesach, and whilst I know that in general this practice is unique to families who follow the minhogim of the Talmidei HaBaal Shem, and is most minor, I state quite openly that deciding NOT to follow a family minhag/chumra on Pesach would be FAR more upsetting and disturbing to me than not eating Kneidlach. I'm happy to wait for the last day, and for the record, I am not a fan of them, despite my wife being a superlative cook. Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a "hot dog roll". "It is only the anticipation of redemption that preserves Judaism in Exile, while Judaism in the Land of Israel is the redemption itself." Rabbi A.I. Hacohen Kook From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 8 05:55:41 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 12:55:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent actions of Simcha Felder. >From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv "Using his leverage as the swing vote in the divided State Senate, Sen. Simcha Felder appears to have strong-armed a provision into the budget that significantly changes state oversight of yeshiva curricula, political observers say. " I have talked to some people who live in Willimsburg, and the picture they paint of the level of secular education in Hassidic yeshivas is not a good one. One Satmar woman who lives in Williamsburg told me that her sons received no secular education in the Satmar yeshiva they attended. For the record NYS law requires that all children receive a secular education. What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf R. Barukh Schick of Shklov (d. 1808): When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . . . He urged me to translate into Hebrew as much secular wisdom as possible, so as to cause the nations to disgorge what they have swallowed, making it available to all, thereby increasing knowledge among the Jews. Thus, the nations will no longer be able to lord it over us-and bring about the profaning of God's name-with their taunt: "Where is your wisdom?" R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. I:Iayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, 6 through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash. The Gaon of Vilna's sons: By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... 8 First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): I cannot refrain from repeating a true and astonishing story that I heard from the Gaon's disciple R. Menachem Mendel. . . . 10 It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. This included its inner and outer manifestations. He explained: All secular wisdom is essential for our holy Torah and is included in it. He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. He especially praised music, explaining that most of the Torah accents, the secrets of the Levitical songs, and the secrets of the Tikkunei Zohar could not be comprehended without mastering it. ... He explained the significance of the various secular disciplines, and noted that he had mastered them all. Regarding the discipline of medicine, he stated that he had mastered anatomy, but not pharmacology. Indeed, he had wanted to study pharmacology with practicing physicians, but his father prevented him from undertaking its study ,fearing that upon mastering it he would be forced to curtail his Torah study whenever it would become necessary for him to save a life. . . . He also stated that he had mastered all of philosophy, but that he had derived only two matters of significance from his study of it. . . . The rest of it, he said, should be discarded. To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw for this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 8 05:22:36 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 08:22:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Message-ID: <9ABBE35B-0F5B-4CD1-917D-550FD3E33394@cox.net> 9:1 "Vay'hi bayom hashemini..." The Sages teach that the word "vay'hi" often indicates that trouble or grief is associated with the narrative (Megillah 10b). What trouble or grief could there have been on that joyous first day of Nissan? It presages the tragic deaths of Aaron?s sons, Nadav and Avihu. Another explanation: Even in the midst of our greatest rejoicing, a Jewish wedding, we pause for a moment to recall the destruction of the Temple and the fragility of life through the breaking of the glass. Here, too, we have such a happy occasion, but the "Vay'hi" is to remind us of our fallibility and the frailty of life. There are many commentaries on Aaron?s response when told of his sons' deaths: Vayidom Aharon, ?and Aaron was silent.? It is somewhat coincidental that the third syllable of vayidom sounds a little like the English word ?dumb.? One of the literal meanings of the word ?dumb? is mute and unable to speak. It seems to me that Aaron?s silence was his inability to speak due to shock. Many people would faint dead away if told of such news. So it really isn?t surprising that his reaction was one of a deafening silence. When two egotists meet "It's an I for an I" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 8 12:08:57 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2018 21:08:57 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rabbis Ben Nun, Sherlo, and Rimon have come out strongly against the wheat substitutes and feel that they should be banned. In their opinion, the primary reason for the kitniyot minhag is to prevent mixing up the various grains. Eating these types of products will lead to the same confusion. Ben On 4/8/2018 6:15 AM, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: > Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they > essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and > pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are > quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a > "hot dog roll". From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 07:29:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 10:29:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180409142919.GG25254@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 12:55:41PM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects : in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent : actions of Simcha Felder. : : From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv ... : What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular : studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept : only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time : studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, rather than the one you're critiquing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 07:54:47 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:54:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: Message-ID: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:29 AM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with >the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? > >You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh >in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, >rather than the one you're critiquing. And what do you do with the GRA's statement When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . simply ignore it? This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech cannot go against the facts. Also from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf Friesenhausen's critique, however, was hardly confined to the left; he also had to contend with the right: I appeal especially to all those who fear God and tremble at His word, that they not heed the false claims of those who plot against secular wisdom . . . , unaware that those who make such claims testify against themselves, saying: "We are devoid of Torah, we have chosen folly as our guide." For had the light of Torah ever shone upon them, they would have known the teaching of R. Samuel bar Nachtmeni at Shabbat 75a and the anecdotes about Rabban Gamaliel and R. Joshua at Horayot 10a. Also, they would have been aware of the many talmudic discussions that can be understood only with the aid of secular wisdom. Should you, however, meet a master of the Talmud who insists on denigrating secular wisdom, know full well that he has never understood those talmudic passages whose comprehension is dependent upon knowledge of secular wisdom. . . . He is also unaware that he denigrates the great Jewish sages of the past and their wisdom, as well. Worst of all are those guilty of duplicity. They speak arrogantly in public, either to appease the fools and gain honor in their eyes, or out of envy of the truly wise, disparaging those who appreciate secular wisdom, yet in their hearts they believe otherwise. See in the above link the Chasam Sofer's evaluation of Rabbi Friesenhausen. He was indeed a talmud Chacham. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 08:17:47 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:17:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:54:47AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : And what do you do with the GRA's statement .... : simply ignore it? Yes, that's exactly what the Chassidim who run the mosedos in question do with many of the Gra's statements. Why would it surprise anyone if they ignore this as well? As for me, as in your question, "what do you do", that's an entirely different issue. : This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree : with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech : cannot go against the facts. It may be more productive to ask about 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on and 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. Being surprised when Chassidim don't see the world the way the Gra did isn't really useful or warranted. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 11:28:06 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 14:28:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 1144 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 13:30:59 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:30:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180409203059.GB4975@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is : not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with : what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find : that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Or any of a million other things someone who disagrees with the Gra might suggest. A few years back there was a storm, and my son's grade school rebbe ended up losing a son to a downed power line. The friend who tried saving the son died immediately. The boy lingered for about 2 weeks. We attended the levayah. The father was proud that his young son went to his Maker pure, unsullied even by learning the alphabet. Alef-beis, yes, the child knew; but they hadn't yet begun the English alphabet. Not a sentiment I would share. In fact, hearing it from a rebbe who taught my son in a MO school, I found it kind of startling. But it's a perspective. And if it fosters accepting ol malkhus shamayim and ol mitzvos, raising children who are "ohavei H', yir'sei E-lokim, anshei emes, zera qodesh..." who am I to say it's not the right answer for someone else? :> It may be more productive to ask about :> 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on :> and :> 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. : Rabbi Dr. Shnayer Leiman, who wrote the article from which the : quotes come... I meant in each point something different than what your responses reflect. To spell out further: 1- The reports that lead you to believe the norm for secular education in chassidishe chadorim today is actually as weak as you believe. Rather than the likelihood that the more extreme stories are the ones more often reported. They could all fully be true, and yet not reflect the experiences of a statistically significant number of American students. Or perhaps they do. I would want statistics, not anecdotes, before judging. For example, I did not notice it any easier to teach Sukkah 7b-8a "sukkah ha'asuyah kekivshan" and the diagonal of squares vs circles or their areas to MO Jews who weren't themselves in STEM fields than to American chareidim. And if things were so bad, how do so many end up "in computers", if not in a job that requires as much post-HS education as mine? 2- How do they understand those "facts" about needing limudei chol to succeed in limudei chodesh. Which of the numerous possible responses I refered to in response to the first snippet in this email they actually believe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 15:12:48 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 18:12:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:30 PM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: >: One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is >: not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with >: what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find >: that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... > >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 15:31:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 18:31:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409223134.GD12000@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:48PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's : >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. : : Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" : is learning? I hope not. I am implying that it is valid for the chassidim whose school you are critiquing to believe so. And yes, they probably believe that the Gra's hisnagdus was an error caused by his exposure to the wrong set of ideas. They *certainly* believe that of RYBS. (Or at least did in his lifetime. I see an "acharei mos - qedushim" effect currently going on with RYBS's memory.) As I wrote, I am defending the position in an eilu va'eilu sense. It is not a position to which I personally subscribe, nor could subscribe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com Mon Apr 9 23:17:53 2018 From: rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com (Rabbi Meir Rabi) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:17:53 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Gebrochts - MInhag but absolutely no foundation in Halacha Message-ID: My Gebrochts postings have been to clarify one point - it is wrong to claim that Gebrochts is Halachically mandated or justified and points to anything other than a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition. and I do thank RIB for his query to which the answer is a firm NO - my observation - [if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach] - is in no manner a violation of, "one should not be MAZNIACH [ridicule] those who have this Chumra" IF they do not eat Gebrochts FOR THE RIGHT REASON i.e. a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition BTW - I do not see this in the ChCHayim, pity RIB did not provide sourcing But it is in the ShTeshuvah [460:2] - Nevertheless those who wish to sanctify themselves by refraining from that which is permitted - soaked and cooked Matza, even that which has been [baked hard] and ground [again referring to the corrected practice of making Matza meal from thinner hard baked Matza and NOT from thicker soft Matza which was grated on a Rib Ayzen, and at greater risk of being underbaked and Chametz] - should not be ridiculed. RIB has not suggested any argument to associate not eating garlic during Pesach with Gebrochts, and I have no idea what makes one Chumra IN LINE with other Chumras. Neither do I understand the significance to our discussion/disagreement. We both urge those who do not wish to eat Gebrochts/Garlic etc because their parents etc did not - to keep their tradition. However, the natural corollary is - that IF you DO NOT have such a custom - then eat them and enjoy Pesach because there is no legitimate Halachic imperative. Also, the reference to Keneidelach being an important contribution to Oneg Yom Tov is not of my making - it comes from great and highly respected Poskim. It is also not correct to characterise this Minhag as being concerned with the infinitesimal - because that is the Halacha - a speck of flour can become Chametz and ruin your entire Pesach. Indeed this was the very point I am making - there is no substance in Halacha to support this concern - if there was it would be Halacha. And finally - If anything, the urging that we not be Mazniach, demonstrates that Halacha has no concerns about this issue. We ought to however, nevertheless, not ridicule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 01:37:42 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:37:42 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: " Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge." You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a question of cost/benefit for the masses. Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is greater then benefit. The people you listed were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 02:23:50 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:23:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: At 04:37 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will >affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a >question of cost/benefit for the masses. > >Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be >harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is >greater then benefit. The people you listed > >were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 03:05:03 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:05:03 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular > studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am > paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular > subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not > study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" > > I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from > observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of > Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. > > YL > > And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: "All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are largely Orthoprax." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 02:16:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:16:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: Will those who are against the teaching of secular subjects simply ignore what R. Yhonason Eybeschutz wrote in Yaaros Devash 2:7 (as translated by L. Levi in Torah and Science, pages 24-25)? For all the sciences are ?condiments? and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impureand how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:32:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:32:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:31:27AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: :> Is that a common interperation of minhag hamaqom -- that there be :> a common practice in all things? I understood minhag hamaqom to :> be designated practive by practice. : Otherwise the concept of Minhag Ha Makom is meaningless.... Again, why? It is meaningful to say, "here, the minhag hamaqom is to say "umoried hageshem", not "gashem", without making reference to anything else the qeillah might do. Why do we need a context of a qehillah that has many such rules rather than a few? And how many? : Many people wear tefillin on chol hamoed in Eretz : Yisroel, including some gedolim. However, some do : it betzinoh so it is not so well known. You misspelled, "a tiny percentage". : One such godol is the Erlauer Rebbe. You can go : in his beis medrash and see him with tefillin. He : keeps the minhogim of his zeide, the Chasam : Sofer, to wear tefillin on chol hamoed and daven nusach Ashkenaz. One may argue that the Erlau community has their own minhag, and their beis medrash it's own minhag hamaqom. But that raises questions of how one defines "maqom" that I don't know how to answer. .... : Bekitzur, Al titosh toras imecho, keep on : following your minhog and Al yisbayeish., as the : Rama says in beginning of Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim. Minhag avos is inferior to minhag hamaqom. In fact, we have had a hard time finding its basis. The best I can come up with is that minhag avos means that in the absence of a minhag hamaqom in your current location, you should follow the minhag hamaqom of your prior location even if that means the location of your avos. :> For other things? Give it time. How long did it take Jews from Provence, :> Italy and elsewhere to congeal into a single minhag Ashkenaz? : On the contrary, I doubt that the Chassidim will : ever eat Gebrokts on Pesach, the Sephardim will : stop eating kitnyos, and the non-Chassidic world : will stop eating Gebrokts on Pesach. And yet nowadays Sepharadim make an Ashkenazi qutzo shel yud, to be yotzei lekhos hadei'os. Yekkes and Litvaks eat glatt out of necessity (go find reliable non-glatt), but how many would eat that piece of non-glatt if they found a reliable hekhsher for it? Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. The choilam is far broader in the US than its ancestry; and in other communities, tav-lessness caught on. How many non-Morrocans in Israel celebrate Mimouna nowadays? It seems from the media, this minhag is spreading. (I think it would be a beautiful thing for "misht-night" communities to adopt. After a week of not being guests, make a point of sharing food and showing it had nothing to do with a lack of friendship.) I see lines coalescing. These things take centuries, and accelerate as people who remember pre-migration life pass away. We just begun. I think it is less that a Minhag America can't emerge than the mashiach won't give it the time necesssary to emerge. And Minhag EY may go back to being by sheivet and nachalah, but in any case its evolution will be radically changed by the rapid influx of the rest of Kelal Yisrael. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:03:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:03:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:37:30PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as : a trivia question for now). There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one were considered propitious for a large crop. (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:12:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:12:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101226.GC31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 07:50:13AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat before Biur : Chametz? What makes this mitzva different from so many other mitzvos, where : we cannot eat until doing rhe required act? When the issur de'oraisa begins is a machloqes tannaim (RH 28a-b): Rabbi Yehudah holds starting from chatzos, R Meir - from sheqi'ah. (Does the issur start from when the non-qorban could be shechted, or when it could be eaten?) The Rambam in Chameitz uMatzah 1:8 pasqens chatzos, as do we when we make the zeman 1 hour before chatzos (rather than 1 hour before sheqi'ah). MiDerabbanan, it's pushed earlier, and that's the safety margin. But I don't think that's enough to make it a morning mitzvah that it must be done first thing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:19:33 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:19:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 02:15:47PM +1000, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: : Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they : essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and : pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are : quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a : "hot dog roll". It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. Like not declaring quinoa to be qitniyos. And unlike declating peanuts to be. (Which some of Eastern Europe did, and as RMF attests, some didn't.) For that matter, is there anyone whose ancestors had the minhag of qitniyos but didn't include corn when it was brought over from the New World? Since minhag is by definition informal and mimetic, what happens to catch on or not doesn't trouble me. Boils down to a qasheh oif a masseh. (You can't ask a "question on a story"; how it happened is how it happened, unreasonalbe or not.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From isaac at balb.in Tue Apr 10 03:24:59 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:24:59 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> On Apr 10, 2018 at 8:19 pm, wrote: > It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, > even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. > There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels > would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of another term. From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 02:59:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:59:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] PESACH -- AFTER 400 YEARS GD'S IN A HURRY TO REDEEM US? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410095948.GA31049@aishdas.org> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:28:48PM +1100, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: : We begin the Seder with Matza being a reminder of our suffering -- but we : conclude it with a new perspective -- Matza reminds us of how quickly Gd : took us out of Egypt. Actually, that's the end of Maggid, not the end of the seder. Later than that in the seder, Hillel reminds us of a third aspect of matzah -- al matzos umorerim yokhluhu. Not that of slavery, nor of leaving, but of the midnight in between, and every Pesach thereafter. There is a fourth aspect: Lechom oni -- she'onim alav devarim harbei. Rashi takes this idea so seriously that he holds you're not yotzei the mitzvah with matzah eaten before Maggid. Matzah that didn't have the haggadah is not lechem oni. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:51:53 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:51:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> References: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> Message-ID: <20180410105153.GB23901@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:24:59PM +1000, Isaac Balbin wrote: : It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the : Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of : another term. The only thing we know for sure is that it included some subset of grain-like foods and of legumes. Any reason as to why is a post-facto theory. Multiple exist. In principle, pasqaning one such shitah is right, and therefore the rabbanim who made a din must have intended to include the new case is possible. But not compelled. We often leave a gezeira off where it originally ended because it's not for us to ban more things than Chazal did. All the more so in a case like qitniyos, when it's not a rabbinic issur but a minhag. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 05:14:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 08:14:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10.4C.08474.AFAACCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:05 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies >curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not >higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance >is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study >http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p >which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: >"All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, >when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are >largely Orthoprax." I am not claiming that the study of secular subjects is any sort of guarantee that one will remain religious. The reasons for someone to give up observance or to water down their observance are complex. However, for many reasons it is important to have a basic secular education. One of them is to open up some opportunities to earn a living. And let me be clear, I am not talking about a "Harvard" secular education. But I see no reason why someone born in the US should not be able to speak, read and write English. I have an Op Ed piece that will appear in this week's Jewish Press on the topic of secular subjects in chassidic yeshivas. In part it reads Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. Parents do not have a blanket right to determine the education of their children. Would you say that a parent has a right to send his child to a school that preaches Antisemitism and prejudice? Also, based on my experience as an educator for over 50 years, I have to say that parents do not always know what is best for their children educationally. Choosing to enroll one's sons in a school that does not give a basic secular education is a very poor choice. Also, having a school that does not give a basic secular education is against the law as is clear from my recent Jewish Press article. Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma let alone a Regents diploma? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Tue Apr 10 04:29:37 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:29:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: It's not only the lack of secular education (that R' Yitschok Levine refers to) or knowledge to interact with the secular world (that R. Hirsch z"l is reported to have referred to) that is the problem; it's the abysmal standard of the education they do receive, the overall intellectual integrity, and their attitude to anything scientific. Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. As far as i recall, the Munkatche Rebbe [frequently?] visited the Natural History Museum when he could. There is such a terrific gap in some of our children's education that it's hard to believe it's not going to be detrimental in some way to their development. [I know I'm spouting to the 'converted', but thanks for the opportunity to at least voice my concerns somewhere.] Dovid Rubin From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 06:07:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:07:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. I will just deal with one of the things you raised. If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against the crowd, this practice would end. YL The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of Volumes I-IV. The German custom to bring a young boy to the synagogue with a wirnpel (wrapping for t he Torah scroll) has no connection whatsoever to the practice of the chalaka (the Arabic term for Upsherin) observed by Sepharadirn and later ad opted by many Chasidirn. Th e custom of holding a special celebration marking the boy's first haircut developed among these groups. The celebration takes place at a specific age, usually three. Th e festivity is customarily held near the gravesite of a tzadik or in a synagogue. T his custom was unknown in ancient Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities. The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are found in accounts written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim. Some three centuries later, we find the first indications that the custom had made its way into Chasidic circles. The most important source concerning the chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. The details of this story are somewhat vague, and it is unclear whether the Ari-zal made a chalaka for his son, or whether the account refers to his disciple, Rabbi Yonatan Sagish. There is also some question as to whether the Ari-zal participated in Lag Ba 'omer events in Meron after his kabalistic insights because the custom to conduct a chalaka on Lag Ba 'omer runs in opposition to the Ari-zal' s final ruling that forbade hair cutting during the orner period. Furthermore, the custom of the chalaka has given rise to some questions as to the propriety of hair cutting at a gravesite or synagogue, which might constitute an infringement upon the sanctity of the site. Some have also questioned the permissibility of haircutting on Lag Ba omer, during bein ha-rnetzarirn (the three weeks before Tisha B' A v) or during Chol Ha 'rno 'ed. Yet another concern was the immodest behavior that occasionally accompanied this event. :Most Sephardic and Chasidic rabbis applauded, or at least defended the practices observed in their circles, though there were those who forbade The custom in this manner. Rabbi Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik of Brisk (1889-1960) disapproved of bringing children to rabbis on their third birthday for the chalaka, claiming that this practice "has no reason or basis." He noted that there are sources indicating that one should introduce the child to matters of Torah at the age of three, but none that involve haircutting. Rabbi Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky [the "Steipler Ga'on," (1899-1985)] also opposed this practice, and would send away parents who brought their children to him for the chalaka haircut. The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. Some, however, dismissed this argument, claiming that to the contrary, the chalaka perhaps began as an ancient Jewish practice which was later adopted by the gentiles. There are some older customs, originating in the times of Chazal and the Ge'onim, such as fasting on Erev Rosh Hashana and the ceremony of Kapaprot on Erev Yom Kippur which were opposed by some rabbis since they feared that their origins could be found in pagan rites. In any event, although some communities accepted this custom, Ashkenazi communities \yere never aware of such a practice. They did not receive this tradition from their forebears, and they found no mention of it in the writings of the Rishonim. The ancient tradition among Ashkenazi communities was to cut a boy's hair at a very young age. In fact, during the times of Chazal, parents would cut an infant's hair not long after birth, and they even permitted cutting a baby's overgrown hair on Chol Ha 'mo' ed. In the times of the Rishonim, too, boys' hair in Ashkenaz was cut already within the first several months after birth. The phenomenon of children with overgrown hair simply did not exist in Germany, and a boy with overgrown hair would have been mistaken for a girl. The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no special affair was held to celebrate the event. .. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:21:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:21:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 09:07:38AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for : >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. : : I will just deal with one of the things you raised. I only raised one thing. You are discussing an example, and not the point. : If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go : against the crowd, this practice would end. Which has nothing to do with the general principle of whether the resettlement of Jewry post-war should or shouldn't evolve into new minhagei hamaqom, nor the topic I raised -- the claim they actually are. Nor the reason why I raised the topic: the idea that minhag avos is only a stop-gap, a way to manage when in a maqom that has no minhag. Nor the reason for my post: Your claim that minhag hamaqom only has meaning if the maqom has loits of minhagim. That it can't be applied one-off to whatever practice is under discussion. And if you are correct, what's the threshold of minhagim that unify a community sufficiently to qualify. Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line accordingly. : The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: : Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of : Volumes I-IV. WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. : The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are : found in accounts : written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... It has to be earlier. Originally, chalaqah was held at the qever of Shemuel haNav on the 43rd of the omer, his yahrzeit. See teshuvos haRadvaz 2:608. (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get associated with a haircut at age 3. The move to Meron and Lag baOmer happened when the Ottomans restricted access to the qever in the 1500s. But that has little to do with upsherin in general, eg on a birthday.) The Radvaz, R' David b Shelomo ibn Zimra, was among the gerushei Sefarad, who ended up in Tzefas in 1513 and eventually end up in Egypt where he was RY (he taught the Shitah Mequbetzes, R' Betzalel Ashkenazi) and ABD. So, upsherin was already a practice old enough to get recorded as minhag by someone who lived through the transition from rishonim to achronim. : The most important source concerning the : chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. What makes this "post important source" if the practice predated the Ari by generations? Raising questions about a tradition that the Ari practiced it is a distraction if he isn't the basis of the minhag. AND, the problems with the story isaren't around upsherin, but around making a celebration the night of Lag baOmer, again nothing to do with making one on the child's 3rd birthday. (Unless it too is in the wrong part of the omer or during the 3 weeks. Issues we already navigate for bar mitzvah parties that aren't on Shabbos.) .... : The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice : stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka : transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's : hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in : ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation : of pagan ritual... All I know is that people invoke a similar Hindu practice. And while Hindus may wait to age 3 before making a celebratory first haircut, waiting until 5 or 7 are more common, and not making any ceremony at all is most common. (Although a girls' only haircut being at 11 months is most common.) Observant Sikh men never get a haircut. In Mongolia, between 2-5, girls get their first haricut when they are 3 or 5, boys when they are 2 or 4. No match. China - 1 month. (They wait until after the bulk of infant mortality; lehavdil but yet similar to our considering a child who dies in their first month a neifel.) Poles: a pre-Xian tradition that survived into the 1700s was 7-10. Ukraininans, 1st birthday. Polenesians, teens. Yazidi, originally 40 days, now, 7-11 mo. Interestingly, Moslem boys get their first haircut at 1 week old -- in other words, on the 8th day. In short -- no culture that wikipedia or google found for me has a special haircut for 3 yr old boys ceremony. And yet, I turned up much else. We've seen similar attacks on shlissel challah ('tis the week for that perrennial) based on a difficult to assert connection to key-with-cross breads in Xian communities that were nowhere near the areas where shlissel challah originated -- in either time or space. And yet, the same people continue dressing up their children in Purim costumes, despite the similarity to Carnivale -- and both being local to Italy in origin. Or milchigs on Shevu'os starting in the same region that already had Wittesmontag on the Monday before the Xian Pentacost. For that matter, both of those customs are first originated LATER than chalakah! ... : The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or : other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic : communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern : Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. : Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no : special affair was held to celebrate the event. Is using the haricut to tell the boy "You're not a baby now, time to start chinukh in earnest with alef-beis" really so terrible? Nothing will make that point as deeply as weeks of build up, followed by changing the look in the mirror. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From sholom at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:09:18 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:09:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> References: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <22b69f274e57a0d24c6dcbc45c456a93@aishdas.org> > : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? > : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as > : a trivia question for now). > > There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one > were considered propitious for a large crop. > > (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) REMT wrote me off line and noted: "I don't know its source, but I first heard it when I was a young child." He also answered my trivial question, writing: "In a leap year, the parsha read eight times will always be Acharei Mos. I know of no one commenting on its significance." It just occurs to me that the main event in parshas Acharei Mos occurred on the same day as the events in parshas Shemini. Kol tuv! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 09:30:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:30:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 11:21 AM 4/10/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line >accordingly. > >: The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: >: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of >: Volumes I-IV. > >WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. It was not RSRH who wrote this, but Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger who has spent much time investigating minhagim. >: The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are >: found in accounts >: written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... > >It has to be earlier. Again you are questioning Rabbi Hamburger. I suggest you contact him about this and the rest of your post. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:31:21 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:31:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 09:07, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >> Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >> children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. > > I will just deal with one of the things you raised. > > If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against > the crowd,? this practice would end. YL That is simply not true. The Baal Shem Tov and his talmidim practised it, and that is more than enough for most people. That not everyone did it is irrelevant; very few practices had unanimous support. The BeShT was far greater than the sources you cite, and many more people follow him today than follow those people, so they would have no reason to change. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:35:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:35:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, > and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get > associated with a haircut at age 3. Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From seinfeld at jsli.org Tue Apr 10 10:08:53 2018 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:08:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Playing devil?s advocate here. For the record, I have college and graduate degrees, my children all read and write well etc. However, in response to Prof. Levine. If the cost of that exposure to American secular culture (language, history, values, etc.) is that a certain percentage of children may be enticed by it and go OTD - more than would have otherwise - then, yes, it makes sense. That?s an unacceptable cost. I?m not saying that that is a real cost, but that is the perception. If you want to change the practice, you have to change that perception (which may have some truth to it, I don?t know). >Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America >cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade >science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he >has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the >history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what >happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the >mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic >knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the >digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of >HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has >no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. > From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 10:29:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180410172934.GA1877@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:35:39AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : >(This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, : >and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get : >associated with a haircut at age 3. : Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. As per the same discussion in previous years.... That's what the rishonim run with -- see Rashi and Radaq on the pasuq. Although Rashi says 22 mo in our girsa, I think the other girsa of 24 mo is more likely, because... As the Radaq points out, this fits halakhah, that the time a woman is mish'ubedes to nurse is 24 months. But while elegent, it is not mukhrach that Chanah kept to the minimum. (Thinking out loud: The exchange in 1:22-23 fits better if it was about Chanah not attending an aliyah laregel that was after Shem'el was 2. After all, why would Elqanah have pushed her to bring ShMemu'el to the mishkan before it was safe?) More to the point (and back to repeating myself), there is a machloqes in the medrash whether Shemu'el lived 52 or 53 years. And since that's 50 years after he was weaned and brought to the Mishkan, it implies a machloqes about when he moved into the Mishkan. The minhag was apparently based on the position that he was niftar at 52, and thus moved into the Mishkan at 3. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:06:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:06:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? Message-ID: One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has no inherent "Jewish" quality.) However, there are opinions that say that the Jews spoke Egyptian while in Egypt. I have posted some selections from the Sefer Lashon HaKodesh, History, Holiness, & Hebrew by Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/jews_egypt_hebrew.pdf While it is true that according to one Medrash the Jews did speak Hebrew while in Egypt, there is another Medrash that contradicts this. >From the above reference: GOD SPEAKS TO THE JEWS IN EGYPTIAN While the above sources point to the notion that the Jews in Egypt did not speak Egyptian, there is another Midrash that implies otherwise. This Midrash likens the Jews in Egypt to a prince who was kidnapped for an extended period of time. Finally, his father the king decided to exact his revenge on the kidnappers and release his son. Upon saving his son, the king conversed with the child in the language spoken to him by the kidnappers. Similarly, explains the Midrash, after God redeemed the Jews from exile in Egypt, He spoke to them in Egyptian.221 The Midrash explains that the Jews had been in Egypt for many years, where they had learned the Egyptian language.222 Therefore, when God wanted to give them the Torah, He began to speak with them in the Egyptian language with which they were already familiar. He began by proclaiming, "I (anochi, ) am Hashem, your God ... !"223 According to this Midrash, the word "anochi" in this context does not denote the Hebrew word for "I"; rather, it refers to the Egyptian224 word anoch (11:ix), which means "love" and "endearment."225 One Midrashic source even explains that the Jews forgot Lashon HaKodesh, which is why God had to speak to them in Egyptian. >From page 99 THEY SPOKE LASHON HAKODESH, BUT TOOK ORDERS IN EGYPTIAN Similarly, we can posit that even when exiled to Egypt, the Jews indeed continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, they were not accustomed to accepting orders in Lashon HaKodesh; their Egyptian taskmasters spoke to them only in Egyptian. Therefore, at Mount Sinai, when God was giving the Jews the Decalogue, He spoke to them in Egyptian, the language in which they were accustomed to "taking orders." THEY MAINTAINED THE ESSENCE OF LASHON HAKODESH, IF NOT THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE Even if we assume that the Jews completely forgot Lashon HaKodesh, we can still reconcile the contradiction based on a previously mentioned concept set forth by Rambam. Rambam, as we already mentioned, writes that Lashon HaKodesh is called so because it lacks the explicitness found in other languages, making it a chaste and holy language. Therefore, one can explain that although the Jews in Egypt spoke the Egyptian language, they did not deviate from the moral standards manifested by Lashon HaKodesh. God had to speak to them in Egyptian since that was the only language with which they were familiar. However, they did not change their manner of speaking; that is, they internalized the refined and moral linguistic style of Lashon HaKodesh, which they maintained even when speaking Egyptian. And from the Chapter Summary After discussing Joseph's personal exile to Egypt, we segued into discussing the Jews' collective exile to Egypt. A well-known Midrash states that the Jews in Egypt did not change their language, meaning that they continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, another Midrash states that God began presenting the Torah to them in Egyptian, because that was the language that they spoke in Egypt. While these two Midrashim seem at odds with each other, we presented several approaches to reconcile them and give a more concrete answer as to whether the Jews in Egypt spoke Lashon HaKodesh or Egyptian: ? Radak explains that there were some Jews who were not enslaved, and they spoke Lashon HaKodesh exclusively. Their not-so-fortunate brethren spoke Lashon HaKodesh between themselves, and Egyptian with their Egyptian overlords. ? Alternatively, it is possible that all the Jews spoke Lashon HaKodesh, yet God presented them the Torah in Egyptian because they were acclimated to accepting orders in that language. ? A third possibility is that since the hallmark of Lashon HaKodesh is its embodiment of holiness and purity, even if the Jews forgot the literal language, they could still be said to speak Lashon HaKodesh- The Holy Language-if their manner of speech remained holy. After the Jews exited Egypt and eventually arrived in the Land of Israel, establishing their own rule, it is clear that Lashon HaKodesh alone served as their spoken language. This arrangement lasted for several centuries until the language began receding under Babylonian influence, toward the end of the First Temple period. Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may not be true. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:22:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:22:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Legendary Chassidic Rebbe Admits: The Noda BiYehudah Was Correct In His Opposition to Lisheim Yichud Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/QEUCPq However, what is less well known, is that the Divrei Chaim, despite being a great Chasidic leader, actually said that the Noda BiYehuda was correct in the matter, and, based on that, his followers do not say lisheim yichud before sefira. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:39:28 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:39:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:06 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews > from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. > Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their > children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far > as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has > no inherent "Jewish" quality.) > > > ... > Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may > not be true. > > YL > > > May not be true is the operative word, there is no disputing that there is an opinion in Chazal that it is true and that the Jews spoke only Hebrew in Egypt. This is the opinion that the Chasidim follow and therefore they are against speaking English. I don't see how you can find fault with them when they are following a valid opinion in Chazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:10:49 2018 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Yehuda Gluck) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 04:10:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Wed Apr 11 02:59:49 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: R? Moshe Yehudah, Thank you for taking notice of my post! ?Only a narrow band of Torah studies are benefited by a narrow band of secular studies? - I agree with you - but only in part. 1. If I may add the word ?directly? to your statement (- ?only a narrow band of Torah studies are *directly* benefited?), as, arguably, the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education [though admittedly, this was not the thrust of my original statement]. 2. Re the case in point, Chullin and biology. Though, in general, the biology syllabus does not necessarily help in learning Chulin, biology could be taught in a manner that would: i.e. a teacher familiar with the various sugyos, could give a thorough grounding in anatomy, etc. This would be better than relying on Temunei Chol [or similar compilations], which (might) stifle critical thinking. Furthermore, an appreciable amount of Torah literature is based upon a medieval understanding of chemistry and anatomy. A fuller understanding of those thinking processes, coupled with a comparative study of [human] biology and the basics of modern chemistry, could conceivably open the door to a much fuller Torah experience. Indeed, a syllabus could conceivably be drawn up that would both benefit the Ben Torah and satisfy the requirements of an Examinatory Board. 3. Re maths; again, you are right, so far as a basic understanding of the sugyos are concerned. But to appreciate maths as a backbone of the world?s structure and thus marvel at the???? ????? , to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory to deeper areas of the Torah [which surely some of them will want to learn], requires a fundamental grounding in the subject. Dovid Rubin Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ________________________________ From: Moshe Yehuda Gluck Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 9:10:49 AM To: 'The Avodah Torah Discussion Group' Cc: 'D Rubin' Subject: RE: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:23:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:23:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Lets take a step back for a second. There has been a machlokes for thousands of years (see the Gemara in Berachos 35) whether the ideal is torah only or for lack of a better phrase torah im derech eretz. There is no disputing that in the last 200 years the overwhelming majority of Gedolim have been in the Torah only camp and in the 20th century the Torah im derech eretz is pretty much RYBS and the followers of R' Hirsch. I can provide an almost endless list of Gedolim who had zero secular education and knew kol hatorah kula while on the other hand the list of Gedolim who had a secular education is much much much smaller. Your position regarding secular studies while certainly a valid one is unquestionably the minority opinion and therefore it is ridiculous for you to simply dismiss the other opinion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 03:23:23 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 10:23:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <79615f4629784da49fb5941943399ebd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. ----------------------------- Bingo-and probably true on a micro level but not, I fear, on a macro level. I used to tell my boys that 80% (not based on a study but the handy 80/20) rule)of what they learned would not be used later, the problem is you don't know which 20% will be. Look here for the background of the inventor of the m-16 and you'll see what he brought together https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Stoner Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 04:40:52 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 07:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote, and I quote his closing last paragraph in full: > Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them > to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend > a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma > let alone a Regents diploma? The first and second sentences don't have any logical connection that I can see. There are plenty of boys who attended a Hassidic yeshiva, who now earn enough to support a family. Diplomas are not guarantees, and I'm don't know how much they help. They certainly don't help as much as drive and persistence and elbow grease. My boss, for example, asks me for help occasionally with English spelling and grammar, but that doesn't seem to have hampered his ability to own his business at half my age. (His mathematics abilities are a good example. He understands enough of the concepts that he can figure out anything on his calculator without my help. But he avoids doing even simple arithmetic in his head. And because he refuses to do the arithmetic in his head, I make more mistakes than he does.) Akiva Miller From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 11 06:22:58 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:22:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <1F.0A.18065.33C0ECA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:10 AM 4/11/2018, Moshe Yehuda Gluck wrote: >I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that >a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. >What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion >sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some >secular knowledge in order to understand them. Please read RSRH's essay The Relevance of Secular Studies to Jewish Education (Collected Writings VII) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 06:50:01 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:50:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption Message-ID: Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:20:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:20:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org> I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:45:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:45:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:50:01PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may : be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? All I have is the reverse. R' Gedalia Felder (Yesodei Yeshurun 2 pp 188-191) holds that an adopted child can be called up "ben Micha Shemuel", but that this shouldn't be done when the adopting father or the son is a kohein. In order to avoid confusion about the child's kehunah. (Or that of a future descendent, when people vaguely remember his name years later). I assume leviim too, but that's not in my notes. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 12:08:20 2018 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:08:20 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> References: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Tangentially, there is a convention to write the name of a chalal in official documents as Ploni ben Ploni Vehu Kohein, to signify the difference in status between father and son. I'm not sure that this would be recommended (or desirable) in the case of an adopted child. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 11 23:46:36 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 01:46:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: I suspect that some will feel that my position on the issue "secular" studies comes from the left of center. First off, we need to delineate what we mean by "secular" studies. This word as we use it today is far different from the science the GRA or the many achronim, rishonim and of course Chazal learned in the sense of math, astronomy and biology. Today that word would also include many areas such as social studies, psychology, philosophy, evolutionary biology, cosmology, comparative religion, black studies, sexual awareness, cultural studies etc, etc, that could lead a young untrained mind into problematic areas that could raise many question they are not prepared to deal with. The scientific study required by the various sugios in shas and halacha really require a minimal study of some elementary math such as some trig and geometry, some values such as that of Pi, square root of 2 etc and Pythagoras theorem, astronomy (mainly lunar orbit, seasonal and diurnal calculation), anatomy and some other limited areas of biology plus a handful of other concepts. By this logic much of what we call science today would be excluded from being necessary for learning Torah. Mi'sevoras libi, I would say that the study of much of what we think of in modern parlance of the many new fields of mathematics and the physical sciences such as the many branches of modern physics both classical and relativistic and quantum mechanics, the many branches of chemistry, biology and medicine and of course modern astronomy including much more than just solar system dynamics (mainly lunar & seasonal) and positions of a handful of stars are mandated for a very simple reason -- an understanding (the deeper the better) in these fields makes one truly understand that the world is so highly complex and functions so beautifully that this it can not be a random happening and that there must be a borei olam. A havana into the very ultra small as we find through quantum mechanics and particle physics, or into the wonders of the atom and chemistry and how things combine, or into the wonders of dynamics, optics, elec & magnetism, or the modern fields of solar and stellar astronomy and spectrographic analysis and through the beauty and understanding exposed through the many modern branches of modern math including advanced algebraic theory, statistical analysis, advanced calculus and vector and tensor analysis and the many other fields to numerous to mention here that are so useful throughout all of modern science.. These literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam. The understanding of biology from its lowest levels of its physics and chemistry to the molecular with the tremendous complexities at its molecular and cellular levels and onto its study at the organic and systemic levels, through developmental biology of the miraculous changes from conception through the fetus to birth, infancy and childhood to the adult and ultimately death. Many of these may not help much with the simple peshat of any particular sugio in shas, but they surely create emuna and tremendous yiras haromeimus. No one who has even the smallest inkling of any of this knowledge could believe that existence as we now can begin to perceive it is a bunch of random events. Just the mind boggling complexity of the functioning of a single cell is awe inspiring. With so many thousands of things happening in each cell with perfect timing, with everything just in the right place at the right time in each of the billions of cells in our bodies. Worst of all, leaving a young mind unexposed to many of these areas and without proper training in them leaves him vulnerable to the many questions he will eventually encounter as he goes through modern life. He will not be prepared to deal with evolution, cosmology, philpsophy etc that he will surely encounter no matter how well shielded he may be. In addition to the above, in our modern society some of the above may be needed merely to functional and earn a living in todays highly technical society and he will be severely limited in the types of parnasa available to him. I am sure that many will differ substantially from my position above. Please excuse my rambling and repetition at times and run on sentences in the above. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 12 10:20:51 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 17:20:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not utter the phrase with the congregation? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Apr 12 12:42:50 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:42:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "There is no way that a "Rabbinical committee (namely the Rabbanim/Poskim/Rebbeim of the respective chassidishe Yeshivos whom Simcha Felder is representing) decided that systematic secular education is forbidden by Orthodox Jewish law. The reason is that the Torah requires one to study secular subjects. I have posted part of an article by Dr. Yehudah Levi from his book Torah Study. " Of course there is. Dr. Yehuda Levi is coming from a Torah Im Derech Eretz point of view however, Chasidim and most Charedim have a different viewpoint, namely Torah only. You seem to be a classic case of someone living in an echo chamber. The only opinion/derech that you recognize as legitimate is Torah Im Derech Eretz. As I stated many times, Torah Im Derech Eretz is a small minority, the overwhelming majority of gedolim rejected it. So much so that Gedolim like R' Baruch Ber could not believe that R' Hirsch thought that it was lechatchila. R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch wrote a teshuva (end of Bircas Shmuel Kiddushin) where he explicitly forbid a secular curriculum: ?What emerges is (a) that according to the Torah the obligation of Banim Ubeni Banim means you must make your children into Geonei and Chachmei Torah ? and not merely to prepare them for life as a Jew. But rather, you must teach them and get them to learn the entire Torah, and if chas v?sholom you do not, you violate the entire Mitzvah of learning Torah as per Banim Ubnei Banim. ... (c) To learn secular studies on a regular basis is prohibited as per the Rama 246:4 ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 12 12:34:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:34:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu In-Reply-To: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180412193406.GA7972@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:20:51PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to : bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "barchu : hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in : order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait : and not utter the phrase with the congregation? See the Agur, Hil' Berakhos 98, which can be found at . The Maharam miRothenburg held the sha"tz needn't say it at all. R' Yehudah al-Barceloni says he should say. The Agur adds: and we are noheig to say it. The next source, the Avudraham (or to be accurate: Abu-Dirham), says that the sha"tz says it to be among the community of mevorkhim. He cites the Y-mi (Berakhos 7:3). And he adds that R' Yehudah b"r Barzili Barceloni (I assume the same source as the Seifer haAgur) writes in the name of R' Saadia that even though the sha"tz said "haMvorakh", and therefore didn't remove himself from the klal, he needs to return himself to the klal "legamrei" and day "Barukh H' Hamvorkh". Like in bentching, where the leader says "nevareikh" and yet repeats the responses of the rest of the zimun. No answer there. However, note that the assumption is that Borkhu doesn't need the sha"tz or the oleh to repeat it. The sha"tz needs to repeat it for his own sake, so as not to exclude himself from the kelal of mevorkhim. (Except according to the MmR, who doesn't believe the sha"tz has such a need.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 12th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Gevurah: What aspect of judgment Fax: (270) 514-1507 forces the "judge" into submission? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 01:31:53 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:31:53 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am surprised that you even bothered to quote him." And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his teshuva. There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 02:10:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 05:10:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: >"In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz >wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am >surprised that you even bothered to quote him." > >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with >his teshuva. If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in EY are pursuing higher secular education. >There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' >Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and >Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through >this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not >with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to >learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a >book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the >Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of >issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even >happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas >and poskim. Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat and Yom Tov (holy days) - and furthermore, it is better to occupy oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). >And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but >Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after >them." as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as >the Mishna Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of >people are capable of studying Torah all day. Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? The following is taken from Rav Schwab on Chumash, Parshas Acharei Mos. "At all times the Torah's unchanging teachings must be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, attitudes, relationships to man and beast, and positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and evaluation of the Torah. "What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the 'ways of the Earth.' The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world that surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities that confront him. "What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more crucial it is that this wisdom be conveyed to the Jewish contemporary world. It must be transmitted in a language that our generation understands and that will attract the searching youth, the ignorant, the estranged and the potential ba 1al teshuvah to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah leader must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. "There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose life task is to enlighten and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those 'messengers of G-d' the highest respect and a loyal following. These are the kohanim and levi'im of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. "Yet education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore it becomes mandatory for the present day 'Tribe of Levi' to initiate and encourage an educational system that can serve the other "eleven tribes who comprise the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meets its challenges, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head-on the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. "The Divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Sun Apr 15 05:53:59 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:53:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Micha Berger) In-Reply-To: References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com>, <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org>, Message-ID: This reply was sent earlier to R' Michah and is still valid: I agree. With respect, I did allude to ?learning skills and a mode of thinking? in both of my previous posts: ?the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education?, ? to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory?, and my reference to ?the [lack of] overall intellectual integrity?. Related to this: Is it incorrect to posit that a lot of ma?amorei Chazal was formulated in accordance to their understanding and cultural absorption of sciences of their day? Can we not further Torah with our understanding of modern science, both peripheral and integral ? even though clearly lacking their sya?ato dishmayo and Ru?ach HaKodesh? Is that not the derech taught both by the Ba?al Shem and his disciples, and the GRA and his school [to use the chochmoh of the world..]? Another q: Do we view Torah SheBa?al Peh on a par with Torah SheBiKsav, in the sense that it must be learnt ?as is?, without consideration of the worldview that shaped those comments? [I rather think we can see two views in the Rishoinim.] Dovid Rubin ________________________________ From: Micha Berger Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 5:20:06 PM To: Moshe Yehuda Gluck via Avodah Cc: Moshe Yehuda Gluck; 'D Rubin' Subject: Re: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:39:19 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:39:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:45:43 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:45:43 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 3:01 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a > regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance > secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > > > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > > The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he > already knew shas and poskim.? > > > Can you verify this assertion? > Not really but given that the Gra was a super genius and the stories that abound about how much he knew as a child it is certainly plausible to believe so. The fact is that no one really knows how old the Gra was when he learned these things so your assertion that he learned mathematics as a youth is unprovable as well. > > > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > > Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in > 1518? > > > Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there > would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. > > > And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple according to the Rama, the study of Torah is what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get us into the world to come and the study of secular studies will not. That fact remains the same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 03:39:38 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:39:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >> And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his >> teshuva. > If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who > attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend > the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in > Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today > offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. Touro College was established against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim see http://haemtza.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/yosefs-folly.html for example for details. > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in > EY are pursuing higher secular education. Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a pig with a streimel (see http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html ). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: " *Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the other nations, she didn't want to burn them, rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need any outside wisdom and therefore she was priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the world with his wisdom which was solely torah based. * *We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt."* >> There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch >> Ber. The Rama writes: >> "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >> and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will >> acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other >> wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all >> other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called >> by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the >> Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he >> knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >> regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance >> secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles > Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also > learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He > taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning > of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is > permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this > excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible > and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh > De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his > decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy > only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat > and Yom Tov (holy days) -- and furthermore, it is better to occupy > oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). Not sure what you point is here, the Rama is quoted exactly as I wrote, you cal leanr secular studies only now and then and only after you know shas and poskim. > And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but > Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them." > as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as the Mishna > Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of people are > capable of studying Torah all day. > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in 1518? From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 05:01:14 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:01:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:39 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. >R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a >pig with a streimel (see? >http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html >). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak >Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: > >" Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn >them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the >other nations, she didn't want to burn them, >rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need >any outside wisdom and therefore she was >priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the >world with his wisdom which was solely torah based.? > >We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish >home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish >wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt." Too bad this statement does not differentiate between un-Jewish and non-Jewish. as RSRH did. I agree that we do not want un-Jewish influences in the Orthodox world. However, there is no problem with non-Jewish influences. I wonder if they are against the use of, for example, modern medicine or electricity or running water, and countless other things that are "non-Jewish wisdom and come into Chareidi homes. >>There is no question that the simple reading of >>the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: >> >>"But it is not for a person to learn anything >>but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >>decisors that come after them and through this >>they will acquire this world and the world to >>come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >>In any case, it is permitted to learn through >>happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >>isn't a book of heresy.? This is what called >>by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person >>should not take a trip in the Pardes until he >>has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] >>and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> >>The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >>cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >>only that, but he writes that even happenstance >>secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > >Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > >The Gra was sui generis, when he studied >mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim.? Can you verify this assertion? >>And how many people are capable of capable of >>learning "anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >>and the halachic decisors that come after >>them."? ? as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah >>in Koheles as well as the Mishna Brurah make it >>clear that only a very small percentage of >>people are capable of studying Torah all day. > >Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > >Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah >less in 2018 then it was in 1518? Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 09:44:37 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:44:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:45 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not >for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna >and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come >after them and through this they will acquire >this world and the world to come. But not with >learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple >according to the Rama, the study of Torah is >what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get >us into the world to come and the study of >secular studies will not. That fact remains the >same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person >should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. The facts do not remain the same in 2018 as in 1518. The day school movement in the US as well as all of the Orthodox schools throughout the world where secular studies are routinely taught from kindergarten on show that things have changed. Please spend the time to read "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 ? 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 The Jewish Press, July 6, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916)" "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1786-1879)" "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1654 ? 1785) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 08:07:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:07:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi >world agrees with his teshuva. > >There is no question that the simple reading of >the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything >but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >decisors that come after them and through this >they will acquire this world and the world to >come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >In any case, it is permitted to learn through >happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by >the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should >not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and >he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >only that, but he writes that even happenstance >secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. I must admit that I do not understand your assertion against secular studies in conjunction with Torah studies even for boys at a young age.. The day school movement in the US was founded on the principle of a dual curriculum. The model was RJJ. Today in the US the vast majority of yeshivas follow this model save for some of the Chassidic yeshivas. Gedolim like Rav Yitzchok Hutner (Chaim Berlin), (Mr.) Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz (Torah Vodaath), Rav Avraham Kalmanovitz and Rav Shmuel Birenbaum (Mir), Rav Dr. Yosef Breuer and Rav Shimon Schwab (Yeshiva RSRH) , to name just a few, headed yeshivas in which boys were taught Torah and secular studies in elementary and high school grades. I am sure they were well aware of what the RAMA wrote and paskened that it did not apply today. Even in Europe in the 19th century there were some places where secular and Torah studies were taught along side each other. The Kelm Talmud Torah was one. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelm_Talmud_Torah "In addition to Jewish subjects, students studied general subjects such as geography, mathematics, and Russian language and literature for three hours a day. The Kelm Talmud Torah was the first traditional yeshiva in the Russian empire to give such a focus to general studies. " There was the L?mel-School in Jerusalem where both Torah and secular subjects were taught. So I really do not understand why you focus on the RAMA when it is clear that yeshiva education in many places, since the 19th century and throughout the 20th century involved a combination of Torah and secular studies. What are you arguing about? YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 11:16:15 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:16:15 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> On 4/15/2018 11:10 AM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, > in EY are pursuing higher secular education. I just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different story entirely). From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 10:14:25 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:14:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916) ... There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in have secular studies: 1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would have had no students 2. The law mandated secular studies Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a bdieved. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:22:23 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:22:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:14 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in >have secular studies: >1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send >their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would >have had no students >2. The law mandated secular studies When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young people. >Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but >as a bdieved. Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! YL From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:29:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:29:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <4C.65.18065.A7C83DA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:16 PM 4/15/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I Just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went >through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these >colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or >should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different >story entirely). And many of those who attend these institutions find their secular knowledge woefully inadequate and probably wish they had a stronger secular education when they were younger. Look at the first part of the video at https://goo.gl/WKrKyT and see what he says about his own yeshiva education. At about 2 minutes in he says he discovered that he didn't know anything when it came to being prepared to work. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 15 05:48:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:48:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria Message-ID: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> The leprosy mentioned here was special kind of leprosy which only the Jewish people suffered from only in Israel. It never occurred outside of Israel, even in a Jewish home. The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical but rather a spiritual disease. The Rabbis comment: b?sorah tovah hee l?Yisroel ? "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and mortar to act as if it were alive. It would be most unusual for a house to become sick just like a human being. Such an illness borders on the miraculous. Why does the Torah say that a house may be afflicted with leprosy? It means that a Jewish home is different from other homes; it has life and spirit attached to it. When the people who live in these homes are sinful, the very bricks of the home reflect that sinfulness. The Rabbis tell us that leprosy is a sign of evil and sin; therefore, it is natural that house would manifest leprosy as a sign of its inhabitants evil. Now we can understand why the rabbis say it is good news when a house is stricken with leprosy. If one can notice the disease before it spreads, he has a chance to cure it. When the disease goes unnoticed, the real trouble ensues. Since in today?s world we don?t have the warning of leprosy attached to our houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. The Bible will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible Dwight L Moody -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 11:02:08 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:02:08 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sunday, April 15, 2018, Prof. Levine wrote: > When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 > there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young > people. > Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a > bdieved. > Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 15 12:45:46 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 19:45:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. _______________________________________________ Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 13:08:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 16:08:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <13.9E.29097.691B3DA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:02 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >This is not something to be happy about. This is >more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu >torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very >difficult decision to violate the Halacha in >order to save the next generation. This was not >uncommon in America of that time. Young >Israel???s sponsored mixed dances for the same >reasons. However, now that the Torah community >is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. ? On the contrary, this is something that is appropriate for our time and the future. Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? See my article "Frum or Ehrliche?" The Jewish Press, October 20, 2006, page 1. This article is also available at "Frum or Ehrlich". Letters to Editor Also see "The Obligation to Support a Family" The Jewish Press, February 18, 2015, front page. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 15:35:12 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 18:35:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the > community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the > congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l?olam vaed" > and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included > with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not > utter the phrase with the congregation? Incidentally, the same situation and question applies by the Borchu prior to Birchos Krias Shema, as per S"A 57:1. I can't bring any source, but in my mind, the simple answer is that if the oleh would say it together with the congragation, he might not be heard. The delay is to insure that no one mistakenly thinks that the oleh is excluding himself. I was going to ask a related question about Kaddish that has bothered me for some time. Namely: When the Kaddish-sayer says "Yhei Shmei Raba" himself, why does Mishne Brurah 56:2 tell him to say it *quietly*? But I am *not* going to ask that question, because RJR's post has forced me to compare these tefilos carefully, and I have found a difference that might help to answer his question. RJR was very correct when he used the word "command" to describe what the oleh is saying. The word "Borchu" is indeed the tzivui/imperative form of the verb. But no comparable command exists in Kaddish. Yes, the Kaddish-leader does command them "v'imru", but he even specifies what it is that he wants them to say. Namely, a simple "amen". And so they do. May I suggest that the "Yhei Shmei Raba" is an impromptu addition, that the tzibur adds of their own accord, NOT commanded to do so by the Kaddish-leader. Thus, there is no fear of causing any illusions that he is somehow excluding himself. Indeed, he himself added to the praise by saying "Yisborach v'yishtabach", which (one might say) is simply an expanded version of "Yhei Shmei Raba". So I guess the real question on MB 56:2 is not why the leader says Yhei quietly instead of loudly, but perhaps we could ask whether the leader really needs to say Yhei at all. Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 20:59:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:59:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <54519ad6-5f2a-1c69-4e5f-2d8f0fa2f2a5@zahav.net.il> 1) Is the community as strong as it was back when Torah was transmitted orally? 2) Who is the rabbi who is going to overturn decisions made by the Ta'naim (as opposed to overturning decisions made by school administrators in the 50s)? On 4/15/2018 9:45 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es > laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. > KT From hankman at bell.net Sun Apr 15 18:13:32 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:13:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> R? Marty Bluke wrote: ?R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah.? My response to R? Marty makes a number of assumptions that may not be universally accepted but that I firmly believe. The times are different, the level of knowledge is different both in the physical sciences and in Torah hakedosha. Dare I say that these as a function of time seem to be moving on trajectories that are unfortunately inverse to each other ? particularly in the latter time frame that we live in ? most intensely over the last 10 to 12 decades but can already be clearly seen over the last 4 centuries. With each dor we can see an ongoing diminution in the level of our Torah havanah while a commensurate level of greater scientific understanding has come about (with perhaps the exception of a very few yechidei de?ah such as the Gra and a few others who may have achieved levels more common in much earlier times before them). While Chazal tell us ?haphoch v?haphoch d?kol bah? and that certainly for those who are capable of a great level of Torah understanding such as those of Chazal who were doresh all the essin or all the taggin in the Torah probably could have been able to find quantum mechanics or tensor analysis or molecular biology in the Torah if they so chose. Certainly if the scientists of our day were able to discover these facts, Chazal certainly were able to as well. But I would point out that there is no maimre in Chazal that relates to having discovered any of this knowledge through their pilpul and passing this on to us. Perhaps they did not feel it important enough to report. But this level of understanding in Torah in our times is sadly not available in our times. Given the level of limud for the average person (unlike for some of the gedolim of our times) in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics. The average person (maybe I am just giving away my matsav) will not find much yira or emuna from learning that which is typical of our yeshivos (say a sugia in shas say ?succa govoah m?esrim ama or a sugia on movuy or on tumas negaim ? of hilchos melicha or muktsa in shulchan aruch etc). For the average person these are not awe inspiring subjects and unfortunately only a true godol or great talmid chochom could extract yira and emunah from these cut and dry subjects. Such inspiration for the average yid are fewer and much further in between from most of his limud of Torah. This as a result of our sad diminution in our Torah learning ability. Today, given our greater abilities in understanding the Borei?s briah it is much easier for us to find yira and emuna from our hisbonenus in them. So ?of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none? is Torah, but a very solid adjunct in our times for a vehicle to further inspire yira and emunah would very effectively be math and scientific knowledge. Part of the mitsva of emuna, is not simply belief, but to go out and prove to your satisfaction (to be doresh v?choker) the truth of the Borei and his achdus and that he is the Borei olam and revealed Himself to us at matan Torah and so on. To the extent that science facilitates this search it is a MITSVA and not just mere secular studies at the cost of Torah studies. Clearly the experience our ancestors experienced at yetsias Mitzrayim, al hayam (ma sheroaso shifcha al hayam etc) and revelation on sinai etc was more than enough to inspire tremendous yira, awe and emunah without the need for any help from science (which was not great in their period in any case) and on through the period of the nevi?im and the batei mikadash and later Chazal inspiration was possible through there havana of Torah alone. But I do not see that to be the case in our generation and times. ?So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah?? Because in our day it may be another additional (I hesitate to say ?more? effective way b?avonoseinu harabim for most people) very effective way for most average people.? So today, for the yechidei olom the tried and true method of attaining great yira and emunah through limud Torah may be the best way to go as we have witnessed these great traits in our great gedolim, but that recipe may not work so well in our times for everybody else without additional help. I am also not comfortable with the notion that there are certain areas of knowledge that are off limits to even our gedolim. I feel quite confident to assert that in our time, non of even our gedolim come to discover the great advances in science through there limud hatorah. If they know these subjects it came from sources outside of their linudei kodesh. But Chazal was not constrained in their knowledge. They were required to know shivim loshonos, they studied kishuv and astrolgy and the chukos hagoyim and certainly the science of their day (sometimes even quoting chachmei ha?umos and cf the Rambam quoting Aristo often etc [I also imagine the Rambam learned his medicine in the conventional way mostly including sources outside of Torah]). I feel sad for many talmidei chachamim in our day who lack the background in (sometimes in even minimal) math and science to grasp that they are saying a peshat in a sugia that could not be, and to seek out another peshat therein or to at least realize there is a problem they need to deal with to get a proper havana. Also the chiyuv to teach a son an umnus, obviously means, other than the chiyuv to teach one?s son Torah. We do not assume that his limud haTorah will suffice to teach him an umnus as well. The conventional ?secular? methods of teaching an umnus are to be followed. If you want your son to be a carpenter, send him to carpentry school ? do not expect him to come from yeshiva a talmid chochom AND a carpenter just from his limud haTorah. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 16:30:43 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:30:43 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: Is it not likely that the prohibition is against non-Torah learning which serves no purpose other than engaging in those studies for their own interest and excitement? There is no prohibition against learning any skills for earning a livelihood. Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and research. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 18:06:13 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:06:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. It seems to me that there is indeed one very obvious exception, namely, the chometz which the Rav has not yet sold to the non-Jew. (I suppose that one could avoid this situation by delaying the bittul until the very end of the fifth hour, but the danger of missing that deadline scares me.) I have not seen any sifrei halacha, nor any pamphlets or bulletins or websites, that mention this point. Perhaps everyone just presumes that people have this exception in mind when they say the bittul? Here's a better way to phrase my question: Would a mental reservation be valid in this case? Perhaps halacha ignores the mental reservation, and only cares about the actual words of the bittul - which explicitly refers to ALL the chometz. If halacha does allow this exception - and people do have this exception in mind either explicitly or implicitly - then there is no problem. But I would like to hear that this is confirmed by the poskim. Some might say, "What's the problem? There is chometz in his house, but he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" No, I can see two very serious problems. But before I go further, I must reiterate that these problems would only arise in the case where one does his Bitul Chometz BEFORE the Rav transfers ownership to the non-Jew. (If the ownership transfer occurs first, then at the time of the Bitul, there is no problem, because the only chometz still in his possession is really and truly nothing more than the chometz that he is unaware of.) 1) If there is still chometz in his home, and he is expecting for it to be sold to a non-Jew several minutes or hours later, but the words of the bittul - "All the chometz in my possession, whether I know about it or not" - are to be taken a face value, doesn't this case aspersion on the sincerity/validity of the bittul? 2) Perhaps even worse: After Pesach, when it is time to re-acquire the chometz, he can no longer rely on "he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" Rather, a determination must be made. If he got rid of it via mechira (despite happening after the bittul), then the chometz may be eaten. But if, in the final analysis, he got rid of it via bitul, then it is assur b'hanaah (Mechaber 448:5, MB 448:25). So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? Akiva Miller From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Apr 16 06:35:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 23:35:36 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: I enjoy reading smatterings from the philosophical musings of the great scientists. But I suspect, that is the very reason they are banned. It is because they are NOT boring. And I suspect that unless it may assist me in my Parnassah even reading about new tech developments etc, is likely to be prohibited, not as a corrosive Hashkafa but simply as a time waster. But as the saying goes, Nobody's Perfect [which is sometimes followed by - I am a Nobody] Furthermore, the loud protests that I can already hear, are voiced by those who live in this world which is influenced by non-Torah energies. If we experience boredom when learning Torah - then is it not true that we are still far from the truth of Torah? Reb Avigdor M said - ever noticed how people yawn during Bentching? And would then wryly observe, They were not yawning a minute earlier during the ice cream. I have a friend, a Sefaradi Satmar Chossid, V Frum V Ehrlich, who asked R A Miller if he should learn ShaAr HaBechicnah in the ChHalevovos, R A asked him if he reads the newspapers, to which he replied, No - to which Reb Avigdor responded You need to learn it anyway because the streets are infiltrated with the HashpaAh of the newspapers. I apologise if I seemed to be dismissive of the scientists and their philosophical musings - and the truths that they may discuss Sure, I agree, truth is truth no matter the source. I was merely reflecting upon the reason for the ban on Alternative Wisdoms A] they are unnecessary - they are not required for Parnassah B] they waste time from Torah C] they may well harbour and cultivate life-concepts that are alien and contrary to Torah, amongst the granules of truth Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 06:51:02 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:51:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: <20EAE8A6498E468ABF14517EBCFFBC8A@hankPC> R' Meir G. Rabi wrote: > Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to > various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. > Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote > extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and > research. Do not ignore the truth of the message because you (and we all) do not like the like the lifestyle of the messenger. Pythagoras' theorem is a central truth to much of mathematics and science, and the truth of Einstein's science has withstood the test of time and been subject to much experimental verification. So what exactly is your point -- ignore the truth because you do not like its source? Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Apr 16 11:33:13 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:33:13 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <100f9bef-3e84-6df0-e91d-87b4c01ee3c7@zahav.net.il> Last year I read the document that one signs with the Rabbinate about the mechira. It was quite clear - you sell everything.? Everything includes things that you may have forgotten about? and even things that you have no idea if you own, like stocks in some company that deals in chameitz (even if your ownership is via your pension fund). Everything? means everything. I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". On 4/16/2018 3:06 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the > chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. > > > > So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? > > Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 16 11:07:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:07:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria In-Reply-To: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> References: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180416180705.GG23200@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:48:58AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical : but rather a spiritual disease. I like calling it spirito-somatic, coining a term to parallel "psychosomatic". Just as it stress can turn the presence of Helicobacter pulori in the stomach into having an ulcer. : The Rabbis comment: b'sorah tovah hee l'Yisroel -- : "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." : Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and : mortar to act as if it were alive... But they also say it's purely theoretical (Sanhedrin 71a). Although that's tied to R' Elazar b"R Shimon's side of a machloqes in the mishnah (Nega'im 12:3). R' Yishmael and R' Aqiva (the other two opinions in the mishnah) would apparently disagree. In any case, as with the rest of the cases in the gemara of laws that exist only for learning (ben soreir umoreh and ir hanidachas) it continues with tannaim saying they saw something local tradition said was evidence of one. Nowadays, house mold is known to be all too common. The actual physical side of tzara'as habayis needn't be miraculous. However, unlike tzara'as of the body, one can't invoke a soul - mind - brain causality. It would be pretty direct evidence of Divine Providence if tzra'as of the sort that would cause tum'ah struck only appropriate homes. Which is how I saw the quote. It requires people living on a level where blatant hashgachah peratis is approrpriate. As opposed to an era where even tzara'as of the body requires far more spirituality than people achieve. : Since in today's world we don't have the warning of leprosy attached to our : houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be : able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. There is a discussion of the role of learning Torah, and whether studying Torah that is non-applicabile is of value. Because of ideas like this one, it is hard to believe there can be Torah that is non-applicable. Even if the case isn't, "derosh vekabel sekhar" could refer to taking home lessons for the general principle. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 16th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Tifferes: What type of discipline Fax: (270) 514-1507 does harmony promote? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Apr 16 06:55:47 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:55:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzorah Message-ID: <672ECAA3-45E8-4B5C-A040-0A47C6B91FE2@cox.net> The second verse of this portion (14:2) states: "This shall be the law of the metzora on the day of his purification..." Since the Torah mentions that his purification takes place during the day, the Sages expound that the Kohen's declaration, which alone permits the metzora to begin his purification ritual, may be made only during the day (Rashi; Sifra). The observance of Taharat Hamishpacha has been a central feature of Jewish life for millennia. One finds Mikvehs in medieval Spain, in ancient Italy and in the famed desert outpost of Masada. This is consonant with Halacha which mandates that even before the town synagogue is built, a Mikveh must first be established. The source of the laws of Mikveh and family purity is found in this week's Torah portion. The Torah commands that when a woman has a menstrual flow, she and her husband must stay apart from one another. During this period she is "tameh," a Hebrew term that has been incorrectly translated as "unclean." In point of fact, the word tameh has nothing to do with uncleanness. When one is tameh it means that a person has had some contact with death. In the instance of a menstruating woman, it is the death of the ovum. Similarly, when a man has had physical relations (which inevitably involve the death of millions of sperm), he too is tameh. Implicit in this Biblical tradition is a great sensitivity and awareness of the natural life cycle. After a week has passed since the cessation of the woman's menstrual flow, the woman goes to the Mikveh where she undergoes a "spiritual rebirth." Various aspects of the Mikveh experience reinforce this notion of rebirth. The Mikveh itself must have 40 seah of water, the number 40 alluding to the 40th day after conception when the soul of a child enters the embryo. The woman must have no ornaments or barriers between herself and the water, for her emerging from the Mikveh is like that of the newborn leaving the waters of the womb with no ornaments or barriers. A child is the mirror of the family, he reflects the moral purity of his parents. Anonymous From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 16 08:34:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:34:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Kriyas HaTorah, Aseres Ha'dibros Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Rambam (Teshuvos HaRambam 60) writes that one who is seated should not stand up for the reading of the Aseres Ha'dibros (Ten Commandments). However, the general custom today is that the entire congregation does stand during this reading. Why is it that this ruling of the Rambam is not followed? A. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt"l pointed out that there are two versions of cantillation for the Aseres Ha'dibros. The first is called ta'am ha'tachton (lower cantillation) which punctuates the Aseres Ha'dibros into sentences in the same manner as the rest of the Torah. The second is called ta'am ha'elyon (higher cantillation), which punctuates following the order of the commandments, reconstructing the manner in which the Ten Commandments were received during matan Torah. There are two reasons why someone would wish to stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros. If one's intent is to show extra honor to this portion of the Torah, this is inappropriate. The entire Torah was given to Moshe on Har Sinai, and therefore all of Torah is equally precious. Standing for the Aseres Ha'dibros might lead some to the erroneous conclusion that only the Ten Commandments were received directly from Hashem. However, there is a second reason why one would stand during the Aseres Ha'dibros and that is to recreate the assembly at Har Sinai. We stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros in the same fashion that all of Israel stood during the original acceptance of the Torah. Today, the general custom is to always read the portion of the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'elyon. This indicates that this is not merely a reading of the Torah, but a recreation of matan Torah. Therefore, it is appropriate to stand. Rav Soloveitchik posits that the Rambam read the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'tachton, equating it to every other Torah reading, in which case, it would indeed be inappropriate to stand. The custom of Rav Chaim Soloveitchik, zt"l was to read the Aseres Ha'dibros both on Shavuos and during the weekly portion with ta'am ha'tachton, following the practice of the Rambam. Some, however, have the custom to read the Aseres Ha'dibros on Shavuos with ta'am ha'elyon, since this reading is a recreation of Sinai, but when parshas Yisro and parshas Va'eschanan are read on a regular Shabbos, the Aseres Ha'dibros are read with ta'am ha'tachton. In such a shul it would be best to stand from the beginning of the aliyah so as not to show more honor to one part of the Torah than another. From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 17:58:57 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 19:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: In my previous post responding R? Marty Bluke I wrote: ?in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics.? Upon reflection I wish to add to my previous thought about ?the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly? can lead to great awe and yiras harommeimus and emuna. I have no doubt that the pasuk jn Iyov (19:26) ?umibesori echezeh eloka? is a direct expression in Nach of this idea that my very tissues (biological systems) are great evidence and testimony to the the existence of the Borei Olam and His careful and intricate design and continuing hashgacha of the very smallest and finest, myriad intricate details of every living thing. It basically is the old argument that the existence of a complex system such as a clock implies that there must be a clock maker ? but ever so much in spades. Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 17 10:59:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:59:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> Message-ID: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a : bdieved. Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. The wave of rabbis coming in when the big drive for day school education started were predominantly a particular kind of Litvak. Look who the big voices were in the Agudas haRabbanim of the first half of the 20th century. RARakeffetR makes a strong case that one of the differences between RSRH and RYBS was just how lekhat-chilah secular studies are. RSRH held that our insulation from general culture and general knowledge was a tragic consequence of ghettoization. And that we never chose that life, it was forced upon us. The Emancipation was seen as a boon, allow the full expression of Judaism again. RYBS, in RARR's opionion (and of course, others vehemently disagree) only saw secular studies as the ideal way to live in a suboptimal situation. Secular knowledge in-and-of-itself as well as its ability to help one live in dignity is lekhat-chilah only within this bedi'eved world. But had we all been able to move back to Brisk, it would be all the better. Which gets us to the eis la'asos discussion. Shas too is lekhat-chilah and a great thing. What is bedi'eved is the reality that forced Rebbe, Rav Ashi, Ravinah to canonize official texts and (according to Tosafos) the geonim to write it down. But since we are still in that reality, we still publish TSBP -- lekhat-chilah. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? : Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, : "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of secular studies. Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. I would stick to discussing financial crimes: Yafeh Talmud Torah im Derekh Eretz sheyegi'as sheneihem mishkachas avon. VeKhol Torah she'ein imahh melakhah, sofahh beteilah vegoreres avon. - R' Gamliel beno shel R' Yehudah haNasi (Avos 2:2) But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the am hanivchar means. I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does not produce people less prone to these things. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 17th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Tifferes: What is the ultimate Fax: (270) 514-1507 state of harmony? From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 17 17:25:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 20:25:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz Message-ID: . I had asked: > On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat > before Biur Chametz? I thank those who responded. I still haven't found any poskim who deal with this exact question, but the Magen Avraham does mention something very close: "All melachos are assur once the time for burning has come, until he burns the chometz, just like above in Siman 431." - Magen Avraham 445:2, at the very end Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Apr 17 22:27:14 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 07:27:14 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Omer and Koolulam Message-ID: A Post by Rabbi Alex Israel. In this essay (originally posted on Facebook for public consumption), Rav Israel talks about his feelings about participating in a Koolulam sing along. If you don't know, Koolulam is an organization which gets hundreds, even thousands of people together to teach to sing one song in unison. They took this idea from the US with the twist of having regular folks and not just stars singing. For an example of what Koolulam does, here is their Yom Atzmaut video (described by many as a tefilla b'tzibbur): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxzR9Z-kG6Q (Al Kol Aleh by Naomi Shemer). Rav Israel's post is an excellent example about how people are dealing with inner conflicts of the Omer (and Three Weeks) mourning period and living in modern Israel. Note: There are rabbanim who wouldn't have allowed participation, during the Omer time or any other time. You can read the comments and discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/alexisrael1/posts/10157199448378942 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ If you have been following me on FB, you will know my obsession with Koolulam, especially their ??70th Yom Haatzmaut event. Prior to the event I was asked by 7 or 8 people, friends or talmidot/im, ?whether they could attend during the Omer. (If you watched the video, about half the participants ?were religious-looking.) ? I am generally halakhically conservative (small "c"!) and I try to keep halakha even if it disrupts my lifestyle. I ?am committed to halakhic practice and I don't knowingly contravene the law. So was it forbidden?? On the one hand this was a live event. So is it a problem? The Shulchan Arukh restricts weddings ?and haircuts as modes of marking the death of Rabbi Akiva?s 24,000 talmidim. Magen Avraham ?adds dancing and revelry to the list and I grew up not even going to movies in the Omer. Koolulam ?isn?t a wedding and did not include dancing, but was very much a public celebratory event. Could I ?go and allow others to go? I went to consult. One authoritative Posek said to me "It's not really assur (not dancing); it's not really muttar (public mass event). Go if it is ?important to you." ... But is that satisfactory?? The fundamental issue is deeper than the technical definition of ?music?, dancing? etc. In truth, ?I was going as part of my Yom Haatzmaut experience, as a celebration of life in Israel, of a people ?revived. This was not simple entertainment. Having participated in Koolulam, it was incredibly ?uplifting. My wife has described the evening as ?tefilla betzibur,? as the song?s words are essentially ?a prayer! - Just watch the "kavanna" in the video of the event! This was not merely a fun night out, although it was great fun. It was for us a Zionist ?expression, it touched a far deeper chord; it reflected faith, national unity, pride, hope, and so much ?more.? On the one hand, I see Halakha as embodying values which we aspire to imbibe. As such, I fully identify with the mourning of the ?Omer. It recalls Rabbi Akiva?s students who did not regard or interact with one another respectfully. In Israel ?today, we desperately need to be reminded annually about the need for a sensitive and respectful ?social environment and public discourse. The Omer contains a critical message. We wouldn't want to be without it. The mourning of the Omer, especially for Askenazi kehillot, also marks ?massacres and Crusades throughout the ages; another important feature, (although they may have tragically been eclipsed by the Shoah.?) But here is the problem. These practices totally fail to absorb the huge historic shift that is Medinat ?Yisrael. There is a gaping dissonance between the traditional Omer rhythm and our Israel lives. The ?traditional Omer rubric doesn't match the modern days of commemoration. For example, one ?does not recite Tachanun on Yom Hashoah because it falls in Nissan. If there is one day to say ?Tachanun, it is Yom Hashoah (I wrote about my struggle with this here ?http://thinkingtorah.blogspot.co.il/?/davening-on-yom-hasho?). And is Yom ?Haatzmaut merely a hiatus in a wider period of mourning? Moreover, in general, on a daily basis, ?as I read the Siddur, I wonder how we can ignore the huge chessed of HKBH in our generation of ?Jewish independence and the restoration of land and nationhood. How can my Siddur be the same ??(excluding the prayer for the State) as my great-grandfather? ? In this period of the year, we should be thanking God, celebrating our good fortune, revelling in ?the gifts that we feel as we move from Yom Haatzmaut to Yom Yerushalayim. Fundamentally, the ?Omer is a happy time; Ramban perceives it as a ?chol hamoed? of sorts between Pesach and ?Shavuot where we mark ?the love of our youth, our marriage with God, how we followed God ?through the wilderness? (Jeremiah 2) as we followed God from Egypt to Matan Torah at Mount ?Sinai. Where is the joy? ? So, I felt that this was a sort of Yom Haatzmaut event which yes, contravened the traditional Omer, ?but in some way lived up to our new reality. I keep the Omer - not shaving; watching how I speak ?to others and how I interact in a positive and respectful way - but we are not in the terrible era of ?Bar Kochba when the Romans massacred Rabbi Akiva's talmidim, and we are not in the period of ?the Crusades. We are in Medinat Yisrael, our thriving sovereign State, and I want to praise Hashem and celebrate my people for ?the ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ????, ?? ???????? ????? ?????? ??????? - and so I went to Kululam. ? I don't know how to square the two systems.? Later I saw a post by an amazing Rav, Rabbi David Menachem, whose post reflected similar sentiments, going even further than my thoughts. See his post here: ?https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=963243270498844&id=276752372481274 ?(h/t Yael Unterman) I?m sharing these thoughts without the ability to articulate a solution. Maybe time will change ?things. Maybe we need to push these questions to halakhic authorities and thinkers greater than ?myself.? From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 17 12:56:42 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 19:56:42 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> There have been many many posting recently about the desirability of secular education, but no one has, so far, mentioned an exceedingly important point. Bammaqom sh'eyn anashim hishtaddel lihyoth ish, so I have to step in and point it out. We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have. `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater". This is preposterous; someone who knows xokhma yvanith knows that "epi" means "above" and "tropos" means to move, or to act. An epitropos is someone who acts above someone else, i.e., a guardian, who acts above, and on behalf of, his ward. `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Posqim, especially, need to have a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages. Any poseq who is not willing to be `oqer a din in the Shulxan `Arukh is no poseq (you may attribute this quote to me). But ordinary Jews also need to know this. It is always dangerous to believe things that are untrue. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 17 15:00:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 18:00:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >: Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a >: bdieved. > >Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up by Shearith Israel in the 18th century taught secular as well as Torah subjects. The day school set up by Rabbi Avraham Rice did the same. While it is true that the level of Torah subjects taught was low, still there were secular subjects almost from the beginning. Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects and so did RJJ that was founded around1902. The high school that Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started in the second decade of the 20th century taught secular subjects as well as Torah subjects. The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. Please see my articles "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 "Bringing Torah Education to Baltimore" The Jewish Press, October 3, 2008, pages 57 & 75. >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? >: Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, >: "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." > >So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of >secular studies. The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. >Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of >secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. He knew in detail how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, he did value mathematics. Once he moved to NY he enrolled his children in yeshivas that gave its students a secular education. He received special permission not to send his eldest son to public school in Chelsea, MA, since there was no other alternative at the time. (His eldest daughter did attend public school in Chelsea, MA.) Lazar Miller, his eldest son, told me when he was sitting shiva for his mother that his mother used to help him with his math. However, she used Hebrew terminology for fraction, numerator, and denominator, since she had studied at two Yavneh schools in Lithuania where everything was learned in Ivrit. >: How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? > >Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat >haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. > >I would stick to discussing financial crimes: ... >But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding >of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the >am hanivchar means. What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal. I will take Erlichkeit with aberrance to mitzva practice over Frumkeit any time. >I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, >have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does >not produce people less prone to these things. I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to those who possess it. Originally, higher education in America was tied to religious education, and there was an attempt to instill morality in the students. Today, there is no such attempt. Indeed, if anything, higher education is in many cases anti-morality from a Torah standpoint. Parents contemplating sending their children to a secular collage should keep this in mind. YL From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 18 13:05:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:05:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:00:38PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: :> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a :> : bdieved. :> Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. : This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up : by Shearith Israel in the 18th century ... : Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects ... : The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. None of which led to the dayschool movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? .... :> So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of :> secular studies. : The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member : behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. But you haven't shown a connection between the lack of limudei chol and the extent by which people are not living according to some derekh's understanding of "true Torah values". :> Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of :> secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how : science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. ... And yet would have felt a student who studied science as a full time endevor to be a cause fo a cheshbon hanefesh. And consequently, due to his own lack of formal study, much of the science he uses in his examples is just plain wrong. (And similarly, someone who knew the then-latest theories of cosmogony, geology and evolution would not have found is arguments for Creationism very convincing. If you don't know what the other side of the debate believes, you end up knocking down strawmen.) : how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is : true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, : he did value mathematics. Leshitakha-- Why aren't you asking how R' Miller could ignore RSRH's paean to Schiller? :> But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding :> of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the :> am hanivchar means. : What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on : externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal... Frumkeit is about ritual and a drive to satisfy one's need to be holy. Ehlichkeit is about wanting to do G-d's Will. A frum "baal chessed" wants his gemach to be the biggest in town. An ehrlicher one is happy those in his town in need have so many sources of help. See Alei Shur vol II pp 152-155 A translation of an excetp by R' Ezra Goldschmiedt My blog post on the topic . And if that's not your definition, it's the one I intended when I said that the main cause of the chilulei hasheim you raised (and the mindset that least to them which is in-and-of-itself un-Jewish) is frumeit. :> I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, :> have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does :> not produce people less prone to these things. : I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to : those who possess it... So then why bring up immoral behavior as proof that there are problems with a lack of secular education? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 18th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 balance? From driceman at optimum.net Wed Apr 18 13:30:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:30:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > RAM: >> On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat >> before Biur Chametz? > Burning hametz is a b?dieved. In an ideal world we would eat all of our hametz before zman issuro. So Hazal gave us time to eat hametz in the morning, and instituted biur hametz soon enough before noon that we wouldn?t violate any issurim, but not much before that. Otherwise why not do the biur right after bedika? David Riceman From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 18 16:25:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:25:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95.6C.08474.004D7DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: None of which led to the day school movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Etz Cahim had secular studies in the late 1880s. see below. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started a high school with secular studies around 1915. . R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? This is not true. > From my article "The Founding of Yeshiva Etz Chaim" The Jewish Press, May 2, 2008, pages 48 - 49. From the amount of time allocated to secular subjects, it is clear that the directors of the yeshiva considered these far less important than the students? limudei kodesh studies. Abraham Cahan, who would eventually become the editor of the Jewish Daily Forward and a prominent figure in the Socialist movement in America, became one of the first teachers in the English department in 1887. Cahan records that the curriculum was loosely drawn to provide for the study of grammar, arithmetic, reading, and spelling ? all within the ?English Department.? But because the directors of the school had no clear idea of what should be taught, the English Department functioned haphazardly, more out of a perfunctory acknowledgement for these subjects than a sincere desire to ?provide the children with a modern education.? The English Department was divided into two classes. The first was taught by a boy about fourteen, who had just graduated from public school and the second was taught by Cahan, who was a little less than twenty-eight years old. The students ranged from the ages of nine or ten to fifteen and many were exposed to the formal study of secular subjects for the first time. One of the native students received his first lessons in the English language when he entered the Yeshiva after passing his thirteenth birthday. The young immigrants presented an immense challenge to their devoted teachers. The students drank up the instruction with a thirst centuries old. Cahan frequently remained long after the prescribed teaching hours to tutor his pupils, who were uniformly poor in reading and mathematics and who regarded grammar as an exquisite form of torture. On these occasions, the directors would ask Cahan why he ?worked so hard,? saying that the students ?already knew enough English.? And from my article "The Founding of the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School" The Jewish Press, September 5, 2008, pages 26 & 66. Setting The Pattern For Future Yeshivas The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was unique in that it was the first elementary parochial school that taught basic Jewish studies as well as Talmud. Yeshiva Etz Chaim, founded in 1886, was an intermediate school that enrolled boys at least nine years old who already were somewhat proficient in Chumash and Rashi. Yeshiva Etz Chaim?s goal was to give its students a thorough grounding in Gemara and Shulchan Aruch. In addition, it provided some limited secular studies in the late afternoon. The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was different in that in addition to providing a first rate religious education, it sought to provide its students with an excellent secular education at least equivalent to that offered by the public schools of the time. Nonetheless, limudei chol (secular or ?English? studies) was considered much less important than limudei kodesh (religious studies), and this attitude was clearly displayed in the constitution of the school. It required that there be two principals, one for each department. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 18 17:35:48 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:35:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> R? Jay F, Shachter wrote: ?We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have.? To this I respond: First, I certainly would not wish to set myself up as one who is capable ?to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us,? despite having some modern math and scientific knowledge. I think such a broad statement goes much too far. Not having any significant knowledge of Greek, I will refrain from commenting on your second example. However the first example you cite regarding Pi and the Rambam is one that I am willing to challenge. You are of course correct about the dating of the formal proof[s] (there are more than one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_%CF%80_is_irrational), date to modern, post Rambam times. However, it is very possible and probably likely that the Rambam intuited this on his own, even if without the benefit of a formal proof, that Pi had to be or was most likely to be irrational. I know I did so and probably most reasonably good students of math do so as well, long before they are aware of any formal proof for that fact. One reason for this is the well known method to approximate the value of Pi to any precision desired (even if very slow to converge) that requires little more than the knowledge of how to analyze a triangle. Simply inscribe a polygon of N equal isosceles triangles in a circle and calculate its perimeter and then divide by twice the length of the long side (= diameter of the circle). then do the same for N+1, and N+2 etc. a process in theory you could do infinitely many times for greater precision. So to intuit irrationality is very plausible even if not proven in our modern sense. Practically, note, that no matter how far you carry this exercise you will not get a repeating decimal that is the mark of the rational number. So I think you are far from ?judging the credibility? of the Rambam based on this example you cited. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 18 15:33:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:33:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . R' Ben Waxman wrote: > I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth > of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real > need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know > about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." > > The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika > anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant was that once you sell your chameitz there is no *d'Oraisa* need to do a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, and that's why we say the bracha. This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the only reason. Mishneh Brurah 431:2 writes: "Also: Because people are used to chometz all year long, if there is still some in his house and his possession, they made a gezera because he might forget and eat it." Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of the chometz that we found. But this is an error, in my opinion, because the concern raised by the MB was that one might happen to come across some chometz, and thoughtlessly eat it. Mechira will NOT prevent this. Mechira will ONLY remove the chometz from one's ownership, but it will not help against forgetfullness. I would like to close by showing that Bedikah and Mechira BOTH have strengths that the other lacks, and that is why people should do both: Mechira removes all chometz from ownership, regardless of where it might be, and (I think) regardless of my sincerity, but if I didn't clean the house well enough I may have left some around. Bedika removes (or greatly reduces) the chance that I might come across some chometz accidentally, but the chometz that I didn't find is still in my ownership. A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had intended to type!) Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 00:09:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 03:09:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> Message-ID: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day. In his day it was considered acceptable to say "Look, pi is obviously an irrational number", and nobody would lift an eyebrow, because it *is* obvious. Only later did mathematicians start to say, well, yes, it is obvious, but let's see if we can actually prove it. And eventually they did so, and guess what, they confirmed what everyone including the Rambam already knew. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 18 23:13:45 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 08:13:45 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Ben On 4/19/2018 12:33 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant > was that once you sell your chameitz there is no*d'Oraisa* need to do > a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, > and that's why we say the bracha. > > This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do > Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 03:27:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:27:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam and Pi In-Reply-To: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180419102714.GA11722@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:09:29AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a : rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state : it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day... I fully agree. But there is an irony here. When it comes to theolgy, the Rambam holds the chiyuv is to know, ie to believe because they had proof -- not tradition, not pur faith, etc... I think the Rambam believed he had a proof that pi was irrational. However, he had a differnt definition of the word proof. Continuing on this tangent... I think the definition of "proof" and therefore of "Rationalism" changed so much since the Rambam's day, the Rambam really wouldn't qualify as a "Rationalist" in our sense of the word. For example, science wasn't invented yet. The things the Rambam believed about Natural Philosophy were not backed by anything comparable to the rigor of scientific process. (Which itself is only rigorous at narrowing down the search space. Actual theories are constructed inductively, patterns found from a number of examples, and only have Bayesian levels of certainty. There can always be a black swan out there that, once found, requires replacing the theory with a new one. But *disproving* theories? That black swan does with certainty. Jumping back to before this parenthetic digression...) Similarly in math. The Rambam didn't have a modern mathemetician's definition of proof in mind. Even though he knew Euclid. But he did and always expected knowledge to be backed by some kind of proof. Archimedes spent a lot of time trying to "square the circle", i.e. come up with a geometric way of constructing a square with the same area as a circle. Numerous people tried since. This is the same thing as failing to find the rational number that is pi. Say the square they were looking for had sides of length s. So, the are of the square would be s^2. To "square the circle" would mean to find a square whose sides, s, are such that the ratio between s^2 and r^2 is pi, so that the areas s^2 (the square) and pi * r^2 (the circle) are equal. Repeatedly failing to find s by geometric construction eventually led people to conclude it was a fool's errand. By the Rambam's day, it was taken as a given that geometric construction could not find an s, and therefore that the ratio between them, pi, was irrational. (Weirdly, there still could have been a "black swan", the geometric construction that hadn't yet been found. The level of confidence the Rambam had would parellel that of a scientist believing the results of repeated experiment, but not that of a modern methematician.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Apr 19 08:04:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:04:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day >schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a >post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied >began, but initially, it didn't have to. I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was never separate from the study of Torah. He emphasized the importance of unifying Judaism and secular studies. Often speaking of the, "harmonious union of culture and spirituality," he believed that knowledge of the liberal arts would broaden one's understanding of Torah. However, Revel's dedication to Orthodox Jewry was undisputed. For instance, he forbade the use of a female vocalist in the 1926 Music Festival, as a female singer is a violation of Orthodox Jewish law. He did not allow Reform Jews to serve on Yeshiva College's national board of directors. He was also staunchly opposed to mixed seating in synagogues. "He wrote: 'Yeshiva aims at unity, at the creation of a synthesis between the Jewish conception of life, our spiritual and moral teaching and ideals, and the present-day humanities, the scientific conscience and spirit to help develop the complete harmonious Jewish personality, once again to enrich and bless our lives, to revitalize the true spirit and genius of historic Judaism.'" From https://goo.gl/hbRw8S "Rabbi Revel's first step as the new head of RIETS was the creation of an affi liated high school. The high school, Talmudical Academy, had its fi rst entering class in September 1916." Regarding Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin please see "Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin, Torah Education Pioneer in America" The Jewish Press, April 4, 2008, pages 42 & 91. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 03:19:45 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:19:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> References: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <81715a05-f9f9-f57e-95b1-03dc5240cb96@sero.name> On 19/04/18 02:13, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there > is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Nor is there an issur in having hefker chametz sitting in your property, but you have to search for it and put it away or get rid of it, for fear that if you come across it during Pesach you may absentmindedly eat it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Apr 19 07:45:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:45:48 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . I just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this permission? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:33:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:33:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180419153325.GA3724@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:04:09AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. : : From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b : : "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was ... Before the wave in question, but not the cause of the day school explosion. I do not know why this is so hard of a point to get across. Being around first but not starting a trend does not make something the source of the eventual trend. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is flawed reasoning. In fact, he didn't run a day school. And for that matter TA wasn't fully seperate from REITS. It wasn't a HS model that caught on anywhere. The model of day school and HS that actually catches on across American O through the middle of the 20th cent was the product of compromises between R ("Mr") SF Mendolovitch and his parent body. When TA evolved into MTA and BTA, it was because other schools have already created different expectations of what a HS was. Being in the same track as the eventual college degree, so that going from TA to any other college but YC was more like a transfer, was not sellable. (Although it did make AP courses moot; just take a college course in your 3rd year, if you were ready to.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Apr 19 04:25:17 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:25:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach Message-ID: The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately precedes the Amidah. I gave the following response: Soncino gives a very poignant explantion. ?O Lord, open Thou my lips; and my mouth shall declare Thy praise.? David?s lips had been sealed by wrongdoing, because praise of God would then have been blasphemy. If, then, God opened his lips and he was again enabled to offer Him praise, it was a sign that he had been granted pardon. What a profound thought before one of the most prominent and central prayers of our entire liturgy. We are all sinners and hope for the same pardon that King David was granted. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:59:45 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:59:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180419155945.GA30717@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:25:17AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately : precedes the Amidah. Technically, it is part of the Amidah. That's why we say it between ge'ulah and tefillah in Shacharis and Maariv. Unlike "Ki sheim H' eqra", which is only said before the Amidah of Minchah and Mussaf, because there is no Birkhas Ge'ulah, and therefore no problem of interruption. This is particularly relevant to a Chazan, as Chazaras haShatz should begin with "H' Sefasai Tiftach", not Birkhas Avos. Tangent, since we're looking at what the pasuq is about. Safah is at the edge. The word is not only used for a lip, but also for the seashore (sefas hayam). The peh is what stands behind the sefasayim. So, when I say this pasuq, and when I have the time and yishuv hadaas to think about what I am saying, my thoughts are about Hashem removing the externalities that block me from expressing my real inner self. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 09:23:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20180419162328.GB30717@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:56:42PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: : We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct : judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. : ... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. : He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although : he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater"... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge to that we know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon am? Mind you, I believe in the value of secular knowledge in-and-of-itself. Not just what you need to increase the likelihood of paying the bills. But I just don't see this particular argument. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 09:25:22 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> On 19/04/18 10:45, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I? just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, > then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no > longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). > > But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I > MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is > no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not > destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this > permission? It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 11:55:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahMusings] The Best Charity Message-ID: <20180419185537.GA11736@aishdas.org> People who both know my own proclivities and read this to the end will understand why I just HAD to share this post by RGS. >From https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/04/the-best-charity/ Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings The Best Charity Apr 19, 18 by R. Gil Student My friend, Rav Shlomo Einhorn, is once again attempting a superhuman feat of Torah teaching. A little over two years ago, he taught Torah for 18 live-streamed hours to raise money for the yeshiva he heads. This year, on Lag Ba-Omer, he will be attempting to break that record by teaching for 19 straight hours. This is a cause worth supporting -- or is it? I. Which Charity? Many people in the Jewish community have achieved varieties of financial success, allowing them the privilege of supporting many charities. This raises questions of communal and philanthropic priorities. Others have limited charity funds but still want to allocate them effectively. The issue is a blessing but also a complex problem, with multiple angles. Rav Hershel Schachter discussed this with me a few years ago in [48]Jewish Action. I would like to explore a specific subject that I have seen discussed in the responsa literature -- what is the best charity if you have to choose only one? In mid-sixteenth century Turkey, a wealthy man passed away without leaving instructions for the disposal of his charity funds. The local rabbis decided that some of that charity money should be given to the deceased's poor brother but the sons of the deceased objected that they should inherit the money and decide what to do with it. The question was brought to the Maharshdam, Rav Shmuel Di Medina of Salonica (Responsa Maharshdam, Yoreh De'ah 158). Maharshdam says that we have to try to determine the deceased's desires for the charity fund. Since in this case we do not know his intentions, we should give the money to the highest level of charity. The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 259) quotes his father, the Rosh, as saying that a town may reallocate to a study hall money that was donated to a synagogue or cemetery. Maharshdam argues that if in a case in which we know with certainty that the donor intended for the money to go to a synagogue we can use it for a study hall, then certainly when we do not know the donor's intention we can use the money to support Torah study. If we give the money to a lesser charity, we risk misusing the donation. II. Higher Torah The question then becomes which Torah study organization receives higher priority. Maharshdam quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 119b) that the world survives because of the Torah study of children, who due to their age are free of responsibility from sin. Additionally, more people doing a mitzvah together has greater merit than fewer people. Therefore, concludes Maharshdam, the money should be given to ththe highest charity -- a large elementary school. Similarly, Rav Ephraim Navon in early eighteenth century Turkey addresses a related question (Machaneh Ephraim (Hilkhos Tzedakah 11). A man donated money to establish in a small town a part-time kollel of ten men studying Torah. However, the town could not find ten men willing to enroll. The donor wished to change the endowment from a kollel to a full-time elementary school teacher. Rav Navon permitted this reallocation for technical reasons but adds that this new purpose is higher than the original because the Torah study of children sustains the world. III. God's Place However, Rav Yosef Eliyahu Chazzan challenges this argument (Ma'arkhei Lev vol. 1 no. 25). He quotes the Gemara (Berakhos 8a) which states that nowadays God only has the four cubits of halakhah. Therefore, He loves the distinguished gates of halakhah more than all the synagogues and other study halls. According to this passage, high-level Torah study merits higher priority than any other study. This seems to contradict the earlier passage, which gives priority to children's Torah study. This question gains greater strength when we note that the priority of high-level Torah has practical implications. Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Tefillah 8:3) rules, based on the above Gemara, that it is better to pray in a study hall than a synagogue. Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 90:18) rules likewise. Since the two passages seem to contradict and the latter is quoted authoritatively, it would seem that an elementary school should not be given priority over adult Torah study. Rav Chaim Palaggi (Chaim Be-Yad nos. 64-65) favors the interpretation of Rav Chazzan. However, he struggles with the many authorities who side with the Maharshdam. Rather than taking a minority view against the majority, in an impressive act of intellectual humility Rav Palaggi adopts a middle position that gives due weight to the majority with which he disagrees. IV. Jewish Behavior Perhaps a reconciliation of the two passages lies in the Rambam's interpretation. Rav Chazzan and Rav Palaggi follow Maharsha's interpretation that the Gemara is praising high-level study of halakhah. In the introduction to his commentary to the Mishnah (ed. Kafach, vol. 1, p. 21), Rambam sees the passage about the four cubits of halakhah as a general declaration about the uniqueness of true loyalty to the letter and spirit of halakhah. Synagogues and study halls may be full of people studying Torah but not enough of those students apply these teachings properly to develop a faithful Torah personality. Only someone who internalizes the messages of halakhah can reach out fully to God. If so, the distinguished gates of halakhah may overlap with elementary schools. Schools that teach proper character traits seem to qualify as remaining within the four cubits of halakhah, whether for adults or children. An elementary school that trains its students to follow the law, to embrace and internalize the messages of Judaism regarding behavior and thought, serves in the same capacity as a high-level kollel. Both types of institutions are distinguished gates of halakhah. Elementary schools have the additional benefit of purity, discussed above. If this is correct, the highest charity would be an elementary school that emphasizes proper behavior and attitudes, a mussar-focused cheder that directs pure children on the proper path. About Gil Student Rabbi Gil Student is the founder, publisher and editor-in-chief of Torah Musings. From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Thu Apr 19 18:08:35 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 01:08:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> ?When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah?? One thing I learned in my years as an attorney is that a rhetorical question is not an argument. I, of course, do not know what Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue to be observant in a work environment. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Fri Apr 20 11:40:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:40:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> References: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20180420184026.GA7707@aishdas.org> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 01:08:35AM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : I, of course, do not know what : Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very : proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates : and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue : to be observant in a work environment. Historical (and hagiographical) accounts portray the request for secular education that would make college and professions possible options came from the target audience, a majority of the parents of Brooklyn, not R "Mr." Mendlowitz. His launching of the HS was by convincing 8th grade parents to keep their sons in TvD "just one more year", as the parents wanted their boys to go to Public HS. That was the importance of getting a real American education had to his customer base. Then, it was another "just one more year" into 10th grade, until he had his first graduating class. There wasn't an issue for him of getting secular education into TvD, it was an issue of getting parents to agree to commit time to limudei qodesh! So of course TvD made a big deal about the quality of their secular studies. The whole point their marketing had to make was that the son can learn Torah without parents feeling afraid their boys would be held back. Getting back to the main conversation: What R-"Mr"-SFM thought is more of a historical issue. My point was that the push for limudei chol in day schools at the time the movement (not the first day school!) was getting started came from the parents, not the idealogues. There is no indication the decision was lechat-khilah, as this wasn't a lechat-khilah situation. Limudei qodesh without a guarantee of pre-college quality education wasn't a vaiable option in most communities, not a choice on the table. Meanwhile, the big voice in American O Rabbinate of the time was the East European Rabbi, and not an ideological immigrant who had a pull to America, but someone who came fleeing either progroms or Nazism. We know the majority of them considered limudei chol an assimilationist force. Or is that too under question? (I used the name "R 'Mr.' SF Mendlowitz" [or misspelled as per the usual pronounciation "-olovitch"] because he asked people to call him "Mr." and therefore I thought it respectful to acknowledge it. Even though here, "R" is the default title for men. Then I was afraid people who didn't know the history would think insult was intended, so I am adding this parenthetic explanation.) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 20th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Tifferes: What role does harmony Fax: (270) 514-1507 play in maintaining relationships? From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:54:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:54:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Some thoughts on the passing of a teacher and friend Message-ID: <5f552137ab7f4015af43f057f925c5ae@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> With the greatest trepidation I will share a few thoughts. I knew (to the extent one can know someone) R'Ozer Yeshaya Glickman Hacohain Z"L for 40 years. In the early years we learned together. He certainly was far more able than I but we did discuss many tum issues over the years. I don't think he would be happy being held up as a unicorn even though his blending of both worlds was the reason he felt he was asked by the Yeshiva to be "on the road" so much. I believe he felt that anyone could do what he did at their own level. When the hurley burleys done the question the yeshiva needs to ask itself imho is have they encouraged (or perhaps should they-my uninformed sense is that RIETS looks at the separate mountain approach as a vision -a la r'ybs) broad lives( a la r'hutner) in any of their best and brightest? do they seek out role models of that nature or only exceptional examples in specific accomplishments (e.g big TC or big $ but not a balancer)? Balancing priorities is a big challenge in life, if one wants to honor R'OYG Z"L imho one might start with some cheshbon hanefesh looking at his balance and its message for us (no two of us will likely reach the same conclusions but that's what is to be expected-it's the process not the results) yhi zichro baruch KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:53:20 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:53:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?R=92YBS-Feminist/Talit_Story?= Message-ID: <9fc9dd88e16649d48fc183b298bbfe74@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I believe this version of the story told by R? S Mandel in Jewish Action-not the ?gotcha? version I?ve heard. When a group of feminists visited him and demanded that he permit them to wear tallitot, he listened to them, showed he understood their reasoning, and proposed that there first be a trial period during which they would wear colored cloaks as tallitot, but without tzitzit and without reciting a berachah. He asked them to note how they feel wearing them and to come back after two weeks and confer with them again. After two weeks, they reconvened, and when the Rav asked these women how they felt, they told him how inspired they felt when wearing the cloaks. The Rav replied that that was excellent, that they should definitely continue wearing the cloaks and praying with kavannah, and that there was no need to wear the tallitot with tzitzit that men wore. Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 22 11:27:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:27:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah is Not Religion Message-ID: We are counting towards Shevuous which commemorates the giving of the Torah. The question is "What is Torah?' The following is from RSRH's essay Sivan I that I have posted at Sivan I (Collected Writings I) The Torah, however, did not spring from the breast of mortal man; it is the message of the God of Heaven and Earth to Man; and it was from the very beginning so high above the cultural level of the people to which it was given, that during the three thousand years of its existence there was never a time yet during which Israel was quite abreast of the Torah, when the Torah could be said to have been completely translated into practice. The Torah is rather the highest aim, the ultimate goal towards which the Jewish nation was to be guided through all its fated wanderings among the nations of the world. This imperfection of the Jewish people and its need of education is presupposed and clearly expressed in the Torah from the very beginning. There is, therefore, no stronger evidence for the Divine origin and uniqueness of the Torah than the continuous backsliding, the continuous rebellion against it on the part of the Jewish people, whose first generation perished because of this very rebellion. But the Torah has outlived all the generations of Israel and is still awaiting that coming age which "at the end of days" will be fully ripe for it. Thus, the Torah manifests from the very beginning its superhuman origin. It has no development and no history; it is rather the people of the Torah which has a history. And this history is nothing else but its continuous training and striving to rise to the unchangeable, eternal height on which the Torah is set, this Torah that has nothing in common with what is commonly called "religion." How hopelessly false is it, therefore, to call this Torah "religion," and thus drag it by this name into the circle of other phenomena in the history of human civilization, to which it does not belong. This is a fundamentally wrong starting point, and it is small wonder that it gives rise to questions such as the following, which have no meaning so far as the Torah is concerned: "You want Judaism to remain the same for ever?" "All religions rejuvenate themselves and advance with the progress of the nations, and only the Jewish 'Religion' wants to remain rigid, always the same, and refuses to yield to the views of an enlightened age?" See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 22 04:12:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 07:12:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav Message-ID: . Tumas meis and sheretz, for example, are supernatural phenomena. If someone has been in contact with tumah, and is infected with that tumah, there is no physical evidence of this infection. We are aware of the tumah if and only if we know about the events that took place, and the status of the things in those events. Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses. But they are spiritual illnesses, not medical ones. And in fact, Torah Sheb'al Peh is chock full of spiritual reasons why a person would become a metzora - Lashon Hara being the most famous of these, miserliness and others being mentioned less frequently. My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve myself in general." (Please note: This post is NOT an attempt to categorize all the many kinds of tumah. The first two paragraphs are designed only to show a similarity between tzaraas and zav, and then to highlight a difference.) Akiva Miller From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:02:03 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:02:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Re: R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 RYL quoted R? Yonasan Eybeshutz: --quote-- For all the sciences are condiments and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impure and how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. ?end quote-- >>>>> ? Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual, or even for every member of the Sanhedrin, to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry.? It is not necessary for all these subjects to be part of the standard yeshiva high school curriculum.? It is only necessary that there be in the world mathematicians, zoologists, chemists, doctors, astronomers and so on.? It is not even necessary that they be Jewish.? It is only necessary that their expertise be accessible when needed.? It is not uncommon that poskim confer with physicians, for example, when they need certain medical information in order to posken shailos in specific situations.? The poskim don?t first have to go to medical school.? ? Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. ?It is necessary that they exist in the world. ?It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies. ? If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:55:19 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:55:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> ? In a message dated 4/9/2018 RYL wrote: ? >> ?There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf --quote-- R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. Hayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, ?through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash?. By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy?. R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): ?. It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. ?.He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. ?. ? --end quote-- To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw from this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL ? >>>>? ? ? To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn: ? [1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ? [2] If you can master the ?seven branches of secular wisdom? before your bar mitzvah, that?s fabulous!? Because after your bar mitzvah you have to be mindful of ?vehagisa bo yomam velayla.???But before your bar mitzvah, you can play ball, roller-skate, and memorize the encyclopedia to your heart?s content. ? [3] Funny you should quote R? Chaim of Volozhin.? The famous Yeshiva of Volozhin did not include any of these seven branches of wisdom in its curriculum.? Anyone happen to remember why and when the Yeshiva of Volozhin closed its doors? ? Let me add a passage written by Rabbi Dr. David Berger (who, BTW, was my Jewish history professor for four wonderful semesters in Brooklyn College): ? --quote? ? Although various Geonim were favorably inclined toward the study of philosophy, it is clear that the curriculum of the advanced yeshivot was devoted to the study of Torah alone?.The private nature of philosophical instruction in the society at large [early medieval intellectual Islamic society] made it perfectly natural for Jews to follow the same course; more important, the curriculum of these venerable institutions [the yeshivot] went back to pre-Islamic days, and any effort to introduce? a curricular revolution into their hallowed halls would surely have elicited vigorous opposition.? ? --end quote? ? [Above is from R? Berger?s essay ?Judaism and General Culture in Medieval Times,? in the book *Judaism?s Encounter with Other Cultures* edited by Jacob J. Schachter.] ? Please note these words:? ?the private nature of philosophical instruction.?? The Vilna Gaon studied secular subjects on his own, as many yeshiva students have done over the years. ? Elsewhere RYL has indicated his desire that the NY govt require chassidishe schools to provide a good secular education to their students. ? You don?t have to impose your preferences on others, or get the government involved to force changes in school curricula. ? I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 01:06:16 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:06:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <6b2084c852a745458c68c6f7836e4477@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn:[1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ================================== IIUC, the Gaon?s theory of limud torah was that there was no such thing as spare time (any time one does not have to be doing something else must be spent learning) Thus assumedly he felt time spent on secular studies was required. Unless one posits that he had a need for ?recreation? which was study of secular studies or that he really only studied them when Torah learning of any sort was forbidden. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 23 05:39:50 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:39:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halacha Yomis - Hafrashas Challah, At Large Factories Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. How does the OU separate Challah at Jewish owned factories that manufacture bread and related items that require Challah separation? Is there a mashgiach separating a piece of dough from every batch? Isn?t that impractical? A. For OU-certified restaurants and caterers, the mashgiach separates Challah from every batch of dough. However, in factories it is not practical to have a mashgiach present each time a batch of dough is made. Instead the OU uses what we call the ?Tevel Matzah system.? Open boxes of matzah that did not have Challah separated from them (i.e. tevel) are placed in these factories next to the mixers. The mashgiach declares that each time a batch of dough is made, a designated piece of the matzah should become Challah and exempt that batch of dough. Even though the matzos have already been baked and the mixer contains unbaked dough, we have already seen that one can separate from baked matzah on raw dough when both are obligated in Challah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Mon Apr 23 06:34:22 2018 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 13:34:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. On Sunday, April 22, 2018, 11:29:56 PM CDT, Toby Katz wrote: > Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. It is necessary that they > exist in the world. It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student > take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. > I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female > physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. How > fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn > Torah day and night that men have! ... > If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") > are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and > potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. Not that this is optimal, Those that have the ability, and desire should spend as much time as they want/need to achieve the Torah knowledge we all rely on to live our lives. We all need Gedolim that these kinds of people become to naser the difficult Shaylos that constantly arise as we progress through time. For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah. This that misdirect those strengths - being urged to use their strengths to learn Torah are in my view shortchanging them. They are discouraging Jews from serving God and his people in the best way they can. Where their strengths where they really lie. More to say - no time. HM Want Emes and Emunah in your life? Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/ From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Mon Apr 23 01:26:05 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:26:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 From: Micha Berger > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us > they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon > am? What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, and what they are teaching us, whilst simultaneously utilising our understanding of the era's terms and sciences to better probe the intentions of the original statements. Dovid Rubin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 08:15:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 11:15:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423151544.GD1065@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 08:26:05AM +0000, D Rubin wrote: : > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, ... : > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon : > am? : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) ... Just to clear up the word, I meant non-posqim. I needed something that meant someone who wasn't "from LOR on up", and therefore shouldn't be pasqening for themselves. : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper : understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, : and what they are teaching us... Yes, as I said, I too believe in a role for limudei chol beyond the utilitarian study of things that will eventually help you pay the bills. I was addressing what I thought was a flaw in a particular argument. There is enough Torah to keep one busy for a lifetime without topics that require a formal secular education. The question is what to do when "Mah shelibo chafeitz" is something like hil' qidush hachodesh. Which brings me to a totally new aspect of this discussion: formal vs informal education. Secular study in one's spare time was the norm in places like Volozhin and Slabodka. (Although Slabodka students were more likely to be reading Freud...) To the extent that RSRH thought Volozhin were "fellow travelers on the path of Torah im Derekh Eretz" and described them as such to his followers when fundraisers for the yeshiva approched Frankfurt aM. And yet the same Litvisher rabbanim and RY would campaign against university and formal education. Perhaps their primary concern was leaving the bubble prematurely leading to assimilation, rather than expecting their talmidim to define away the concept of "free time" or afraid of which ideas their students might be exposed to. Although the Alter of Slabodka would make a case-by-case diagnosis and give each student different guidelines, at least we could say there were stduents for whom he thought secular study on one's own was appropriate. And apparently the norm. Remember, these are the same bachurim for whom the leading pass-time when not learnig was chess. Yeshiva wasn't for everyone; the guys who went were a bunch of intellecturals. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From t613k at aol.com Mon Apr 23 09:33:07 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:33:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <162f35a0504-c8b-11ca6@webjas-vab001.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Mon Apr 23 12:43:36 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:43:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: << I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies.>> And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of science the women should pasken the question -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:00:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:00:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423210037.GA8959@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:43:36PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of : science the women should pasken the question Except that it's arguable that pro forma women can't pasqen. It means a poseiq needs to know enough to ask intelligent questions of the expert. Even if the experts would end up being women, BTs who studied the subject before accepting ol mitzvos, unobservant Jews or non-Jews. Which is a good deal of knowledge, but doesn't require years of formal education. When I brought this thread over from Areivim to Avodah, my intent was not to have a bunch of pro-secular education posts. Rather, my focus was on the eilu va'eilu of saying that even though I believe in the value of secular education, I cannot say it's the One True Derekh. For example, the gemara only says that many tried to follow Rashbi's Torah-only derekh and failed. Not that R Yishmael was right. But that pragmatically, one worked for the masses and the didn't. And if the context changes, so that the welfare state makes it possible for more to succeed toing things Rashbi's way? The gemara says nothing against it. Assuming they don't bankrupt the state that way or other Modern Israeli political, governmental and economic issues, but again, that's the balebatishe problem of the system failing. Even if it were chilul hasheim issues (just to pre-empt that line of reasoning), that's not about eschewing secular studies. I would say the gemara leaves both options open. And for today... For every kid who leaves chareidi life going OTD because they feel hobbled by the lack of secular education, or the lack of worldliness in general, or just plain constricted by the paucity of their choices of how to live as adults there is a Mod-O kid who leaves because of too much opennees, a lack of structure, an attraction to the other lifestyles they're exposed to, a feeling that their parents are fooling themselves with compromise... To survive, we need all our options. That said, I find it interesting that none of the arguments in favor of limudei chol actually involved what I consider their real value: There is too much we can't learn from Torah. Not that it's not there, just that we don't know how to extract it. Like when RALichtenstein saw the Chevra Qadisha try to rush the aveilim at one levayah through so that they could begin another, he commented that had they read Hamlet they never could have acted that way. Not that such middos aren't in Torah sources, but they're more accessible sometimes in literature. And for all the awe one may get from the Wisdom of the Author when learning Torah, it hits harder when you see Chokhmas haBorei in the physical world, outside the context of "religious studies". Also, by studying other topics one learns other modes of thought, and becomes more able to think in other ways, reach other conclusions. Mathemeticians, programmers and lawyers all learn a precision of thought and attention to detail that helps in real-life problem solving as well as learning. Vekhulu for other displines. In short... The value I find in limudei chol only starts with knowing more and having more data to put into the Torah and the parnasah mills. They change how one thinks in ways that improve both Torah and life skills. Simply by having more tools in the toolbox. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 11:08:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. When I was a kid, it was a big deal that we couldn't buy chameitz from Walbaum's, including the supermarket whose parking lot was directly across the street. It means that for a couple of months, I couldn't be sent to the store on Fri for many of those last-minute purchases. I presume (given who my parents would have asked in that era) that was R' Fabian Schoenfeld's pesaq. But as the broohaha over beer this year indicates, there is a machloqes. We could view the sale as valid, and the Jew wrongfully selling merchandise that belongs to someone else. Theft, rather than chameitz she'avar alav es haPesach. Which would imply that in our case, where bi'ur chameitz is done later than the rav's mechirah, we would view it as wrongfully destroying someone else's chameitz. Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? I would think the latter. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 14:07:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:07:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> On 23/04/18 14:08, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. > > With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim > who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) > that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to > treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But here your actions show that you were completely serious about the mechira, but you didn't intend this to be included in it. The shtar you signed doesn't specifically say this *is* included. Its description of what's included very much depends on your intentions as revealed by your actions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend to include ANY item? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 23 14:51:13 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:51:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <07.CD.29097.DC55EDA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:31 AM 4/23/2018, RN Toby Katz wrote: >I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a >reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I >never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would >never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the >option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? >? >? >? >--Toby Katz I find your terminology "normal Orthodox schools" somewhat surprising in the context of Chassidic yeshivas. What exactly do you mean by this terminology when contrasted with Chassidic schools? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 21:57:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:57:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/04/18 17:49, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be > : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from > : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a > : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. > > But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when > the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions > showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or > burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend > to include ANY item? Again, you are conflating two questions, one of which depends on your intentions and one which does not: 1) Is the mechira valid? Yes, regardless of your intentions. 2) What is included in the mechira. Certainly anything explicitly included in the shtar. But the shtar's language is vague; does it apply to *this* piece of bread? Only if you meant it to. That which you've set aside for breakfast is clearly not included, even if the mechira happened early in the morning. Ditto for that which you set aside to burn. Did it include an item on your store shelves, which you ended up selling just 20 minutes later? We can approach this two ways: a) It did, because you intended it to. Your intention was that your inventory should not become treif; this is inventory, you don't want it to be treif, therefore it's included. b) I bo'is eima, fine, let it be as you say, and the act of selling an item -- whether 20 minutes after the zman or 20 minutes before the end of Achron Shel Pesach -- shows that it was not included. Even if we were to accept this proposition (which I do not), whatever remains on the shelves that you did *not* sell remains included. Not only did you do nothing to indicate an intention to exclude it, you clearly did intend to include it, since your whole purpose was that it should not become treif. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 22:18:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:18:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name>, <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore > guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is > still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between > chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or > moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? > > I would think the latter. > ?????- Iiuc they sold the whole business, not just the stock Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 24 04:53:01 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 07:53:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira. There have been conjectures that the person's actions might reveal his intentions, or maybe not. But it seems to me that the starting point should be that which has been mentioned in writing. And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser degree of detail. In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this thread. But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other details. It seems to me that the "stam daas" of this person would be that he is selling only what is on the list, and the bittul is on everything else. Akiva Miller From hankman at bell.net Tue Apr 24 06:15:47 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:15:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: <0401042908D24434A2102FDD03A26A7A@hankPC> R?n T. Katz wrote: In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz I would go well beyond that and possibly suggest that when done ?the right way? that certain limudei chol? (read math and natural sciences) could be a better and more efficient way of attaining emunah including drosh vachakor and yiras harommeimus and the goal of understanding ?beHai? boro osom, or the gevuros of masseh bereishis, the intricacies of the olam koton and the actual vast olom not to mention the numerous sugios in shas and halacha that require knowledge of the real world and it science (its understanding). I propose a thought for consideration, that while for some yechidim their level of Torah learning is sufficiently high that Torah is the best and most efficient path to attain these goals. Unfortunately for many (most) of us, our level of Torah havanah is not even close to that level and as a practical fact a more direct path to getting a start on these Torah goals is through studying the briah and its science put there by G-d in the maseh beraishis. Someone like the GRA whose level of Torah study most of us can not even begin to imagine would relegate his study of science to only when it was not in opposition to his limud of Torah (such as the B?HK etc) as the best manner (for him) of achieving this goal was through his limud of Torah. But for most of us to take this as also applying to our situation is wishful thinking. As many times as I learn parshs Bereishis, my havana of ?beHai? boro osom has not really grown very much nor my level derosh vachakor. For us it may be a lekatchila outside the B?HK to set times for scientific study if done with the appropriate approach in support of our Torah understanding and growth in yira and emunah even when not just for parnasa. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 24 08:12:26 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:12:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Some_FAQs_about_the_OU=92s_=93Tevel_Mat?= =?windows-1252?q?zah_system=94?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Here are some FAQs about the OU?s ?Tevel Matzah system? that were described in yesterday?s Halacha Yomis. Q1. What would happen if the box of tevel matzos that was left in the factory was accidentally discarded? A1. If the matzo is discarded, the Tevel Matzah system becomes in-operative. Because of the concern that the tevel matzos might be lost, the OU also arranges a backup Hafrashas Challah each day in the OU offices to cover any factory that did not have a proper Hafrashas Challah done on premises. Q2. Is there any special reason that the OU chooses to use matzos for their tevel system? Couldn?t plain dough or bread be used instead for this purpose? A2. The main advantage of using matzos for Hafrashas Challah is that they have a very long shelf-life. A matzah can easily last from one year to the next and still be edible. Another obvious advantage of using matzah is that it can remain in the factories on Pesach. Q3. From how many batches of dough can one separate Challah using one box of tevel matzos? A3. When the mashgiach places the box of matzos in the factory, he declares that 1/5 of a gram of matzah should become Challah for each subsequent batter that will be produced. Considering that a box of matzos contains approximately one pound of matzos (454 grams), this means that a box of matzos will cover the Challah for more than 2,200 batches of dough. Even if a factory makes ten batches a day, a single box of matzos will last for over 6 months! Q4. Given that a box of matzah can be used to separate Challah for over 2,000 batches of dough, if a factory only makes one or two batches of dough a day, could a single box of matzos be used for several years? A4. No. One cannot take Challah from dough made from wheat that grew in one year on a batch of dough made from wheat that grew in a different year. The cutoff for determining which year the wheat grew is Rosh Hashanah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 24 08:24:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:33pm EDT, R Akiva Miller wrote: : This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do : Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer : to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the : only reason. I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? The MB's other reason (gezeira) and discussion thereof, elided. : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of : the chometz that we found... "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? ... : A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my : chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already : removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for : me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had : intended to type!) Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? A shade over 6 days later, on Tue, Apr 24 at 7:53am EDT, RAM wrote: : I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone : referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira... : And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two : major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person : who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller : must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser : degree of detail. I thought there are so many versions, referencing "the text" or even "a text" is meaningless. I therefore viewed the issue when you raised it last week (?) morein terms of: Does your LOR address this issue, and if so, how? : In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, : I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must : take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual : intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this : thread. Bitul and "all my chameitz" are mutually exclusive sets. It it's hefqeir, it's not mine. (BTW, in Israeli Aramaic the word was "hevqer", which I kept on reading as though it was "the cattle.") Espectially is we allow later actions as evidence of what was intent at the time of the sale. : But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that : he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", : and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other : details... Without "and any other chameitz which may be"? That version would solve all your problems, but affords less protection against issur. Since all the mechirah is belt-n-suspenders with bitul anyway, no big deal. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony? From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 24 09:03:23 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:03:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> References: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1df6ecc6-8417-7966-0620-412e6633fa66@sero.name> On 24/04/18 11:24, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of > hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? Yes, I think it is. Hefker, especially when the item is still in your property, depends on your willing renunciation. If you still regard it as yours then it's not hefker, regardless of your declaration. Either because the insincere declaration is defective, or because the moment you think of it as yours you regain it through kinyan chatzer. > : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point > : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) > : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of > : the chometz that we found... > > "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? Bedika != Bittul. By definition Bedika cannot get rid of what is not found. > Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? I don't see why not. If you inherited an unspecified estate you can surely sell it as a lot, sight unseen, and leave it to the buyer to discover what exactly is included in it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Tue Apr 24 23:26:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 06:26:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hand washing Message-ID: The gemara (Shabbat 62b) states that being derogatory (mzalzel) concerning ntilat yadaim(hand washing) causes poverty. Rava then clarifies that this is only talking about the case where one doesn't wash at all. The gemara then rejects Rava's interpretation based on R' Chisda saying that he had washed his hands with a lot of water and got a lot of good (in return?). As part of a broader shiur, I was wondering : 1. Is it possible that water was not as readily available then and so this focus on the amount of water might not be applicable today? 2. Why would the gemara accept a rejection of Rava without a more specific refutation source? 3. How is R' Chisda's statement a source of rejection? (Rava could well agree that using more than the minimum is praiseworthy but still hold poverty only comes for those who don't wash at all) That's enough to start :) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Tue Apr 24 10:57:13 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:57:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed during the Rav?s lifetime. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 24 05:30:39 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Apr 22, 2018 09:28:10 pm Message-ID: <15245910390.9bBE36.37982@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge [s]o that we > know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto > explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we > question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with > emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? > > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the > metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) > that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such > things. But the hamon am? > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- correction. At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that requires supernatural explanation. Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass them. There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 06:05:39 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:05:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <23688d43-325f-1109-9d85-fcb94a75b7e7@aishdas.org> On 4/24/2018 1:57 PM, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit > and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav's talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav's lifetime. The one that Rabbi Mayer Twersky quotes is in the name of an impeccable source, Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, who was personally involved. KT, YGB From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 07:25:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:25:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425142550.GB15047@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:57:13PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit : and others tell a different version. He believes one... Actually, you can go see RSM's version for yourself. No need to mix RJR into this. From the current Jewish Action: https://jewishaction.com/the-rav/observing-the-rav > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav?s lifetime. Actually, the "a woman" version was. I remember the discussion in shul, because I thought that the story as told belittled the woman too much. (Unlike RSM's impression, "Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances.") Tamar Ross (2004) records R' Meiselman and the Frimer Brothers telling the story https://books.google.com/books?id=vkvNNioH--4C&lpg=PA91&pg=PA91#v=onepage I found R' Meiselman (published Fall 1998) here (near the bottom of pg 9 [5th page of the PDF]): http://bit.ly/2HQBwHm And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 They say they were told the story by Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, former rabbi of the YI of Brokline, and that it happened in the mid-70s. Remember (unlike RSM) your "several of the Rav's talmidim knew the NY RY, not the Rabbi of Boston. There is really enough detail in R' Meiselman and R's Frimer version to rule out the story being legend. I would attribute RSM's version to memory drift; it has been some 40 years since the events, after all. 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? From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Apr 25 07:37:22 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:37:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Translation of Makkos / Binfol oyivcha al tismach In-Reply-To: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> References: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> Message-ID: Revisiting an issue that comes up repeatedly--do classical sources support the approach that we should feel sorrow for / not rejoice over, the suffering of our persecuting enemies. Yeshayahu (15:5) declares, ?My heart cries out? over the destruction of Israel?s wicked enemy, Moab. TargumYonason (and Radak and Metsudos) take this as the prophet quoting the enemy. But Rashi takes it as the prophet expressing his own heart?s thoughts, and he writes, ?The prophets of Israel are unlike the prophets of the umos ha-olom. Bilaam sought to uproot Israel for no reason. But the prophets of Israel [who had good cause to wish for their persecutors? destruction, nevertheless] mourn over the punishments coming upon the nations (miss-o-ninnim al pur-annos ha-ba-ah al ha-umos).?? (Artscroll cites both explanations, but adds a commentary by ''Sod Yesharim (I could not find it on HebrewBooks.org) who, like Rashi, takes the prophet to be referring to his own grief, but contra Rashi declares, ''The prophet had no cause to grieve over the downfall of the wicked nation of Moab, or of other unworthy nations. However, every nation had its own type of impurity that tempted the righteous and was a challenge that they had to overcome. When they did so successfully, they grew in stature. Now, with the demise of Moab, that particular challenge disappeared, and with it the potential for growth.) Also, I did have occasion to directly ask Rav Dovid Feinstein what he meant in the Kol Dodi Hagadah by ''shofchim l'eebud ha-makos and we don't drink them.'' Did he mean we pour out the wine out of sympathy for the Egyptians' suffering the makkos (as I had translated it), or did he mean that after taking the drops of wine out of the cups, we throw them (the drops of wine representing the makkos) out as waste, rather than drinking them (as R. Zev Sero insisted). And how that relates to the issue of ''al tismach.'' Sorry, but he did not commit to either way, comfortable with both approaches towards rejoicing over the downfall of Israel's enemies. Nevertheless, by my request, the next printing of the Kol Dodi Haggadah should have the translation changed to R. Zev's. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 08:32:13 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:32:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". Does _anybody_ here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? Perhaps a bar mitzvah boy the first time his tefillin "counts", or, perhaps the first time one dons a tallis at shul after marriage, or the first time one does birchas hachama? (As a baal teshuva, I have had a plethora of opportunities to do a mitzvah for the first time, and sometimes I get a spiritual high. And it's quite possible that I didn't do all of them correctly the first time, and that sometimes I wasn't even yotzie b'deived. No, I don't check my tzitzis every time I put on my tallis). Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce inappropriate? The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an inappropriate thought? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 25 13:03:11 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 16:03:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages Message-ID: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:26 AM 4/25/2018, Jay F. Shachter wrote: Let me begin with Daas Torah. Some years ago Rav Zelig Epstein, ZT"L was describing how the Mir Yeshiva left Vilna and got to Japan. He pointed out that almost all of the yeshivas were at this time located in Vilna and that almost all of the hanhalla of the yeshivas were opposed to leaving Vilna, because they feared that the Russians would arrest the yeshiva boys for trying to leave the "Communist paradise." However, several yeshivas boys were strongly in favor of leaving. The following is from my article Rabbi Aryeh Leib Malin And The Mir Yeshiva Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 154 The Jewish Press, February 2, 2018. "Rabbi Malin [a top Mir student] felt it was a matter of life and death that the Mir Yeshiva students leave Vilna. He is reported to have said, "I will get a gun and shoot anybody who tries to stop us from leaving!" (This was verified for me by Reb Zalman Alpert, who served as a librarian at Yeshiva University for many years and told me he heard it from two former Mir Yeshiva students.) " When one of the boys heard that the yeshiva students went against what the hanhalla said, he asked, "But what about Daas Torah?" Reb Zelig replied (and I do not know if he was serious or kidding), "This was before Daas Torah was invented." I was told that Reb Chaim Shmuelevitz, who was against the yeshiva leaving, later apologized to Reb Leib with tears in his eyes. The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. Regarding asking and following what a rov tells you, I am convinced that when they ask in the World to Come "Why did you do this or that?" and someone replies, "I asked a Rov and he told me to do this." the response will be, "You were given free will and expected to exercise it." Certainly one needs to ask a rov difficult halachic questions, but need one ask about most things in daily life? A friend of mine who is a therapist told me that some of his patients are afraid to do almost anything on their own. How sad. Even the Avos were not perfect and RSRH points this out. See his essay Lessons From Jacob and Esau (Collected Writings VII) where he points out that Yitzchok and Rivka made errors in educating Eisav. See also his commentary on what Avraham did when he said that Sarah was his sister. He follows the RAMBAN who says Avraham made a "big" mistake when he did this. Sadly there are some who do believe that whatever scientific assertions Chazal made must be valid. Rabbi Moshe Meiselman is one such person. His book Torah, Chazal and Science takes this position. It is hard for me to understand how a nephew of RYBS can hold this view. Regarding believing things that are not true, see my article "My Mind Is Made Up. Do Not Confuse Me With The Facts!" The Jewish Press, August 25, 2004 pages 7 & 77. YL >It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > >Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what >you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when >you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages >have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same >moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- >correction. > >At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the >moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the >dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on >yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, >the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and >advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly >caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). > >Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this >mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still >we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on >our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in >matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, >even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in >Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit >when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must >rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. >If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will >increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where >the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same >reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. > >That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know >already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, >and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, >and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take >literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and >you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that >requires supernatural explanation. > >Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, >and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes >you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like >them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a >Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your >abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is >a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some >of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. > >You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different >species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that >every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid >Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all >scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a >vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us >closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different >species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you >will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are >different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do >is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass >them. > >There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original >topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than >bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, >that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education >inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for >all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and >progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some >people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the >Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded >innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There >is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he >is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will >never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that >he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. > > > Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter > 6424 N Whipple St > Chicago IL 60645-4111 > (1-773)7613784 landline > (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice > jay at m5.chicago.il.us -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 14:03:32 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish Message-ID: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> >From The Jewish Press , by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev [literally, "the fish of the sword"] is kasher. Why is it widely considered to be not kosher, then? Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different consistency - or something like that - from those of other fish. So he decided it was a treife fish. But that's absolutely not correct. The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag hacherev is kasher. Professor [Shlomo] Sternberg, a big genius in learning and math, published an essay maybe 20 years ago in which he writes that Rabbi Soloveitchik asked him to conduct research on the status of swordfish. He did. He showed Rabbi Soloveitchik the scales of a swordfish and Rav Soloveitchik said, "It's a kashere fish!" Professsor Sternberg writes that he still has the envelope with the scales he showed Rav Soloveitchik in his Gemara Chullin. If the commentaries on the Shuchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev is kosher, how can Rabbi Tendler claim it isn't? Rabbi Tendler claims "dag hacherev" is a different fish. It's not true. But Rabbi Tendler did a service to the Orthodox Jewish community because at the time there were Conservative rabbis who were giving hashgachas, so he laughed them out of existence and said they don't know what they're talking because [they were giving swordfish a hechsher when] swordfish is really treif. So the Orthodox realized you can't rely on the Conservatives. L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue, but Rabbi Tendler accomplished his goal. Well, that's a lot of egg (roe?) on my face after what I said repeatedly in the 1990s in soc.culture.jewish[.moderated] O/C/R Wars... But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. "L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! There is a tie in here to what R JFSchachter posted here yesterday (? no time zone) at 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) under the subject line "Judging The Credibility Of The Sages": > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what > you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when > you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages > have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same > moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- > correction. I was okay attributing ignorance to Chazal, but not violating epstemic virtue like "making up an answer". I would think that by the end of the period, subconsious biases wouldn't have made it into the final result. > At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the > moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the > dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah... Except that daas Torah only requires belief that one is obligated to listen to halachic leadership on social and personal issues where the unknowns are not halachic (or even aggadic). Not that they are necessarily right, nor even that they are more likely to be right. (Infallibility was never Agudah doctrine; but you do find it among the population.) And I am not sure that when it comes to halakhah Chazal *can* be wrong. It's like saying that the house john built is inconsistent with the house John built. Pesaq is constitutive, not truth finding; expecially when you are the nation's authoritative halachic source (eg the Sanhedrin or shas as keSanhedrin, depending on when you think the Sanhedrin actually closed its doors). A pesaq made by CHazal based on incorrect science may still be correct halakhah because they define correctness. We would need to revisit our recurring tereifos discussion. But in any case: 1- I refuse to believe Chazal "made up answers" of had other epistemic moral failings (as a group, including peer review, what made it into shas, etc...) And I wonder how emunas chakhamim would work without that kind of assertion. 2- And yet, that may have happened here, among our contemporary posqim. No one is interested in fixing the science error (among those who believe it is in error) because C loses this way. 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? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 12:49:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 15:49:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425194944.GC6722@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:32:13AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 : > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 : : Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav : concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of : 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" : and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". ... : The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is : *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is : doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an : inappropriate thought? I think it's more that the high isn't from the halachic aspect of what they're doing. Rather than it having to be halkhah qua halakhah. I am not sure that "one is doing ratzon H'" is different than "being mequyam a mitzvah" anyway. As for "getting closer to H'", Litvaks would talk more about sheleimus than deveiqus. IMHO this is part of RYBS being, fundamentally, a Brisker. Here's a quote I feel is on a similar theme, from "The Rav: The World of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik", starting on pg 54: Judaism must be explained and expounded on a proper level. I have read many pamphlets that have been published in the United States with the purpose of bringing people closer to Judaism. There is much foolishness and narrishkeit in some of these publications. For instance, a recent booklet on the Sabbath stressed the importance of a white tablecloth. A woman recently told me that the Sabbath is wonderful, and that it enhances her spiritual joy when she places a snow-white tablecloth on her table. Such pamphlets also speak about a sparkling candelabra. Is this true Judaism? You cannot imbue real and basic Judaism by utilizing cheap sentimentalism and stressing empty ceremonies. Whoever attempts such an approach underestimates the intelligence of the American Jew. If you reduce Judaism to religious sentiments and ceremonies, then there is no role for rabbis to discharge. Religious sentiments and ceremonies are not solely posessed by Orthodox Jewry. All the branches of Judaism have ceremonies and rituals. This is not the only reason why we must negate such a superficial approach. Today in the United States, American Jewish laymen are achieving intellectual and metaphysical maturity. They wish to discover their roots in depth. We will soon reach a point in time where the majority of our congregants will have academic degrees. Through the mediums of white tablecloths and polished candelabras, you will not bring these people back to Judaism. It is forbidden to publish pamphlets of this nature, which emphasize the emotional and ceremonial approaches. There is another reason why ceremony will not influence the American Jew. In the Unitesd States today, the greatest master of ceremony is Hollywood. If a Jew wants ceremony, all he has to do is turn on the television set. If our approach stresses the ceremonial side of Judaism rather than its moral, ethical, and religious teachings, then our viewpoint will soon become bankrupt. The only proper course is that of Ezekiel's program for the priests: "And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and the common, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean" [Ezekiel 44:23] The rabbi must teach his congregants. He must deepen their appreciation of Judaism and not water it down. If we neutralize and compromise our teachings, then we are no different than the other branches of Judaism. By RYBS's standards, being moved by music at a kumzitz is "ceremony". Meanwhile, Chassidus, Mussar, RSRH, Qabbalah-influenced Sepharadim (following the Chida and Ben Ish Hai) and numerous other derakhim have no problem with ceremony. For that matter, before it became minhag, specifying specific patterns of hand washing (RLRLRL or RRLL) was also ritual once. And many of those Academics that RYBS foresaw want their Nesivos Shalom, Tish, kumzitz.... Neochassidus is a big thing in YU. This idea that ceremonies that aren't defined by halakhah are inherently empty and its sentimentalism is cheap rather than reinforcing the cognitive and halachic, is, as I said, only something a Brisker would write. Even within Brisk... RYBS went further in this direction than did the Brisker Rav (R Velvel, his uncle). The BR holds that one makes berakhos on minhagim that have a cheftzah shel mitzvah (eg lighting a Chanukah menorah in shul), and that the Rambam and Rabbeinu Tam don't argue about that. What they do argue about is whether Chatzi Hallel is close enough to Hallel to qualify for a berakhah. This is a non-started for RYBS, who requires minhagim have a cheftzah shel mitzvah or else they're ceremoial. RYBS even fit the minhagim of the 3 Weeks and 9 Days to fit this shitah by insisting they must follow what was already established aveilus and sheloshim, respectively. Oops. I just notied I'm repeating something I worte a decade ago. See . At least the berkhah-in-minhag part was posted in 2011, so that this post had the value of combining the two earlier ones. Beqitzur, I don't know of two many people (aside from our mutual rebbe-chaver) who would agree with RYBS on this one. 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? From zev at sero.name Wed Apr 25 14:37:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:37:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish In-Reply-To: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 25/04/18 17:03, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish > because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with > scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is > young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are > elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) > So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question > seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify > as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. There can be no question that a fish does *not* have to keep its scales to remain kosher. The posuk says fish only have to have their scales in the water, not when they leave the water. A fish that sheds its scales when caught is kosher, and no rabbi has the right to say otherwise. And I don't see a difference between shedding when caught and shedding on reaching adulthood. As I understand R Tendler's claim, it was that swordfish never have true scales, that even the ones they have as juveniles are not kaskasim. And this seems not to be true. BTW R Ari G and R Ari Z dispute the claim that adults swordfish (or landed swordfish) lose all their scales. They claim that this is the result of not examining adult landed fish closely enough, and that if one does one finds kosher scales still attached to the skin. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Apr 25 16:33:33 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 23:33:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: <06705270-E689-4937-BAAF-0C7AE035E469@tenzerlunin.com> I simply note that (a) all the stories were published after the Rav died and (b) all appear to be least first degree if not more hearsay. (It?s unclear how R. Mandel knows the story. His article doesn?t say if he saw it, heard it from the Rav, or heard it from someone else.) But the difference between the two ways the story is told is striking and, I believe, calls it into question. But I guess we?ll never know. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 26 05:25:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:25:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sifrei torah Message-ID: <6fef9ae673744a11a2ede85a210fb782@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Can anyone point me to information concerning the history of the difference between the physical element of Ashkenazi (atzei chaim) and Eidot Hamizrach (containers) Sifrei Torah? The differences in the timing and physics of hagba and glila ? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Apr 26 10:06:01 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 17:06:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Unknown Days of the Jewish Calender Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NZ9BN1 This coming week, an unsuspecting person wishing to catch a minyan, who walks into a random shul in many places around the world, might be in for a surprise. After the Shemoneh Esrei prayer on Sunday there will be no Tachanun. On Monday there will be Selichos; and on Thursday there again won?t be Tachanun! Why would this be? No Tachanun generally signifies that it is a festive day[1]; yet, no other observances are readily noticeable. As for the reciting of Selichos on Monday, they are usually reserved for a fast day; yet no one seems to be fasting! What is going on? See the above URL for more about this. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 19:43:43 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 22:43:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> On 4/25/2018 11:32 AM, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: >> And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at >> (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav > concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense > of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something > else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". > Does anybody here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? ... > Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah > was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce > inappropriate? > The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he > is thinking that he is being mekayum a mitzvah?... For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a problem. KT, YGB From meirabi at gmail.com Thu Apr 26 15:58:32 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 08:58:32 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach Message-ID: Yeshayahu (15:5) My heart cries out over the destruction of Israels wicked enemy, Moab. Rashi understands, the prophet is expressing his own agony - The prophets of Israel, unlike the prophets of the world, like Bilaam, seek to destroy us without provocation. Our prophets however, mourn for our persecutors when they suffer Divine punishments. As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness, that is certainly more of an intense and personal loss than the millions of Egyptians who perished - but we mourn them all from the perspective of lost potential, lost opportunity to be loyal to HKBH, and HKBH's failure to successfully persuade them to open their eyes and do what is right. That is why we spill wine from the cup we use for Hallel - HKBH's praise is incomplete, He was not fully successful - the gift He gave humanity, free choice, can, and was, used against Him. Obviously the cup should not be topped up. Each plague was a lesson and a plea from HKBH to all who witnessed these astonishing events - do the right thing, reconise that I am the King of all kings, The Master of the universe. Every Yid deserves 600,000 to attend his funeral. The Gemara explains - As it was given So it is taken away. Every Y, even the most Poshut or unlearned, is a potential recipient of the entire Torah and we must visualise their departure as the loss of that tremendous potential. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 26 18:35:26 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:35:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2499630f-df1d-04ef-9897-ef18103da093@sero.name> On 26/04/18 18:58, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of > descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness Where is this written? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri Apr 27 01:04:10 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 10:04:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> References: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> Message-ID: When I was in yeshiva, one of my rabbanim told us that we should dance when we "get" a Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Ben On 4/26/2018 4:43 AM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: > For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a > problem. > > KT, > YGB From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 29 07:49:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 17:49:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: A while ago we had a discussion about farfetched ukimtas. In yesterday's daf (Zevachim 15) the Gemara made a very startling statement about farfetched ukimtas. The Gemara has a question about whether Holachah without walking is Pasul or not. The Gemara brought a proof from a braisa If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher (even though when it spills, some if it spreads out towards the Mizbeach, i.e. Holachah without walking). The Gemara answered that none of the blood spread towards the Mizbeach.The Gemara then asked, surely, it spreads in all directions! The Gemara gave 3 answers 1: It fell on an incline. 2: It fell in a crevice. 3: The blood was very thick, and almost congealed. It did not spread at all. Then the Gemara made the following startling statement to reject these answers: It is UNREASONABLE to say that the Tana taught about such unusual cases The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? I brought an example from Bava Basra 19-20 which had at least as farfetched ukimtas and yet the Gemara didn't think they were unreasonable. Here is the example that I quoted from Bava Basra A Baraisa states that the following block Tumah, grass that was detached and placed in a window, or grew there by itself; rags smaller than three fingers by three fingers; a dangling limb or flesh of an animal; a bird that rested there; a Nochri who sat there, a (i.e. stillborn) baby born in the eighth month; salt; earthenware Kelim; and a Sefer Torah. The Gemara then proceeds to ask questions on each one that it is only there temporarily and the Gemara gives ukimtas, qualifications, for each thing to explain why it is not there temporarily. 1. Grass The grass is poisonous. The wall is ruined (so the grass will not destory it) The grass is 3 tefachim from the wall and does not harm the wall but bends into the window 2. Rags The material is too thick to be used for a patch It's sackcloth which is rough and would scratch the skin. It's not sackcloth, it's just rough like sacklocth 3. Dangling limb of an animal The animal is tied up and can't move. It's a non-kosher animal. It's a weak animal. 3. Bird The bird is tied down. It's a non-kosher bird. It's a Kalanisa (a very lean bird). It's not really a kalanisa, it's just lean like a kalanisa. 4. A non-Jew He is tied up. He is a ?????. He is a prisoner of the king 5. Salt The salt is bitter. There are thorns in it. It's resting on earthernware so it does not harm the wall. 5. Sefer Torah It's worn out. It's burial will be in the window. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 29 22:24:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 05:24:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? -/////---- One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the already known outcome. Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon Apr 30 01:22:56 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:22:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched >> ukimtas? ...` > One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition > as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the > already known outcome. It doesn't sound that way from the Gemara, The Gemara goes as follows: 1. Ula makes a statement that Holachah without walking is Pasul. 2. The Gemara brings a proof against him from a Mishna (where the blood spills, etc.) 3. The Gemara answers for Ula with an ukimta for the Mishna which doesn't contradict his din 4. The gemara says the ukimta is unreasonable Nowehere does it sound like we are reconciling sources with a known outcome. It sounds like a typical give and take found all over shas where ukimtas are simply accepted. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 29 18:59:29 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 21:59:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Question from the Book of Yechezqeil Message-ID: In Yechezqeil, 44:31, he writes that a Kohen shall not eat nevayla (or T?refah). Nobody can eat it so why is there a prohibition for just the Kohen? I?m aware of what Kimchi and Rashi say, but it seems to be a weak explanation. To say the Kohen needed a special warning is stretching it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:55:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:55:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:24:19AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition : as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with : the already known outcome. I don't know if that works here. I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and there are no counterveiling issues involved. Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish case. Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the floor of the azarah and not spread. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:51:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:51:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215105.GB12997@aishdas.org> My first thought was somewhat off topic but feel like it should be related... R' Yirmiyah's banishment from Bavel was over his habit of checking shiurim by posing implausible edge cases. He ends up in EY, and succeeds in the Y-mi. The final question (BB 23b) before his expulsion was whether we assume owned a bird that had one leg within 50 amos of the dovecote (ie within the shiur for the chazaqah for assuming that's its origin) and one leg outside? But there is also when he questions tevu'ah growing at least 1/3 before RH if harvested on Sukkos. Veqim lehu lerabbanan? How can you measure such a thing? (RH 13a) And his question on hashavas aveidah of 1/2 qav in 2 amos, or 2 qav in 8 amos? We assume yi'ush if we find less than 1 qas scattered across 3 amos. Is that a ratio? (BM 2a) How can you say that a revi'is is the amount of mayim chayim that the blood of a metzorah's birds would be niqar within? Wouldn't it depend on the size of the bird? (Sotah 16b) What if a kohein becomes a baal mum while the dam is in the air between his hazayah and it landing on the mizveiach? (Zevachim 15a) According to R' Meir, a miscarriage that was developed enough to have the shape of a beheimah causes tum'as leidah. (As opposed to saying it must be human shaped.) So, R Yirmiyah asked R Zeira, according to R Meir, what if a woman gives birth to such a baby, a girl and the father was meqadeish her to a man? R' Zeira points out that the child wouldn't live 3 years anyway, so bi'ah isn't an issue. R Meir asks: but what about marrying her sister? This one may or may not count, as R' Acha bar Yaaqov says that R Yirmiyah's point was to get R Zeira to laugh. (Niddar 23a) But it does reflect what kind of thing would come to his mind. (Tangent: There are a number of stories that indicate R Zeira needed chearing up. Like the golam Rava sent him. RMMS tied this to "Rav shachat lei leR Zeira".) But when he gets to EY, the Y-mi accepts his question. (Not that the Y-mi ever answers questions that involve guessing what the tanna / amora would have said...) A picker can eat a snack (quantity discussed) before tu"m was taken from the crop. As long as he is holing them. R Yirmiyah asked whether a picker can eat an olive he was juggling -- and thus didn't put down but also isn't just picked. (Maaseros 3:4, vilna daf 17b) Maybe the issue in the OP is about this time rejecting an absurd -- R Yirmiyahu-like -- oqimta is just the difference in styles in different batei medrash? Too haskala-ish to be satisfying? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Mon Apr 30 20:47:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:47:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tuesday, May 1, 2018, Micha Berger wrote: > > > I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is > the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and > there are no counterveiling issues involved. > > Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish > cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish > case. > > Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's > that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the > floor of the azarah and not spread. And it?s easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn?t seem more unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 06:47:36AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is :> the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and :> there are no counterveiling issues involved. :> Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish :> cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish :> case. : And it's easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a : prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn't seem more : unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. I suggest exploring if the distinction is between a din that could only apply in the farfetched case and dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from the distcussion. This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See . (He offered to send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. In a different post, I suggested another line to explore, if you prefer it. Diffierent batei medrash had different tolerances for R Yirmiyahu's questions, and those too also used farfetched cases. And if so, maybe there was one beis medrash during the course of the ccenturies of amoraim that simply had no patience for odd oqimtos; even though they were atypical that way. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 31st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Hod: What level of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 results in harmony and balance? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 1 03:34:33 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 13:34:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > > But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. > > I suggest exploring if the distinction is between > a din that could only apply in the farfetched case > and > dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated > in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from > the distcussion. > > This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought > in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See > . (He offered to > send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta > serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in > this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. > The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without walking from the equation. It would seem to be a perfect example to apply R' Michel Avraham's thesis and yet the Gemara rejects the ukimta as being unreasonable -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue May 1 04:40:42 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 11:40:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: Please see https://goo.gl/ESJERH for two links to a talk given by Rabbi Dr. Shnyer Leiman titled The Strange History of Lag B'Omer. Please see https://goo.gl/s2KHAVfor [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] The Spreading Fires Of Lag Baomer: Tempting Quick & Easy ?Spirituality? vs. Enduring Ruchnius goo.gl In the past we have discussed at length (5771, 5772, 5773A, 5773B, and 5773C) how Lag Baomer is marked in minhag Ashkenaz, and contrasted it with other, more recent customs, that have become popula? See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) No less an authority than Chasam Sofer was strongly opposed to Lag B'Omer celebrations. He argued that one should not make a new Yom Tov that is not based on a miraculous event, that has no basis in Shas and Poskim, and that is based on the death of someone. (See here for links.) See https://goo.gl/Zma8pS [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] No ? No ? No ? No ? No ? Minhag Ashkenaz & Recent Lag Ba?omer Innovations ? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ?????, ??? ?????, ??????, ?????, ??? ???? goo.gl Yes, it is that time of the year again. Lag ba?omer is almost here. And with it, all the hype and solicitations for trips to Meron, Chai Rotel Mashkeh donations, upsherin, bonfires, and the l? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:54:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:54:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:34:33PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter : (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that : blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The : ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without : walking from the equation... I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Tue May 1 04:25:47 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 14:25:47 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the > stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. > And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's > not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. The Gemara starts with Ula stating a din that holacha without walikng is pasul. The Gemara then brings down the following statment from a Mishna If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher. The Gemara then asks on Ula from this Mishna, namely that the blood must have moved towards the Mizbeach, e.g. holacha without walking and it is kosher. The Gemara then answers with the implausible ukimtos to explain the Mishna. In other words, it seems that the ukimtos are there to explain the Mishna namely that the Mishna provides a principle that blood that falls on the floor is kosher and the ukimtas are there to remove any extraneous factors such as holacha without walking. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 1 15:57:50 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 18:57:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ahava Eternal Message-ID: <2060439B-6A01-4D14-AC06-6D6675AC6381@cox.net> I heard a beautiful d?rash by Rabbi Yosef Shusterman (Chabad of Beverly Hills). He said the following: If you ask 20 people the definition of ?LOVE,? you will get 20 different responses. However, the best definition of love is the Jewish definition. He uses gematria. The gematria of Ahava is 13 and the gematria of Echod is 13. ?Love" is when you are at ?one? with whomever or whatever. Theologically, the love of God is when you are at one with God. Sometimes it takes an entire lifetime to reach that madreiga. I am in you and you in me, mutual in divine love. William Blake (18th c. poet, painter and printmaker) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 2 01:33:44 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 08:33:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of?= =?windows-1252?q?_Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/W49XHX Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. See the above URL for more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 07:10:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 10:10:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <64a22eb4-af1e-fab5-373f-889b1083cd08@sero.name> On 02/05/18 04:33, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From https://goo.gl/W49XHX > > > Toras Aba ?just put up an interesting post > discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to > similarity with ancient practice of idolators. > > See the above URL for more. And yet your precious Minhag Ashkenaz was to (have a nochri) make a bonfire and dance before it (or around it) on Simchas Torah. R Wosner was asked about doing so in camp, stam on a Wednesday, not on Lag Bo'omer when it is, at least in Meron, Chevron, and a few other places in Eretz Yisroel, a long-established minhog practiced by tzadikim and chachomim who were much greater than R Wosner or anyone else you can cite. I don't believe it occurred to him that someone might apply this teshuvah to those fires, and it's dishonest to do so. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 09:04:58 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:04:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:33:44AM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : From https://goo.gl/W49XHX : Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. Most of us have little problem with Israel's Moment of Silence on Yom haZikaron and Yom haSho'ah, at least not Derekh Emori problems. And we wear ties. There are limits to invoking Derekh Emori. To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last days too. And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah kekhol hayom". At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled later than the norm, this evening.) I don't know the origin. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 09:45:50 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:45:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> On 02/05/18 12:04, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag > baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) > and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas > simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo > velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than > waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the > Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last > days too. > > And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo > you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I > have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah > kekhol hayom". > > At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I > know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled > later than the norm, this evening.) > > I don't know the origin. The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. A cessation of mourning, such as the last day of shiva, obviously begins in the morning. Nor is it an occasion for joy; when one gets up from shiva one doesn't go dancing and singing. Thus the restrictions are lifted only after daybreak, and tachanun is said at mincha on the previous day, just as it is on the other three days whose observance begins in the morning, viz Pesach Sheni, Erev Rosh Hashana, and Erev Yom Kippur. But the celebration of Rashbi is a positively happy occasion, so it starts immediately at nightfall, and no tachanun is said at the previous mincha. The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and relies heavily on the Magen Avraham. (He later expressed regret over his over-reliance on the MA, which is one reason why he wrote a second edition, only a few chapters of which are extant.) So it's not surprising that this is the psak found there, however it is not the psak that was followed in Chabad, which means in practice he paskened differently. (Sometimes it means he changed his mind, but sometimes he never paskened in practice as he wrote in the SA, for the reasons I mentioned above.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 10:53:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 13:53:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : >I don't know the origin. : : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain how or when the older minhag was changed. And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. ... : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 11:25:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 14:25:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> On 02/05/18 13:53, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : >I don't know the origin. > : > : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the > : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of > : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the > : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. > > That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain > how or when the older minhag was changed. It follows that the minhag changed when the significance of the day changed. In other words, the minhogim of the day when R Akiva's talmidim stopped dying did not change, but on top of them came a whole new layer of minhogim for the new holiday that occupies the same day on the calendar. For a similar example, the significance of 3 Tammuz in Lubavitch changed dramatically in 5754. The earlier significance of that day and whatever practices it had did not go away, e.g. those who did not say tachanun on 3 Tammuz before 5754 still don't say it, while those who did still do, but the new significance, and the host of practices that came with it, overwhelmed the earlier significance and observance. > And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" > is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. Doesn't the Idra Zuta say that Rashbi asked for his hilula to be celebrated rather than mourned? > You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, > after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, > in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) > that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, > Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. Whether it's the correct explanation of the Pri Etz Chaim or not, it is the one held by the people actually doing the celebrating, and thus fully explains their practices. > ... > : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which > : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and > : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... > > I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to suppose they didn't exist in his day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 15:57:53 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 18:57:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> Message-ID: <4b464085-efab-7164-2d33-7726eba6a069@sero.name> On 02/05/18 14:25, Zev Sero wrote: >> >> : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which >> : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and >> : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... >> I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. > They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to > suppose they didn't exist in his day. PS: Indirect evidence that in the AR's day the night of Lag Baomer was already considered part of the simcha is that in his siddur (as opposed to his SA) he wrote that tachanun is not said at mincha of erev Lag Baomer. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 3 07:01:56 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 03 May 2018 10:01:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?iso-8859-1?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= References: Message-ID: At 12:04 PM 5/2/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag >baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) >and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas >simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo >velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than >waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the >Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last >days too. > >And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo >you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I >have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah >kekhol hayom". > >At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of Aveilus on the 34th day? If so, how can Sefardim go to Meron on the night of the 33rd? I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at Tzeis and who started it. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 3 06:04:34 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:04:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tzedaka priorities Message-ID: The S"A in O"C 152:1 codifies a prohibition against tearing down a synagogue before building a new one (one must build the new one first). The M"B (4) gives the reason for this prohibition as a concern that if one had not built the new one first, a case of pidyon shvuyim(captive's redemption) might arise requiring funds to be diverted from the new construction. 1. Why couldn't the chachamim make a takana in that case? 2. Why would the chachamim work around required priorities? 3. Doesn't 152:6 says you would sell a synagogue anyway in a case of pidyon shvuyim? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 09:03:10 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 12:03:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on the > night of the 33rd? The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve either of those things. (There is no issur on music during sefirah; that seems to be a modern invention, presumably because in modern times we've become lenient on the prohibition against music at any time, so we need to impose a restriction during sefirah, whereas earlier generations who were strict with the general prohibition didn't feel a need to strengthen it now.) > I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at > Tzeis and who started it. As I wrote earlier, it seems associated with the adoption of the Rashbi's celebration on top of the earlier marking of the end of the plague among R Akiva's students. Thus it would probably have started in Tzfas in the late 16th century and spread into Europe in the 18th century together with the AriZal's kabbalah. (Note that according to the AriZal, not cutting hair is not connected to avelus, and applies on Lag Ba`omer as well, except for upsherenishen. But not having weddings is because of avelus, so if we're celebrating Yom Simchas Rashbi they should be permitted.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 10:13:07 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:13:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on : >the night of the 33rd? : : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve : either of those things... An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 10:17:41 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:17:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> On 03/05/18 13:13, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on > : >the night of the 33rd? > : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are > : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve > : either of those things... > An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. For children, who are not obligated in aveilus anyway. But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and the answer is the same way they go by day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 11:56:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 14:56:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and : the answer is the same way they go by day. The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both Ashk and Seph? Yes, if the party happened to be during the day, I would have the same question WRT Sepharadim (only). So how does pointing out that fact help me any in answering it? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 33rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total Fax: (270) 514-1507 submission to truth, and what results? From simon.montagu at gmail.com Thu May 3 16:36:11 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 02:36:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 > > > Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is > > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did that before the 16th century. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 12:08:37 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 15:08:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> On 03/05/18 14:56, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and > : the answer is the same way they go by day. > > The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > Ashk and Seph? And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do so from nightfall. (b) The Meron celebrations, which the question was about, don't violate the sefira observances anyway. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 05:04:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 08:04:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer Message-ID: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:24 AM 5/4/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > > > >I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings >Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did >that before the 16th century. In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to show that it was not really part of the davening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 05:14:32 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:14:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Bow_and_Arrow_on_Lag_B=92Omer?= Message-ID: >From http://www.collive.com/show_news.rtx?id=50532 A 4-year-old son of a Shliach in Florida was hit in his eye by an arrow on Lag BaOmer. Please pray for Baruch Shmuel ben Chana. I do hope he has a refuah shleima. This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. >From https://goo.gl/kumYeX One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn?t even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a break from their Torah studies. It is also surprising that they should pass the time with such a martial activity, seemingly out of character with the day devoted to the man of peace. Rav Menachem Mendel of Rimanov, one of the early Hasidic Rebbes, explained that the custom is based on the Midrash which states that all the days of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, the rainbow didn?t appear in the sky. (Ketubot 77b the same is said there of Rebbe Yehoshua ben Levi.) Rashi explains that the rainbow is the sign of the covenant that the world will not be destroyed, and if there is a perfect tzaddik in the world there is no need of such a sign. (Cited by B?nei Yissachar on Lag BaOmer.) See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 07:58:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:58:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both :> Ashk and Seph? : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do : so from nightfall... You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something aggadic. But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from what I was raised to believe on that. I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and rishonim couldn't have known about? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 07:05:58 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:05:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Mysterious Origin of Lag Ba-Omer Message-ID: Please see http://www.hakirah.org/Vol20First.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 4 09:57:47 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 18:57:47 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Bottom line: They do it or they don't? Ben On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time,? and I > was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to > show that it was not really part of the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:41:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:41:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Let me begin with Daas Torah. ... : The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a : result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this : was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. So what are those formulations? Here are 3 I know of: 1- Given how the gadol's mind is shapeds by his learning, he is a useful resource for advice. He could be wrong, but aren't your odds better by asking? 2- Asking a gadol will get you the answer Hashem wants you to act on, whether it is the truth or not. E.g. the error of advising agaisnt fleeing the Nazis was because that was what Hashem wanted of us. But it was still pragmatically in error. I also see hints of this model in RALichtenstein's "Im Ein Daas, Manhigut Minayin?" but with the added caveat that RAL didn't expect to find daas Torah in practice. (Not since RSZA.) Again, just implications; I could be reading too much into the essay. 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, they are supposed to lead. RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like the same model. Notice that all advocate listening to gedolim even on non-halachic matters, but not because of any guarantees about accuracy. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:52:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:52:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180504165212.GC13247@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 07:12:36AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They : have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye : (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so : much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses.... The relationship to a kohein is trickier than that, as their is no tum'ah until after the declaration. He is more parallel to an eid qiyum than an eid birur. For example, Vayiqra 14:36 tells a person to remove all the items from his home before the kohein comes to inspect a potential nega in it. Even even if the kohein sees the same unchanged splotch and declares it a nega, those itsems are not tamei. It wasn't a nega until the declaration. ... : My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would : become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate : some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just : another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve : myself in general." Tum'as leidah isn't because something is spiritually awry with the mother. So I am not sure we have to assume that zivah is like tzara'as. Lefi RSRH, tum'ah comes from things that could make us overly identify with our bodies -- death, birth, the kinds of sheratzim that share our homes (in EY), niddah... Zivah and leidah would fit that pattern. So would tzara'as, because it too feels like the body is rebelling against the will. The difference is that chazal is saying the body really is rebelling (or made to show rebellion) against a tainted will. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From zev at sero.name Fri May 4 11:15:17 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:15:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 04/05/18 10:58, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > :> Ashk and Seph? > > : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in > : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus > : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't > : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do > : so from nightfall... > > You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, > nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new > information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. Nothing is being uprooted. Something new has come. Just as when a local "Purim" or lehavdil a fast is declared. > If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a > comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something > aggadic. > > But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind > the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous > revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from > what I was raised to believe on that. > > I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence > of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation > anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take > over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in > this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and > rishonim couldn't have known about? They didn't know about the Zohar, let alone the Idra Zuta and R Shimon's request that people rejoice at his "hilula". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 11:51:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 14:51:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:57 PM 5/4/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >Bottom line: They do it or they don't? > >Ben >On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >>Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and >>I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it >>to show that it was not really part of the davening. > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the beginning are said responsively. The Shatz stands at the table where leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 12:06:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 15:06:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <7E.8C.04381.0DFACEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:41 PM 5/4/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Let me begin with Daas Torah. >... >: The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a >: result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this >: was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. > >It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the >popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues >speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are >infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. Please see the article To Flee Or To Stay? at http://www.hakirah.org/vol%209%20bobker.pdf At the end of the article it says, "This article is excerpted from Joe Bobker's "The Rabbis and the Holocaust," to be published by Geffen Books in the summer of 2010." However, to the best of my knowledge this book was never published, and I have always wondered why. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 5 11:45:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 05 May 2018 20:45:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1ed3f3d3-7cb6-927c-da0f-e22d19aa3a4e@zahav.net.il> Bseder. We are all agreed that even Frankfurt changed their seider Tefilla sometime in the last few hundred years. Many shuls have someone, even a child, say (sing) the tehillim from the bimah. Ben On 5/4/2018 8:51 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the > beginning are said responsively.? The Shatz stands at the table where > leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over > he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun May 6 01:53:37 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 11:53:37 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: Yesterday's daf (Zevachim 22) has another wild ukimta that seems to just be there to answer a question on an amora and not provide a sterile environment to learn out a new principle. Here is the gist of the Gemara: R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina states if the Kiyor does not contain enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim, it is invalid - "v'Rachatzu Mimenu Moshe v'Aharon u'Vanav." The Gemara asks a question from the following Baraisa: One may be Mekadesh from any Keli Shares, whether or not it contains a Revi'is of water (this is much less then the water needed for 4 people) Rav Ada bar Acha answers: The case is, the Keli Shares was carved into the Kiyor (so the water comes from the Kiyor, which contains enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim). I don't see any way that you can say here that the ukimta is to remove extraneous dinim etc. The ukimta here seems to serve one and only one purpose, explain the Barisa that it is not a question on an Amora. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From saul.mashbaum at gmail.com Sun May 6 06:41:09 2018 From: saul.mashbaum at gmail.com (Saul Mashbaum) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 16:41:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: RYL >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. Saul Mashbaum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 05:28:41 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 15:28:41 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire Message-ID: << And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. >> Fore details about the printing error to give rise to the idead that Lag Baomer is Rashbi's yahrzeit see http://seforim.blogspot.co.il/2011/05/ changing subjects one of the weirdest experiences I had was a bunch of black coated Chevra kadisha dancing about a grave in Bet Shemesh at 12 midnight with just a flashlight for light -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 07:21:11 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 17:21:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: <> OTOH there is the gemara that when there was the dispute in Yavneh between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. This story took place many years before talmidim of R. Akiva (who was junior at that time) died. If so Rashbi was a known talmid many years before R. Akiva revived Torah . As an aside other taananim survived the bar kochba wars including talmidim of R, Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at mail.aol.com Sun May 6 11:22:13 2018 From: t613k at mail.aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 14:22:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bow and Arrow on Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16336b09884-c88-1c19@webjas-vaa039.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 5/6/2018 7:51:35 AM EST, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org writes: From: "Professor L. Levine" > This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. > From https://goo.gl/kumYeX >> One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is >> less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows >> and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe >> Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn't >> even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a >> break from their Torah studies..... Torah sages and their students learned Torah secretly in the woods, hiding from the Roman soldiers. They took bows and arrows with them and if they were found in the woods, they would say they were out hunting. That's what I was told when I was a little girl. I don't know if this is associated with R' Akiva and his talmidim, or with R' ShBY. As a child I thought the story was about young children and didn't realize until later that it must have been adult students with bows and arrows in the woods. (Yes I know Jews don't hunt for food or for sport, but maybe the Romans didn't know that. Or the Jews could plausibly say they hunted for hides and fur.) PS All my Areivims and Avodahs lately are deformed by great quantities of question marks. If anyone knows how to stop this from happening, please let me know. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com -- From driceman at optimum.net Sun May 6 17:58:21 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 19:58:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> RMB: > 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus > stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the > Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act > as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make > gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on > personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, > they are supposed to lead. > > RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before > RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who > carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the > names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked > questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like > the same model. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? David Riceman From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sat May 5 12:17:25 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 5 May 2018 22:17:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Sacrificies Message-ID: Question: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat had to bring the animal to as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result in hundreds -- Eli Turkel From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 7 04:19:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 14:19:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices Message-ID: R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he was permanently a Kohen; From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:37:00 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:37:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 06/05/18 10:21, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > This story took place many years before talmidim?of R. Akiva (who was > junior at that time) died. On the contrary, R Akiva was very senior at the time of these disputes. In the mishna in Rosh Hashana he was one of the two who counseled R Yehoshua to obey R Gamliel's order, and in Berachos when R Gamliel was deposed he was one of only three candidates considered to replace him. > If so Rashbi was a known talmid?many years before R. Akiva revived Torah > .?As an aside other taananim?survived the bar kochba?wars including > talmidim?of R, Yishmael What have Bar Kochva or his wars got to do with any of this? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:45:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:45:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> References: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> Message-ID: <44c411ba-2fee-9ae7-82d6-de3850c6417a@sero.name> On 06/05/18 20:58, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus >> stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the >> Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act >> as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make >> gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on >> personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, >> they are supposed to lead. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim who are to guide them. There need to be askanim because the chachamim have no time for klal work; they're busy learning and will neglect it. So those who lack either the head or the bottom for full-time learning can be the administrators, and when they need guidance they will consult the chachamim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Wed Apr 25 14:17:16 2018 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:17:16 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5AEFEEE1.1030601@biu.ac.il> Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: >>From The Jewish Press >, >by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): ... > Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if > he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi > Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called > up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different... ... >"L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! The attached has lots of relevant information. [Attachment stored at -micha] From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 08:00:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 11:00:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 07/05/18 07:19, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen > even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes > in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was > considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen > only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); > others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he > was permanently a Kohen; Thank you. Note the context: Rav stated outright that Moshe was a cohen gadol, and the gemara cites this braisa to show his source, that he was ruling like the Yesh Omrim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 8 12:40:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 15:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 3000 Year Old Mansion Implies a Sizable Malkhus Beis David Message-ID: <20180508194052.GA19392@aishdas.org> >From . What struck me is what appears to be the weakness of the objection -- some of the results are from a poor source, and even though they converge with other results, we'll question the whole thing? Does This 3,000-Year-Old House Confirm King David's Lost Biblical Kingdom? By Owen Jarus, Live Science Contributor | May 3, 2018 02:50pm ET Archaeologists have discovered a sprawling, possibly 3,000-year-old house that suggests a biblical kingdom called the United Monarchy, ruled by King David and later Solomon according to the Hebrew Bible, actually existed. The archaeologists who excavated the house, at a site now called Tel Eton, in Israel, said in an article published online March 13 in the journal Radiocarbon that the date, design and size of the house indicates that a strong organized government existed at Tel Eton around 3,000 years ago. They added that this government may be the United Monarchy. The site is located in the central part of Israel in a region called the Shephalah. ... In their paper, Faust and Sapir argue that evidence supporting the existence of the United Monarchy is often not studied because of a problem they call the "old house effect." The site of Tel Eton, including the massive house, was destroyed by the Assyrians during the eighth century B.C. As such, the house held a vast amount of remains dating to that century, but relatively few remains that date to 3,000 years ago when the house was first built. This "old house effect" is a problem commonly seen in Israel and at archaeological sites in other countries, the archaeologists said. "Buildings and strata can exist for a few centuries, until they are destroyed, but almost all the finds will reflect this latter event," wrote Faust and Sapir, noting that archaeologists need to be careful to dig down and find the oldest remains of the structures they are excavating so they don't miss remains that could provide clues to the United Monarchy. Israel Finkelstein, a professor at Tel Aviv University who has written extensively about the United Monarchy debate, expressed skepticism about the results. Two of the four samples used for radiocarbon dating are olive pits, which pose a problem, he said. "The single olive pits come from fills [material that accumulated on the surface of the floor before the floor broke apart]. They have no importance whatsoever [for] dating the building. At Megiddo, my dig, samples like this, single items/fills, are not being sent to the lab to be dated, because they enter bias into the dating system," Finkelstein said. "There is no connection whatsoever between the finds at Tel Eton and the biblical description of the United Monarchy." Faust told Live Science he expects that some archaeologists would be critical of the use of material found in the remains of the floors for radiocarbon dating. He noted that all the radiocarbon dates, those from the olive pits and from the charcoal, converge around 3,000 years. "The convergence of the dates suggest that we are on safe grounds," Faust said. He also noted that one of the charcoal samples is not from the floor but from the foundation deposit (the chalice), strengthening the conclusion that the house was built around 3,000 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 38th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Yesod: How does reliability Fax: (270) 514-1507 promote harmony in life and relationships? From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue May 8 13:05:25 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 23:05:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer Message-ID: >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag in the places I have seen -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Tue May 8 15:31:28 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 01:31:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 11:05 PM, Eli Turkel via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > >>> > In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some > places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is > leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. > This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. > >>>> > > This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> > > Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. > In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag > in the places I have seen > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Tue May 8 17:28:19 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 20:28:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Me > >> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? RZS: > > Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those > doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim > who are to guide them. Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. David Riceman From eliturkel at gmail.com Wed May 9 00:33:02 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:33:02 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: A while ago there was a debate about gebrochs while some condemned the minhag others defended it. I suggest reading an article by Brown https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 (4th on the list) It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those practices that can be traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a select few don't count. He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of elitism that only gedolim count. OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at most) His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in terms of protecting their communities from modernism. I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. Again see the above article for more details -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Tue May 8 21:46:46 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 14:46:46 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer & Rashbi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2700442c-cb3b-4267-b4bc-7e47e0d3efc8@yypwn-sl-yzhq-hkhn-blbyn> See also From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 02:53:57 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 05:53:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 01:31:28AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but : parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or : by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and : acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only : at Kaddish before Barechu At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night (in the US, mostly Syrian), everyone chants everything together. No shatz, and no one taking the lead even section by section. As per the first clause above. Somoene takes the lead for Bameh Madliqin from their seat. Chazan starts at pre-Qaddish material for Arbit. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:12:47 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:12:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 18:31, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: > > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but > parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together > or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing > up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame > Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu In other words, the same as pesukei dezimra, or the ashre and uva letzion before mincha. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed May 9 10:59:33 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 19:59:33 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> References: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At the Yemenite place I go to Friday night, everyone chants Kabbalat Shabbat together (same tune, every week, for the whole thing). An elderly person will get the kavod of saying the first line of Lecha Dodi out loud, but the rest is sung together. After Lecha Dodi, they say four lines from Shir HaShirim and then one person leads them in a "Bar Yochai" song (this kavod is auctioned off). After that, all together for BeMah Madlilin and Mizmor L'yom Hashabbat. On 5/9/2018 11:53 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night . . . From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:21:40 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:21:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 20:28, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: >> Me >> >>> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? > > RZS: >> >> Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those >> doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim >> who are to guide them. > > Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not the rav who guided him. Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. But at any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to do their job properly they can't be learning all day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:27:09 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 03:33, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 9 12:54:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 19:54:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation Message-ID: Many years ago when my two oldest grandsons were in elementary school in yeshiva, they began to speak in a derogatory manner abut non-Jews. They had heard these things from their fellow students. Their father, my oldest son, and I made it clear to them that this was not the appropriate way to speak about human beings who were created by Ha Shem with a neshama. Fortunately, they listened to us and changed their attitude. No one is saying that one must be "buddy buddy" with gentiles, but they are to be treated with proper respect. I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/letter_11.pdf While I suggest that everyone read the entire letter, below are some excerpts from it. MISHPATIM. All these insights, however, are of value only if you truly live your life according to what you, as man and Yisraelite in God's world, with your God-given powers, have recognized. The first requirement is, therefore, that you practice justice: -Respect every being in your surroundings, as well as everything within yourself, as a creation of your God, -Respect whatever is theirs as given to them by God or as having been acquired according to Divinely sanctioned law. Let them keep, or have, whatever they are entitled by right to call their own; do not be a source of harm to -others! -Respect every human being as your equal. Respect him, his inner self as well as his outer garment-his body-and his life) Respect his property, too, as a legal extension of his body. Respect his claim to property or services that you have to render to him, 1 properly measured or counted, as well as his claim to compensation for harm done to his body or property. -Respect his right to know the truth and his right to freedom, happiness, peace of mind,P honor and a peaceful existence. -Never abuse the frailty of his body, mind or heart/ and never misuse your legal power over him. The Chukkim require of you: -respect for all that exists, as God's property: do not destroy anything! do not misuse it! do not waste! use everything wisely -respect for all the species: their order was established by God-do not intermingle them;u respect for all creatures: they are servants in the household of Creation; v respect for the feelings and instincts of animals;w respect for the human body, even after the soul has departed;x respect for your own body: maintain it, as it is the repository, messenger and instrument of the spirit; -limitation of your own instincts and animal-like actions: subordinate them to God's Law, so that, truly human and sanctified, they can help you attain the holy goal of mankind and will not turn you into a mere animal; -respect for your soul, when you nourish its tool, the body: supply the body only with such nourishment that will enable it to act as a pure and willing messenger of the world to the spirit, and of the spirit to the world, rather than giving it food that will induce sluggishness and sensuality; -concealment and sublimation of the animal in you, rather than according it too much respect and attention: only thus will the conflict within you ultimately be resolved, and the animal in you will also aspire only to the truly human; -lastly, respect for your own person in its purest expression-your power of speech. In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources can express a derogatory view of gentiles. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 19:50:36 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 22:50:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 15:54, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters [...] > [...] > In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources > can express a [contrary view] How about because they are Torah sources, and are therefore not required to agree with your favorite 19th-century writer. On the contrary, you should ask how he could contradict Torah sources. (The answer being that he found some contrary sources which appealed more to him, so he adopted their view; that was his right, but nobody else is required to do the same.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From sholom at aishdas.org Wed May 9 08:15:51 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:15:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 20:09:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 23:09:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180510030910.GB2931@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 11:15:51AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : We know Rashi's famous question and answer: that shmita eitzel har sinai : here is to show us that this, too, and all the details, were also given at : har sinai. See my vertl at . That's the Sifra that Rashi is quoting. : My question, however, is: why davka _this_ mitzvah (shmita/yovel)? Other : mitzvos could have been used to demonstrate the point that Rashi mentions. Rashi mentions that shemittah isn't taught in Devarim. The Malbim explains that this is unexpected, since shemittah didn't apply until entering EY, and such mitzvos tend to be the ones introduced in Devarim. : Thoughts? I ran with it... Suggesting that the whole point is that the reductionist approach doesn't work to understanding Torah. This was brought to light bedavqa with a mitzvah that isn't needed to be known yet for its own sake. But the whole picture was given at Sinai, even shemittah, so that we can understand any of the picture. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 39th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliable person? From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 01:57:15 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:57:15 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? >> My apologies. See https://www.academia.edu/36530833/A_translated_chapter_from_The_Hazon_Ish_Halakhist_Believer_and_Leader_of_the_Haredi_Revolution_The_Gaon_of_Vilna_the_Hatam_Sofer_and_the_Hazon_Ish_-_Minhag_and_the_Crisis_of_Modernity_English_?auto=download&campaign=weekly_digest which has several articles besides the one by Brown, Alternatively, send an email to eliturkel at gmail.com and I can send the article -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 02:43:30 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:43:30 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya 3rd line in the widest lines near the bottom and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about 130-135 CE. Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died about 20 years earlier (see eg wikipedia on Gamliel II) It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 07:51:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 10:51:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Me: >> >> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. RZS: > > Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every > Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not > the rav who guided him. No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. > Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a > yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. Again the Reish Galusa determined public policy, the hachamim determined halacha. > But at > any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the > full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to > do their job properly they can't be learning all day. The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his role? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 10 09:08:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:08:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:51:16AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : The claim that "da'as Torah" is derived from din melech is precisely the : claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise : in other fields... That's NOT the way I understood R' Dovid [haLevi] Cohen at all. We want a melekh, separate from the beis din hagadol. Although one person can be in both roles, like when Chazal refer to "Shelomo uveis dino." However, ba'avoseinu harabbim we lost the melukhah. The obligation of obeying the melekh devolved into obeyind the Sanhedrin. (This would have to have been some time between Gedaliah and Ezra, inclusive.) Obeying the melekh wasn't based on the melekh's comptenecy, but the need for order in running a society. (And, I guess some reason(s) why HQBH advised monarchy in particular as the means of getting that order, except according to some readings of RAYK. But RAYK didn't hold of the shitah we're looking at, so ein kan hamaqom leha'rikh.) Then, we lost the Sanhedrin. Today's rabbanim fill in -- either as their shelichim, or . The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. And just as the melekh might not be the expert across all of society, the Sanhedrin or today's rabbanim might not be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 40th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Yesod: When does Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliability/self-control mean submitting to others? From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 10 06:30:06 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93normal_practice=94?= Message-ID: <4ee8a413f67f49da89acceed596b8f72@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I was bothered by the gemara-Megilla 26a where it says Jerusalem apartment ?owners? took ?gifts? by force as ?rental? from olei regal. The Beit Mordechai (2:16), who lived in the early 20th century, raises the same question and says since the normal practice in Israel was for renters to leave something for the innkeeper in addition to the rental payment, so innkeepers in Jerusalem would take it by force since they could not charge rent. He admits that it?s possible that this would be considered stealing but because of this ?normal practice? of leaving something, it?s almost like they had a legal claim and therefore they felt they could take the items. Interesting that I couldn?t find earlier authorities bothered by this but maybe I missed something. Any thoughts appreciated. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 08:15:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:15:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6f2cda5f-ce57-a7a3-36af-3cc0b767dc9f@sero.name> On 10/05/18 05:43, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh >> between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it wasRashbithat was involved. > > I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, > and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > > > Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya?3rd line in the widest > lines near the bottom > and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Thank you. > Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about > 130-135 CE. Why do you suppose he was killed around that time rather than much later? If he was killed then, then he would have been born around 10-15 CE, have started learning Torah around 15-20 years before the churban, and have come back home with all those talmidim 4-9 years after it. Doesn't it seem more likely that his Torah learning started after the churban, and after Kalba Savua had resettled somewhere and reestablished himself, which would mean his death was also several decades after Bar Kochva? > Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died?about 20 years earlier (see eg > wikipedia?on Gamliel II) > > It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the > story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. Why is this at all difficult to believe? What makes it difficult? > So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of > the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant If you assume both that the students died then and that he himself died then, then when did he have time to teach his five new students? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 10 05:57:21 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 08:57:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim Message-ID: At 10:44 PM 5/9/2018, R Eli Turkel wrote: >I suggest reading an article by Brown >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2Fu%2F0%2F%23search%2Fhillel%2F1633fd7c1ed2a4a7&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce7f2ed89c0b04a153b9008d5b61fe896%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C1%7C636615170523842613&sdata=KHDvBEGhAvUsiq8oxUjnwZDX%2Bt0hzpo7D25XR2o0CPA%3D&reserved=0 > > >It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish > >Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent >past >basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those >practices that can be >traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a >select few don't count. >He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that >the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even >communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of >elitism that only gedolim count. > >OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of >the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In >fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their >unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at >most) > >His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in >terms of protecting their communities from modernism. >I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between >litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. I believe you are referring to an article that recently appeared in Hakirah that is at https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjyg6mKmfvaAhVCuVkKHeutBeYQFggtMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hakirah.org%2FVol24Shandelman.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3XZQch0OGem-hvrLpivEHB (I cannot access the link you give above, because I do not have a google account.) I found this article most disappointing and sent the email below to the Editors of Hakirah Subject: The Gaon of Vilna, the Hatam Sofer, and the Hazon Ish: Minhag and the Crisis of Modernity To the Editor: I must admit that the title of this article truly attracted my attention. However, after reading it I was sorely disappointed. The author writes at the beginning of the article, "We have seen that from the 1930's to the 1950's at least, the position of the Hazon Ish remained consistent and unyielding: A minhag has no normative status of its own, and at best can only be adduced as evidence for an actual halakhic ruling, which in turn derives its authority strictly from corroboration by qualified halakhists." He then goes on to point out that both the GRA and the Hazon Ish did not observe many minhagim that most people do observe. However, he does not give us a list of the minhagim they did not observe nor does he give us a list of the minhagim that they did observe. Surely these should have been included in detail in this article. Later in the article the author writes, "These two Orthodox groups [the Hungarian Orthodox and the latter-day hasidic] turned minhag into an endless opportunity for the creation of new humrot. And this only goes to show that it is not always a broken connection with the 'living tradition' that facilitates the creation of a dynamic of humrot. Again, I think that the article should have included a detailed list of these Chumras. In my opinion, this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much substance. What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about nothing." Dr. Yitzchok Levine -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 10 06:58:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:58:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Wild Wild State of Kashrus Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/2bPRtq It was an innovative way of saving money. The municipality worked it out that they would outsource the financial cost of the Department of Health inspectors. From now on, it would be the restaurants themselves that would hire the health inspectors. The restaurants would pay them, they would take out the FICA taxes, the worker?s comp ?? the restaurant would handle it all. The move ?worked wonders? for the state of health in the restaurants. Eateries that were previously designated with a C minus rating were now rated A plus and health violation write ups were down too. The astute reader will detect an obvious problem here. This is what is called a classic conflict of interest. The upgraded rating and lowered violations are probably due to the unique financial arrangement. When an inspector is paid by the people he supervises there is a risk that his judgment and actions will be unduly influenced. The safety of the restaurant consumers has been placed at risk. Indeed, the general public has also been placed in danger. SAME FOR KASHRUS The same should be true in the field of Kashrus. The mashgiach is there to protect the public from eating non-kosher or questionable items just as the health inspector is there to protect the public from anything that can compromise their health and safety. RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN ZT?L Indeed, last generation?s Gadol haDor, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, in his Igros Moshe (YD Vol. IV #1:8) writes that the Mashgiach should not be paid by the facility receiving the hashgacha, but rather should only be paid by the Vaad HaKashrus itself. Indeed, he should have no direct monetary business dealings with the company. See the above URL for more. Keep in mind that when it comes to private hashgachos the person giving the supervision is always paid by the person or organization being supervised. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 09:28:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:28:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <2dd3576d-2d8e-762e-5afc-570ef2dbaa9c@sero.name> On 10/05/18 10:51, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Me: >>> >>> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. > > RZS: > >> >> Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every >> Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not >> the rav who guided him. > > No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert > on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted > on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. But if the rav paskened that they were wrong they had to obey him. >> But at >> any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the >> full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to >> do their job properly they can't be learning all day. > The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the > claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. And indeed it does; how do you see a contradiction from R Akiva? He didn't say TCh don't have the knowledge to run the town, but that they don't have the time. > Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at > all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his > role? Same story: He is qualified, but he has no time, so he will neglect the work and the town will suffer. That's why we need and have askanim to run things, but they have to know that they are not in charge but must defer to the chachamim. Note that not even the biggest haredi calls for the gedolei hatorah to sit in the knesset themselves, let alone to be mayors and city councillors. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 12:43:38 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 15:43:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: RMB: > > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. I already raised the objection of R Akiva?s advice to his son; RZS?s response is conceptually clean, but (a) it doesn?t fit the words of the text, and (b) according to you it is internally contradictory - - if the rabbis who run the city have a din melech how can they be supervised by others? There?s also the sugya of b'nei ha'ir kofin zeh et zeh ?. Naively the authority of the kehilla comes from din melech, but then why b'nei ha'ir, why not the town rabbi? David Riceman From saulguberman at gmail.com Thu May 10 11:51:40 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 14:51:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > RMWillig has a kezayis of 22.5cc, and writes that Middos veShiurei > haTorah pg 277 reports matzah has half the weight of an equivalent > volume of water. So, RMW says a kezayi matzah weighs 11.25gm. (1cc of > water weighs 1gm, by definition. So, the weight of 2cc of matzah is 1gm.) > We buy matzah by the pound, so you can estimate a kazayis pretty > accurately if you know how many matzos are in a 1lb box. (2lb boxes, > divide by 2, naturally.) There are 40.3 or so kezeisim in a pound. > > matzos / lb -> kezayis matzah > 6 -> 2/13 of a matzah > 7 -> 1/6 > 8 -> 1/5 > 9 -> 2/9 > 10 -> 1/4 > > :-)BBii! > -Micha I wish I had remembered to use this at the seder. My rabbi tells me that he got an electric scale this year and had the grandkids make shiurim bags for the sedorim on erev pesach. Has the benefit of having something for the kids to do and moves the seder along. When I mentioned to my Rabbi that I was looking into smaller shiurim,that are smaller than the plastic sheet that is so popular, he was not interested in continuing the conversation. My daughter informed me that one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in the base of their calculation. Saul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:13:50 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:13:50 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1be6e645-8a41-f71b-3d11-7c7d0823c398@zahav.net.il> IIRC the Ramban writes that David took a census because he made a mistake, he thought that the issur didn't apply anymore. I found that Ramban to be shocking. How is it that no one, no rav, no navi, came to David and said "No, you can't do that"?? Answer - David never bothered to ask and no one had the job of being his poseik. Similarly, there are certain acts that the chachamim praised Hezkiyahu for doing and others that they disagreed with him. I read that as meaning "after he made the decisions, the rabbanim weighed in". I don't get the feeling from any navi that they stood by the sides of the kings and told them "yes you? can do this, no, you can't do that". They only weighed in when society or the melucha was totally out of sync. or when they were specifically consulted or when God told them "Go to the king". I admit that there is an incredible tension between even the good kings, the ones trying to rule according to the Torah, and the prophets (forget the evil kings). The former? were not able to live up to the expectations of the latter. From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 11 03:50:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180511105019.GA17192@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:43:38PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : RMB: : > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took : > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. : : The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give : commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us : what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. Not "implies", we are talking about R Dovid [haLevi] Cohen's explanation of Da'as Torah -- it's the thesis he is trying to justify! However, unlike some other versions of DT, it only speaks of rabbis as communal leadership. Not as advisors on personal matters (whose open questions are not halachic in nature). It has this in common with [pre-Mizrachi] RYBS's version of DT, "hatzitz vehachoshen". : I already raised the objection of R Akiva's advice to his son... There is also the historical precedent of the leadership of the Vaad Dalet Aratzos. There is no record of rabbinic leadership on civil issues. They dealt with halachic matters, eg shochetim, batei din, a law to require haskamos on all published sefarim... :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 41st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Yesod: What is the ultimate measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 of self-control and reliability? From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:02:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:02:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The article is one chapter from an entire book. You walked into the middle of a movie, that's all. Ben On 5/10/2018 2:57 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > In my opinion,? this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much > substance.? What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about > nothing." From isaac at balb.in Thu May 10 21:23:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 14:23:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Eli Turkel asked: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, > from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult > for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat > had to bring the animal as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the > cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of > whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result > in hundreds I suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim. [The Ramban in the 3rd Shoresh there isn't happy with this] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 11 01:40:10 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 08:40:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Shiluach Hakein, Performance of Message-ID: >From yesterday's OU Halacha Yomis Q. How is the mitzvah of Shiluach Hakein performed? A. Before sending away the mother, one should have the intent to fulfill a mitzvah. There is a difference of opinion as to how one should send away the mother. According to the Rambam (Hilchos Shechita 13:5), one should grab the mother bird by the wings and send her away. Though the Torah prohibits capturing the mother-bird when she sits on the nest, when the intention of grabbing the mother is to send her away, this is not considered an act of capturing. However, Shulchan Aruch (YD 292:4) rules in accordance with the Rosh and the Tur that one need not grab the mother bird. Rather, one may use a stick or the back of one?s hand to send away the mother. According to these Rishonim, the important factor is not that you grab the mother but that you cause her to fly away. The Binyan Tziyon (Chadashos 14) writes that some Rishonim disagree with the Rambam on two points. They maintain that if one grabs the mother and sends her away, a) the mitzvah is not fulfilled, and b) one transgresses the prohibition of taking the mother-bird (even though the intent is to send the bird away). It is therefore best to use a stick or, as Rav Belsky, zt?l advised, to push the mother bird off the nest with an open hand, the palm facing upwards so that the mother bird is not accidentally caught. Once the mother bird is chased away, one should pick up the eggs or chicks and take possession of them. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Fri May 11 02:25:19 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 12:25:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: Instead of answering Zev's questions directly let me try and describe how I see the events. I fully admit that the sources of dates for Taananim seem very sparse and I welcome any more information >From the chabad site R Yochanan be Zakai dies in 74 The Sanhedrin under Rabban Gamliel moved about 86 Bat Kochba Rebbelion ended in 133 R Akiva put in prison 134 Mishna completed 189 ------------------------------------------ First most historians take the story that R Akiva (along with several others) lived for 120 years as an exaggeration. Typical dates given are 50-135. This also implies that magic split into 3 sections of 40 years each is also an exaggeration This would give his learning under Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua as after the death of R Yochanan ben zakai about the year 75 when he would be 25 years old I again stress that all dates are speculation. It seems unlikely that R Akiva would have 24000 students when so many older teachers were around. Hence, extremely unlikely that this happened while the yeshiva was in Yavne under Rabban Gamliel. The one date I saw for the death of Rashbi was 150. What seems to be clear is that Rebbe compiled the Mishna after the death of all 5 talmidim of R Akiva (of course we know that the compilation was done over a period of time beginning at least with R. Meir and probably R. Akiva and earlier). Pushing off the death of R. Akiva decades later would give little time for the activities of his talmildim after his death before the time of Rebbe who is the next generation. One date I have seen for Rebbe is 135-220 (again approximately) R Sherira Gaon lists the year 219 as the year Rav moved to Bavel The gemara (Kiddushin 72b) states that Rebbe was born when R Akiva died which gives the birth of Rebba as about 135 assuming he died as part of the Bar Kochba revolt (which the Chabad site seems to also assume) As an aside the dates of Rebbe would seem to be connected with the debate over who was Antoninus see Hebrew Wikipedia on Reeb Yehuda HaNasi This post started with my claim that Rashbi was a student in Yavneh years before the plague that kille3d the 24000 students and so he became a student of R Akiva later in life. I note that the other talmidim also had other teachers. Thus, the gemara notes that R Meir also learned with R. Yishmael and certainly with R. Elisha ben Avuyah though R. Akivah was his main teacher 'The students were given semicha by R Yehudah be Buba R Benny Lau claims that R. Yehuda bar Ilai was mainly a talmid of his father and R Tarfon and only secondary by R. Akiva. R Yisi ben Chalfta also learned mainly from his father and then R. Yochanan ben Nuri both of whom stressed the traditions if the Galil. We have no statements of R. Elazar ben Shanua in the name of R. Akiva. R Benny Lau concludes that the two "talmidim muvhakim" of R. Akiva are R. Meir and Rashbi but both of these also had other teachers besides R. Akiva. Hence, we cannot take the story literally that R. Akiva went to the south and found 5 youngsters who became his students. Rather all 5 were already serious talmidei chachamim before R. Akiva. In addition even later many kept up relations with R. Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 14 09:54:07 2018 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 12:54:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel Message-ID: I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential chillul shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:19:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 02:51:40PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : My daughter informed me that : one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even : smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook : It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in : the base of their calculation. But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be invalid anyway? We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more binding than historical reality? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 44th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Malchus: What type of justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 does unity demand? From saulguberman at gmail.com Mon May 14 12:28:24 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:28:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, > the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis > is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does > that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual > olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be > invalid anyway? > > We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai > and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people > causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more > binding than historical reality? > I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:06:21 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:06:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514190620.GC7492@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:33:02AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent : past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those : practices that can be : traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable... So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 15 04:05:47 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 07:05:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . Shemos 12:39 teaches us: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. Various meforshim deal with halachic problems of this pasuk. For example, they were commanded to eat matzah, and being rushed out had nothing to do with it. Or, chometz was forbidden, and being rushed had nothing to do with it. This thread WILL NOT discuss those issues. If you want to discuss those issues, please start a new thread. My questions have nothing to do with halacha. They relate to the sequence and timing of the events of that night. They relate to "lir'os es atzmo" - I try to imagine myself in Mitzrayim that night, and certain parts of the story don't make sense to me. I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: 1) When was that dough made? 2) When was that dough baked? We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for the trip. I find it difficult to imagine that the flour and water were not mixed until the last 17 minutes before morning. Another problem: Given that they DID take unbaked dough out of Mitzrayim, what happened when they finally decided to bake it? Obviously, if they were able to bake it, it must be that they were not hurrying out of Egypt any more. So why didn't they just wait a little longer, and allow the dough to rise? (Someone might suggest that it was only in Egypt that "it did not become chametz", and that they did let it rise after getting out, but the pasuk disproves that, by telling us that "they baked it into matzah", i.e. that the dough never rose at all, at any point.) There are other questions that could ask, in addition to those, but I'll stop here for now. advTHANKSance Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 15 05:11:46 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:11:46 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Issac Balbin wrote: " suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim." There is a fundamental difference between carrying the aron and the avoda in the mishkan. The Rambam writes explicitly there in the sefer hamitzvos that the mitzva of carrying the aron, was given to the leviim in the midbar "v'af al pi shezeh hatzivuy ba laleviim baet hahe". We do not find any such commandment in the Torah regarding avoda in the mishkan. The Torah ONLY commands/allows Aharon and his sons to do Avoda in the mishkan. Therefore there is no room to say that leviim did avoda in the mishkan in the midbar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at yahoo.com Tue May 15 09:53:47 2018 From: gershonseif at yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 16:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know.TIA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 12:31:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:31:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas In-Reply-To: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20180515193110.GB20847@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 04:53:47PM +0000, Gershon Seif via Avodah wrote: : Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked : many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know. The oldest usage Bar Ilan and I could find was the one I had initially thought of -- the AhS. In OC 494:7, RYME gives 3 reasons for not fasting on that day. #2: And more: On that day, Moshe told them to becom qadosh. Uregilin liqroso "Yom haMyuchas" because of this. Which makes me think the AhS was saying it's just mimetic. Otherwise, I would have expected "uregilin le-" to have been replaced by a source. More than that, his vanilla "uregilin" is more typical of his description of accepted Litvisher practice. He tends to report others' practices by saying whom, even if it's a recent import to Litta. For example, se'if 3 mentions that the Chassidim haQadmonim were up all night on Shavuos, as per the Zohar, "vegam agah harbeih osin kein" and in the morning they go to miqvah, all as a zeikher leMatan Torah. Staying up all night gets a "they", not a "we", and is labeled as lower-case-c chassidic / Zoharic custom. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 15 12:39:06 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:39:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bamidbar Message-ID: <24722D2C-AAFF-48C2-A4B0-144A6165528A@cox.net> THEY DID; SO DID THEY DO According to the Sages, not a single letter is superfluous in the Torah. Anything repeated is repeated for a definite reason and with additional meaning. We may not always comprehend the reason or meaning but that doesn't detract from its significance. Also, there may be various interpretations and reasons given by commentators but that is what makes the Torah so profound. This Shabbos we begin the fourth Book of the Torah, Bamidbar. This portion is read the Shabbat before Shavuot, with rare exception. This year it is read immediately before Shavuot. The reason it usually is read the Shabbat prior to Shavuot is because there is a connection between the subject matter of this portion and the theme of Shavuot. There is a verse in Bamidbar in which appears a seeming redundancy. I grappled with it for a while and came up with an interesting chiddush. The verse states (1:54) "The Children of Israel did everything that God commanded Moses, so did they do." The first part of the verse already says "they did everything," etc. Then at the end it again says: "so did they do." Why is it repeated? First, the Children of Israel did "everything that God commanded Moses" because that was what God commanded and they did it as it was a mitzvah. But then, when it states at the end of the pasuk "so did they do," it already had become part of them. In other words, the initial motivation for performing a mitzvah is because God has commanded it, but then after doing it, one does it automatically and out of love and joy (as opposed to being mandatory). It becomes part of the person -- ("so did they do)." Similarly, when the Jewish people accepted the Torah they said "Naaseh v'nishma" (Exodus 24:7) which means "We will DO and (then) we will understand." In other words, we first will do out of duty and obligation since we are accepting the commandments of the Almighty, and afterwards, we will be doing (observing the mitzvot) out of love and joy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 15:45:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 18:45:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos Message-ID: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> R' Mordechai Torczyner (CC-ed) gave 3 shiurim (chaburos?) on koseiv and mocheiq this past march. Including #2, available here . He raises an interesting (to me, at least) question: Catan, formerly The Settlers of Catan, is a game with a board that changes with each play. The board is tiled from hexagons (and played on the edges and corners between them), where each hexagon has a picture on it denoting a kind of terrain, and by implication the reasources one can get from that terrain. This honeycomb is then held in place by a hexagonal frame, which is assembled from 6 pieces, each of which has jigsaw-puzzle-like edges at the join to hold the whole thing together. See RMT cited in shiur SSJ 16:23 (source #5 on the resource page attached to the YUTorah recording). He says you can play a game with letters or pictures IFF one is placing letters or pieces of letters or pictures or their pieces next to eachother. But not if they are made qeva or put in a frame. And only if they do not attach or stick to one another. So, here is RMT's question... Catan's hexagons do not combine to make one picture, but they do combine to make one "message" -- a usable game board. Is assembling a Catan board mutar on Shabbos? And if not, I wish to add: What if the game is played on a pillow, making it hard to keep the pieces interlocked, and the players agree to end the game before Shabbos? If the assembly is neither made to last nor is there intent for it to last, would it then be mutar? Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:11:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:11:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos In-Reply-To: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> References: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> Message-ID: The frame that comes with the newer editions of Settlers is quite flimsy so I don't believe it can be regarded as "fixing" the hexes together in a way that could even raise this shayla. But leravcha demilsa one can simply lay out the board without the frame, as one does with the older editions (my set is close to 20 years old and therefore doesn't have this problem. From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:30:27 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:30:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Further to your question, we've discussed the time of yetzias mitzrayim before, and some have asserted that it was early in the morning, but the Torah says "be'etzem hayom", and Rashi explicitly says this means high noon. At the time of the discussion I couldn't find this Rashi, but it's in Devarim 32:48. So not only did they have all night to prepare food for the journey, they also had all morning. And yet we're to believe they didn't get around to it until just before noon. However, leaving aside the improbability of this timing, my understanding of the actual event is that they started making dough to bake bread, and would have left it to rise but immediately they got the announcement that they were leaving, so they shoved it straight into the oven and baked it there and then, as matzos. Alternatively, given that they had already been commanded not to bake chametz, we can say that because of this commandment they always intended to bake it immediately, but as it happened the command became irrelevant because the announcement came just as they finished kneading it and were about to put it in the oven, so even had they *not* been commanded they would still have had to bake it as matzos. Which of course is why the commandment was given in the first place. Either way, though, my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the perspective of before it was baked. From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 05:55:56 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 12:55:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? A. The Gemara (Avoda Zara 30a) discusses the laws of giluy (beverages left uncovered). Chazal forbade drinking certain beverages that were left uncovered, due to concerns that venomous creatures, such as snakes or scorpions, might drink from the beverage and leave behind some of their venom. Tosfos (Avoda Zara 35a: Chada) writes that in the countries where we live, this concern does not exist, and beverages left uncovered may be drunk. Ordinarily, once Chazal issue a gezeira (decree), the gezeira remains in force even if the reasoning no longer applies. This case is different since the original gezeira was only enacted for places where snakes were common. Accordingly, Shulchan Aruch (YD 116:1) rules that one may drink a beverage that was left uncovered. However, the Pischei Teshuva (116:1) writes that the position of the Vilna Gaon and the Shelah Hakadosh is not to leave drinks unattended. The commentaries to the Maaseh Rav explain that the Vilna Gaon held that there are secondary reasons for Rabbinic decrees that apply even when the primary reason is no longer relevant. Common practice is to follow the position of the Shulchan Aruch, though some adhere to the more stringent opinion -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:26:24 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:26:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me - perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:27:40 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:27:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Designer Babies? Message-ID: Assume that gene editing technology reaches the point that "designer babies" are possible to an extent. Assume that "intellectual acuity" genes can be identified and screened for. Would a Desslerian philosophy allow (require?) mass screening and eventual genetic tinkering to provide a gadol hador material baby? What if there was a clear tradeoff that this gene also resulted in a materially shorter life expectancy? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Thu May 17 08:29:01 2018 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (M Cohen) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 11:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <09af01d3edf3$c8a0bed0$59e23c70$@com> I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul Shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential Chillul Shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before Shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on Shabbos. ..at least 2 major differences between the two. A. the electricity you use is generated in real time, as you demand it (by turning on the switch) B. but the water you use was made and treated in the past, and now simply stored in water towers until you demand it (by opening your tap) (as the water is used, new water is pumped into the tower at intervals. only a gramma). No melacha is done when you use your water C. electricity production in EY typically involves d'orisa issurim of burning fossil fuels, boiling water to create steam etc D. but water production may only be an rabbinic prohibition (electric pumps and filters, adding chemicals, etc) ======= Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2894, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.22240) http://free.pctools.com/ ======= From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Thu May 17 09:00:40 2018 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:00:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: RMB wrote: 'So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here.' I think the point was there was a tendency not to value or keep minhagim, not an absolute rule. And they possibly gave different status to minhagim which clearly originated with gedolim not un-named masses, eg kabalas shabbos. As for the yamulka example, that's got a makor in shas and is mentioned by rishonim, no? Perhaps another example would be Shir hamaalos before bentching which was innovated by the Chida I think. You'd need a whole range of example and a list of who kept what in order to be more certain, I haven't read the rest of Dr Brown's book to know if he does that. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 12:48:18 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 19:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? Message-ID: The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of externalities at all. YL Unfortunately, the term "chasid," meaning a pious person, has become misunderstood because of misconceptions foisted upon us from without. A "chasid" is a person who totally gives himself in love, does not look out for himself but relinquishes his own claims on the world in order to live only for others, through acts of loving kindness. Far from retiring from the world, he lives in it, with it and for it. For himself, the chasid wants nothing; but for the world around him, everything. Thus we find the term applied to David, a man who, from his earliest youth, labored ceaselessly for the spiritual and material welfare of his people and left the shaping of his own destiny, including redress of the wrong done to him by Sha'ul, entirely to God. No doubt you are familiar with the saying shelach shelach v'sheli shelach - -"He who says 'That which is yours is yours and that which is mine also is yours' is called a chasid." Again, a life of seclusion, of only meditation and prayer, is not Judaism. Torah and Avodah (study and worship) are but pathways meant to lead to deeds. Our Sages say, Talmud Torah gadol she'mavi l'y'day maaseh- "Great is study, for it leads to action" - the practical fulfillment of the precepts. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com Thu May 17 13:03:16 2018 From: gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 20:03:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <306356533.2453717.1526587396833@mail.yahoo.com> On Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:48 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that > there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, > speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of > externalities at all. YL Indeed! See Hirsch's commentary to Beraishis 5:24 where he writes very strong words about this. He says that Chanoch lived a life of seclusion after giving up on his generation. Hashem removed him from the earth because "what use is he here" (or something to that effect). From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 17 20:24:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 05:24:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. At one time calling a child a girl did not mean that you were assuming the child's gender? (girl meant a young person of either sex). Ben On 5/17/2018 9:48 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters? I note > that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of > dress,? speaking a particular language,? etc.? Indeed,? there is no > mention of externalities at all. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu May 17 20:51:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 23:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . I had cited Shemos 12:39: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. R' Zev Sero suggested: > ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked > dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. > I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it > has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the > perspective of before it was baked. It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words to have that meaning, that's okay. But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, > their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Fri May 18 14:41:25 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:41:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: See Malbim, who suggests that according to R Yose Haglili, who says that the issur chometz that year was only for one day, that one day was the 14th, not the 15th, but since with kodshim the night follows the day it was from the morning of the 14th till the morning of the 15th. Therefore they started baking bread at daybreak, intending to let it rise, but they were immediately ordered to leave and had no time. Alternatively, since most meforshim understand the one day to be the 15th, he suggests that they mixed the dough intending to bake matzos, but they didn't even have time to do that and had to take the unbaked dough, which would naturally have become chometz during their journey, but miraculously it did not rise and when they got where they were going they baked it as matzos (or, according to pseudo-Yonasan, the sun baked it, which presents halachic problems of its own, since sun-baked bread doesn't have the status of bread). On 17 May 2018 at 23:51, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I had cited Shemos 12:39: > >> They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves >> of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were >> driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare >> any provisions for themselves. > > R' Zev Sero suggested: > >> ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked >> dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. >> I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it >> has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the >> perspective of before it was baked. > > It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the > pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words > to have that meaning, that's okay. > > But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > >> They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, >> their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. > > This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of > Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is > unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff > they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that > the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. > > Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS > for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why > didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. > > The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not > make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then > they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just > before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to > departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water > together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. > > Akiva Miller > _______________________________________________ > Avodah mailing list > Avodah at lists.aishdas.org > http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org -- Zev Sero zev at sero.name From doniels at gmail.com Mon May 21 03:55:24 2018 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 13:55:24 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Generators_on_Shabbos_in_Israel?= Message-ID: R' Ben Rothke wrote: > I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, > AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. Also, apparently, as a form of protest. > With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is > automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the > potential chillul shabbos? R' Israel Meir Morgenstern put out an entire Sefer on this - http://www.virtualgeula.com/Stock/Books/Show/11160 - and regular updates as booklets. According to him, it's not nearly as automated as they pretend. IIRC he did on-site research, not relying on what the Electric Company wants people to believe. > Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before > shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. There are those who do that too. Check the roofs in Charedi neighborhoods - those with huge black reservoirs are doing just that. That said, I asked his father, R' D. A. Morgenstern shlita about getting one of those water reservoirs and he said it wasn't necessary. (I didn't ask him about electricity.) - Danny From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 20 14:10:28 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 00:10:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance Message-ID: <> What effect does this have on shabbat -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon May 21 23:19:20 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 02:19:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 17/05/18 09:26, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) > one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? > What is the source of this practice? (Me ? perhaps the original practice > of only one person saying Kaddish). I assume you mean in a shul where most of the kadeishim are said by multiple people. If so, I have never seen or heard of such a practise until you described it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 03:52:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:52:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Please see Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part I at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FCT8ohf&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=CAO%2FIULzGszY4Io1E7bD7BDzBnrECxpPQX6SlNtHF%2BU%3D&reserved=0 and Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part II at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FKVjQ16&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=RY%2FzL7M3vLMiFdh1MlJcdiMfMVPVPkRXx%2FtVGOhRiWk%3D&reserved=0 If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 05:04:49 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 08:04:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on > a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking > their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me ? > perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). In all the shuls in Elizabeth NJ, the practice is as follows: If no one has yahrzeit, then there are no restrictions on Kaddish. If someone does have a yahrzeit that day, then the Kaddish after Aleinu is said only by him/them (including anyone still in shloshim). As RJR guessed, this is in deference to the original minhag (still practiced in German shuls) that no Kaddish is ever said by more than one person. [A gabbai usually calls out "Yahrzeit!" in addition to the table-banging.] In Shacharis, the other kaddishes (such as after Shir Shel Yom) are said by all kaddish-sayers. After mincha, an additional Tehillim (usually #24) is recited, so that the other kaddish-sayers will have the opportunity to say kaddish. This is done at maariv too, except for situations (such as in Elul) when there's another Tehillim anyway. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:12:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:12:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 06:52:26AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly : going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. But it could still not be worth the learning missed. There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more "nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. micha at aishdas.org Thus excellence is not an event, http://www.aishdas.org but a habit. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aristotle From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 04:01:35 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:01:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Birkat Kohanim Message-ID: 1) The Priestly Threefold Benediction had the following: The first blessing has three words, the second five, the third seven. They remind us of the foundation for all blessings: The tree Patriarchs, the five books of the Torah, and the seven Heavens. Bachya 2) Israel said to God: "Why do you tell the priests to bless us? We desire Your blessing alone!" Said the Holy One: "Although I have told the priests to bless you, I shall stand in their company to give effect to the benediction." Therefore, at the end of the section it states explicitly (verse 27): "I will bless them." Midrash Numbers R. (11:2, 8, end). 3) Why do we ask God first to bless us and then keep or guard us? Because, if He does give us material blessings, we need to be protected from the evil results such prosperity may bring. The Hasidic Anthology P.359 quoting the Tzechiver Rebbe. 4) There is an interesting connection between Parshat Naso, which is the longest parsha in the Torah, comprising 176 verses, and the 119th Psalm (of Tehillim), which also contains 176 verses and is the longest in the book of Psalms. This psalm carries the distinct title, "Torah, the Way of Life." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 03:57:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:57:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Who Sings In This World Will Sing Also In The Next." Joshua b. Levi, Sanhedrin, 91b Message-ID: <37067FE1-055D-4504-A143-8FB433E508DE@cox.net> LA'AVOD AVODAT AVODA VA'AVODAT MASA 4:47... Note the four words in a row with the same root. (Probably the only place in the Torah with four words in a row with the same root). Rashi says the Avodat Avoda (kind of a strange phrase) refers to playing musical instruments. As far as Avodat Masa (Work of burden) is concerned ? the Gemara in Chulin comments that only when there is heavy manual labor involved, then there is an age limit for the Leviyim (as with the others). And it seems that the age limit of 50 was only for the carrying. In other words, a Levi was able to continue serving in the Mishkan after 50, but only for SHIRA and SH'MIRA. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 04:29:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:29:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor Message-ID: We are told that Hashem spoke the words Shamor and Zachor together, and I have presumed that we heard them together as well. But the Ramban (Devarim 5:12) suggests that "He (Moshe) is the one who heard Zachor, and they (heard) Shamor." The ArtScroll Chumash (page 969) quotes Rav Gedalya Shorr as explaining: <<< At the highest spiritual level - the one occupied by Moses - the awesome holiness of the Sabbath is such a totally positive phenomenon that one who understands its significance could not desecrate it. Thus, the positive remembrance of the Sabbath contains within itself the impossibility of violating it, just as one who loves another person need not be warned not to harm that person. This was the commandment that Moses "heard." Lesser people, however, do not grasp this exalted nature of the Sabbath. They had to be told that it is forbidden to desecrate the sacred day; when they absorbed the Ten Commandments, they "heard" primarily the negative commandment *safeguard*. >>> Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue May 22 08:19:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 11:19:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 22/05/18 06:52, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going > there and seeing the falls is not nothing. Not at all. One says a bracha on many things that one would much rather *not* see, and that one would certainly not go out of ones way to see. Also consider the rainbow. If one happens to see it one says a bracha, and quite a positive one, but one still should not tell others to go outside and see it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:27:43 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:27:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet : he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. But AGAIN, no one obligated RAMiller to hold like RSRH. Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim around, etc... : R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or : taken a plane and learned on the plane. : Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the : world as it is, namely, mostly gray. But this isn't about how RAMiller lived now about life in general. It's advice to a school, an institution dedicated to learning. What I am actually taken by is the importance RAM is giving girls' education. Contrast that to the number of seminaries today that are so exclusively focused on inspiring that textual education is limited. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When we are no longer able to change a situation micha at aishdas.org -- just think of an incurable disease such as http://www.aishdas.org inoperable cancer -- we are challenged to change Fax: (270) 514-1507 ourselves. - Victor Frankl (MSfM) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:54:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:54:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522135452.GC14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 07:29:51AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be : understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so : supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", : I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Except that the Rambam believes the Qol had nothing to do with accoustics or physical sound to begin with. That the term is just being used as a metaphor to help those of us who never experienced such things. (Moreh 2:48) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 06:52:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:52:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:12 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >But it could still not be worth the learning missed. > >There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples >of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at >the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. >And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more >"nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. I know that Rav Schwab also went to Switzerland. Many gedolim in Europe went in the summer to vacation resorts, and there are pictures of Mir students at summer camp. See http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rkimble/Mirweb/YeshivaStudents2.html R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or taken a plane and learned on the plane. Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the world as it is, namely, mostly gray. I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:08:39 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:08:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522140839.GD14915@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 05:24:24AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. ... With that in mind as a caveat, let's look at Chazal's chassidim harishonim. Aside from famously spending 9 hours a day (12 on days when Mussaf is said?) on tefillah, Our sages repeated [in a beraisa]: The early Chassidim would hide their thorns and broken pieces of glass in the middle of their fields 3 tefachim [roughly one foot] deep, so that it would not [even] stop the plowing. Rav Sheishes would put them to the fire, Ravan would place them in the Tigres [the large river alongside which his home city of Pumbedisa was built]. Rav Yehudah said: The person who wants to be a chassid [he should take care] to follow the words of [the tractates on] damages. Ravina said: The words of [Pirqei] Avos. Others say in response [that Ravina said]: the words of [the tractate] Berakhos [blessings]. - Bava Qama 30a "Amrei leih" as the end is most ocnsistent with what we normally discuss about them. However, notice everyone else assumes a BALC definition of chassidus. They come up in Seifer Hakabiim I as among the bravest of warriors, and among the last to accept the permissibility of fighting on Shabbos. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:22:35 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:22:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522142235.GE14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:05:47AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about : the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: : 1) When was that dough made? : 2) When was that dough baked? We are talking about 600,000 or so homes. I assume there are a range of answers. And when the Torah says they didn't have time for it to become chameitz, it means that in many or most of those homes... enough that the haste came to characterize how we left. Just trying to aid the imagination by three-dimensionalizing the peopl involved. : We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally : irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as : Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the : Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to : leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for : the trip... Already in this discussion it was raised that in Shemos we're told we left "be'etzem hayom". And yet, in yesterday's leining, we're told "hotziakha H' E-lokekha loylah" (Devarim 16:1) Rashi ad loc (based on Sifrei Devarim 128:5, Barakhos 9a) says that we got permission from Par'oh at night (Shemos 12:31). So there was, as you write, PLENTY of warning. But they also had get their neighbors' valutables, pack, get the animals in hand, find Yanky's favorite bottle, figure out who was getting custody of those kids wandering around that neighborhood that choshekh obliterated... So, little things like what to pack for lunch was rushed, and in most cases, that meant they were left with matzah. (Despite likely promising themselves that if they ever got out of Egypt, they would never eat lechem oni again!) Your 1 mil assumption, BTW, might come from the matzah of the seder they were commanded to make, and that this matzah was not necessarily KLP. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 11:02:42 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:02:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <24.27.04381.9FB540B5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:27 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls >will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. >It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim >around, etc... The question was asked about girls' high schools, not yeshiva boys! Do you really think he was concerned about the reduction in learning for the girls! I think not! He held that Niagara is "nothing" something that makes no sense to me in light of the fact the Falls are one of Hashem's wonders. [Email #2.] Here is what R. Miller actually said in response to a question about going to Niagara Falls. the question was asked about high schools taking girls to the Falls. As you can see, his statement about Niagara Falls being "nothing " had nothing to do with bitul Torah. I find his response baffling to say the least. YL Rav Avigdor Miller on Niagara Falls Q: What is your opinion of the importance of a high school taking their students on a trip to Niagara Falls? A: My opinion is that it's nothing at all. You have to travel so far, and spend so much money to see Niagara Falls?! Let's say, here's a frum girls' school. So they have the day off, or the week off, whatever it is. And where do they go? To Niagara Falls. What's in Niagara Falls?! A lot of water falling off a cliff. Nothing at all. Nothing at all! It's the yetzer harah. The yetzer harah makes everyone dissatisfied. People who are really happy with what they have are almost impossible to find. They may say, "We're happy," but they're not. And therefore, they're always seeking something else. And so, they travel to Niagara Falls. You might say differently, but I'm telling you, that's the reason why people travel to Niagara Falls. It's the yetzer harah that is making you dissatisfied. So you have to go to see water falling off a cliff. But really it's nothing at all. Of course, you yield a little bit to the yetzer harah in order that more girls should come to your school. You have an outing every year to get new talmidos, new students. But really it's nothing at all. TAPE # E-193 (June 1999) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:41:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522184112.GC16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 03:28:24PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to : be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to : area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume : measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they : were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. >From what I posted in the past from the AhS (OC 373:34), is seems the definitions themselves were not constants. A person is supposed to be using their own thumb, fist or forearm when the din is only about them. And standardized numbers are only invoked for things like eiruv where one has to serve many people and "ameru chakhamim denimdod lechumerah" -- use an ammah that covers a very high percentile of the people relying on it. And I tried to discuss what this would mean for shiurim like kezayis, where a person isn't using his own body or something he could only own one of, as a measure. But the discussion went in its own direction. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, micha at aishdas.org if only because it offers us the opportunity of http://www.aishdas.org self-fulfilling prophecy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:33:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:33:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:10:28AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : > By 2025, 10,000 satellites will provide constant Israeli video : > surveillance of the Middle East sufficient to carry out targeted killings ... : What effect does this have on shabbat How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space that has security camteras? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue May 22 16:41:12 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 19:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> References: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 22, 2018, 2:33 PM Micha Berger wrote: > How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space > that has security camteras? No major difference except that some people still avoid security cameras. As they become more common it will be harder to do. It is already difficult to go to many hotels over shabbat. As these devices appear everywhere some argue that poskim will be forced to accept some minority opinions or else we all stay home From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 23 07:53:38 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 14:53:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: From today's Hakhel email bulletin. THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 23 10:12:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:12:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:53:38PM +0000, Professor L. Levine forwarded (from Hakhel, who were forwarding as well): :> THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted :> at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. :> http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg It's very al-menas-leqabel-peras collecting a list of havtachos and segulos.. There is the stretch from the Rambam onward talking about how davening haneitz is better, or how one should daven as soon after as possible. (Which implies kevasiqin is superior, but not actually saying that.) But the general tenor of the list is about mystical rewards; even the references to the gemara. I didn't think it would be your speed. Also, Hakhel pushed my button on a pet peeve. Whomever at Hakhel writes titles knows diqduq better than whomever sent in about the poster. (Compare the subject line of this thread'S "K'Vosikin" with the quoted text's "VASIKIN".) "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. The words are "kevasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. No "the" there to remove; omitting the "ha-" is just wrong. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The meaning of life is to find your gift. micha at aishdas.org The purpose of life http://www.aishdas.org is to give it away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Pablo Picasso From zev at sero.name Wed May 23 10:21:31 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:21:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2f7061f4-8f98-52f7-67af-3204e6dd8b76@sero.name> On 23/05/18 13:12, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. That would be davening *laneitz*. I'm not sure what "davening neitz" might mean, but whatever it is, it's not AZ. I wonder about those who, on a plane going directly to or from EY, daven out the side windows. Are they davening to the Great Penguin Spirit at the South Pole? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed May 23 10:23:14 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 17:23:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <0A36D278-B7B9-4326-9245-B993DE48CB97@tenzerlunin.com> ?I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you?? I am certainly no chassid if Rav Miller. But criticizing anyone, and certainty not criticizing a Talmid chacham, for personal feelings about a family matter, seems to me to be in poor taste. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed May 23 12:42:02 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:42:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin References: Message-ID: At 01:12 PM 5/23/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >The words are "KEvasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, >and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. I use the terminology K'Vosikin, but Hakhel used Vasikin so I left it. I have often quipped that the only people who know Dikduk are maskilim! >:-} (Note the wicked grin.) Regrading segulos, I found the following of interest. From a footnote to letter 15 of the 19 Letters of RSRH "Segulah" denotes a property belonging permanently to an owner, to which no one else has any right or claim (cf. Bava Kamma 87b). YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 05:59:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 12:59:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? Message-ID: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 06:01:44 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 13:01:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life by a community. Do you agree? It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit and then no more rain falls. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 24 10:39:09 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 17:39:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Does_Ru=92ach_Ra=92ah_=28negative_spiri?= =?windows-1252?q?ts=29_still_exist_today=3F?= Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru?ach Ra?ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra?ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra?ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye. Scientists have revealed the presence of numerous invisible forces in the universe, such as gravity and electromagnetic waves. In fact, scientists today theorize that dark matter, which no one has ever seen, accounts for 80% of the matter in the universe. Just as G-d created indiscernible physical forces in the universe which physicists have shown to exist, Chazal identified invisible spiritual forces that potentially impact negatively on both the body and soul (see Teshuvos Vihanhogos 1:8). The Gemara (Shabbos 109a) states that when awakening in the morning, a person must wash his or her hands (three times) to remove Ru?ach Ra?ah. Until one does so, one must be careful not to touch the mouth, nose, eyes or ears so as not to allow the Ru?ach Ra?ah to enter into the body. Also, one may not touch food, since the Ru?ach Ra?ah will spread to the food. Although the Maharshal (Chulin 8:12) questions whether any form of Ru?ach Ra?ah still exists today, the consensus of most poskim is that this is still a concern. The Halachos of removing Ru?ach Ra?ah from one?s hands are codified in Shulchan Aruch (OC 4:2-5). If one touched food before washing in the morning, the Mishnah Berurah (4:14) writes that bedieved (after the fact) the food may be eaten, but if possible the food should be rinsed three times. The Gemara warns us about other forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah (damaging spirits). However, the Magen Avrohom (173:1) writes that there are some forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah that no longer pose a danger. For example, the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru?ach Ra?ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru?ach ra?ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one?s hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Fri May 25 00:10:22 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:10:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were > all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, > a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype > (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and I cringe every time I go past. But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 04:51:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 07:51:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 03:10 AM 5/25/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: >This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards >went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing >towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and >I cringe every time I go past. > >But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" >from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun >"netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There >certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 >in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not found in TANACH, so why not this one? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 06:49:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 09:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 07:51:45AM EDT, Prof. Levine wrote: : Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not : found in TANACH, so why not this one? Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different topic. People are trying to "do halakhah" without understanding the language the categories they're trying to implements are labeled in. Without understanding the language of Chazal, we are missing a lot of subtlety about what they meant. With bigger problems (if less about din) if you don't know the workings of the language of Tefillah, Tehillim or Chumash. Judaism without diqduq is a paler, less nuanced, thing. I expect you have a LOT from RSRH in your cut-n-paste library on this. Earlier, at 10:10:22AM IDT, Simon Montagu wrote the post that Prof Levine was replying to: : But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from : the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the : root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word : meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's : description of his dream and in Hazal. Nitzotz. Yeshaiah 1:31 uses it to refer to a spark, as it's something that starts a fire. Comes up a number of times in Chazal. Most famously to people who daven Ashkenaz, Shabbos 3:6: nosenin keli sachas haneir leqabeil nitzotzos. There is a beis hanitzotz in the BHMQ. Libun requires nitzotzos coming out of the keli. "Nitzotzos ein bahen mamash". (Shabbos 47b) BUT... getting back to that nuance theme... Haneitz is when there is enough light to make things like that sparkle. It's before alos, which is when the first spark of the sun is visible. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, micha at aishdas.org Our greatest fear is that we're powerful http://www.aishdas.org beyond measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anonymous From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 07:38:32 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:38:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:49 AM 5/25/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This >is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. >There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh >and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from >English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different >topic. Sadly, with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and texting, the English language is, IMO, going down the drain. People do not spell properly, write things that are not words, etc. This is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 08:22:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:22:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525152241.GC9702@aishdas.org> This isn't an MO issue, even if the subject line mentions the affiliation of the mechaneikh. For many people in yeshivish minyanim I attend, davening with a tzibbur is something one does between gaps in looking at a seifer. And among the yeshivish-lite (Shababnikim?), minyan is an excuse to get together for the qiddush. We really don't know how to daven. And all the time we spend teaching how to learn contributes to that. Defining religious inspiration in terms of learning, new knowledge, makes it hard to find what the point is in saying the same words yet again. When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. We define it those terms, tefillah won't get anywhere. On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:01:44PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have : the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community : and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that : did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their : prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life : by a community. Do you agree? I think so, because gap year subtlely teaches the message that true spirituality is incompatible with "reeal life". And that's why they need to go to a 1 year religious experience, with no job, no secular studies, no other concerns, not even the usual setting, in order to get inspiration that is supposed to last year the rest of your life. I believe it's an underdiscussed factor (among the many others) as to why so many MO youth go yeshivish during gap year or upon return. That implied message is not fully compatible with TuM or TiDE. That said... There are other factors. Telecom means you can hear from a famous rosh yeshiva regularly, and don't need to "settle" for someone local as a role model. Never mind that you can regularly connect with the LOR, so that he is actually in a position to better model the role. Also, the whole universal post-HS yeshiva thing feeds the RY-centric view (outside of chassidishe admorim) of religious leadership now prevalent, rather than the rabbinate. The shift from Agudas haRabbanim to the Agudah's (or in Israel, Degel's) Mo'etzes haRabbanim. Secondary effects: There is less tie and sense of belonging to a particular qehillah. More and more people daven in a handful of places, because this one is more convenient Fri night, another Shabbos morning, a third for Shabbos afternoon, Sunday, weekdays... Qehillah could be a source of positive peer pressure when inspiration is running low. But only if you feel attached to one. (An LOR mentioned to me this effect as a factor in OTD rates...) As per the famous machgich line: It's chazaras hasha"tz, not chazaras haSha"s! : It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately : go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit : and then no more rain falls. Although it's less that no more rain falls as much as the crops no longer accept irrigation water. Okay, the metaphor doesn't really work. A good rav who one can interact with regularly may be more useful :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals micha at aishdas.org is not as important as http://www.aishdas.org what you become by achieving your goals. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Henry David Thoreau From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 25 08:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos Message-ID: Halacha L'kovod Shabbos - "Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos" According to some Poskim it is prohibited to intentionally tan in the sun on Shabbos. Nevertheless it is permitted to walk or sit outdoors on a sunny day even if there is the probability of becoming tanned (even if one would be pleased that this happened - so long as one is not intentionally tanning) because the tanning is not intentional. One may also apply a thin and pourable suntan lotion for protection against sunburn when walking or sitting outdoors. However, one may not use a cream. S'U Minchas Yitzchok 5:32, Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchasa 18:70, Sefer 39 Melochos YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri May 25 08:56:20 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:56:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Questions on Theologically Motivated Message-ID: <3CB5DF8F-56E4-482D-BA72-9328800F007E@cox.net> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. 1) What is the difference between ?The religious person? and ?the truly religious person?? 2) What exactly do you mean by "cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:11:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:11:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: In this case, the problem pre-dated the smart? (or cell) phone. On 5/25/2018 4:38 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Sadly,? with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and > texting,? the English language is, IMO,? going down the drain.? People > do not spell properly,? write things that are not words,? etc.? This > is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:05:52 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:05:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular Message-ID: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Ever wonder what is the nafka mina of deciding if secular people are tinok sh'nishba or not? Here is a biggy. There is (apparently) a machloket between Rav Kanyevski and Rav Edelstein if it is permitted to donate a kidney if it may end up in someone secular. RK believes it shouldn't be done because he paskens like Rav Elyashiv that no one today has the din of tinok sh'nishba and therefore they shouldn't get this type of help from the religious. RE paskens like the classic Chazon Ish psak that today's secular people do have the tinok din? and therefore it is permitted to donate a kidney to a secular person. See the article (Hebrew) for more details. http://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/558795 From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 09:31:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:31:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? In-Reply-To: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525163124.GF9702@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:59:56PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious : person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are : theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic : inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral : creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a : Supreme Law?" : Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would : be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a : judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? I think it's self-evident. If the gov't is "of the people and by the people" (regardless of "for the people", appologies Pres Lincoln), then the only way to really seperate church and state would be to separate church and people. And "church" here includes not only all religion, but all religious stances. Including atheism, agnosticism, apathy and Sherleyism. A person's vote should be informed by their values. And a person's values by their religious stance -- whether religious, "truly religious", or an atheist. After all, an atheist cannot phrase abortion or end-of-life issues in terms of souls and therefore their etheism will inform their vote when Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice is a key issue. (Looking at you, Ireland!) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man micha at aishdas.org is how he treats someone http://www.aishdas.org who can do him absolutely no good. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Samuel Johnson From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:11:20 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:11:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Professor L. Levine" T >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra'ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra'ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye....? .....the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru'ach Ra'ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru'ach ra'ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one's hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL ? >>>>> ? It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children.? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:05:24 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:05:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398431932-c8d-935e@webjas-vaa194.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Rich, Joel" >From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" ? Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich ? ? >>>>> ? There is no constitutional requirement, no legal requirement, no ethical requirement and no logical requirement for each individual to erect a wall of separation between church and state in his own heart and mind.? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:52:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:52:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> >>>>> It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ============= IIRC R? A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 12:26:01 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:26:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525192601.GC25353@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 05:52:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : IIRC R' A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. It was ruach ra'ah, as per our discussion. Thus, neigl vasr. I think RAS's understanding was that Chazal were using evidence-based reasoning. People were getting sick, and since bad vapors were believed to be the cause of disease, Chazal presumed there was a ru'ach ra'ah. Which means that given that we today attibute disease to microbes, we would transvalue ruach ra'ah to refer to germs. I don't think too many others understand ru'ach ra'ah as a physical threat. Rashi (Taanis 22b "mipenei ruach ra'ah") understands ru'ach ra'ah to be a sheid entering the person -- "mipenei ruach ra'ah: shenichnas bo ruach sheidah..." and then he might drown or fall and die. Perhaps psychiatric illness? In which case, there is no clear transvaluation to today's science, as minds kind of straddle the physica - metaphysical fence. Sheidim /are/ intellects; so how do we map sheidim talk to rationalist psychology talk? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. micha at aishdas.org If you want time, you must make it. http://www.aishdas.org - Charles Buxton Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 09:30:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:30:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2 Message-ID: It is often confusing when trying to determine whether an item is subject to bishul akum or not. This article should help. YL Click here to download "Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2" From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:50:45 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:50:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular In-Reply-To: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> References: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <8849942693d54a55aab7bd43e07dddc7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/901388/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/from-the-rabbis-desk-choosing-a-recipient,-diverting-tzedakah/ Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz-From The Rabbi's Desk - Choosing a Recipient, Diverting Tzedakah Listen to the 1st part-lots to discuss KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 26 12:17:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:17:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Ben On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Toby Katz via Avodah wrote: > >>>>> > > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? > So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their > children. From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 14:07:40 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:07:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? Message-ID: <1639920e25b-c96-3738@webjas-vaa110.srv.aolmail.net> From:?"Prof. Levine" Date:?Wed, 22 Aug 2012 Subject:?Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? One may download this article that appeared in Tradition at http://www.mesora.org/mezuza-gordon.pdf Towards the end of this article the author writes To claim, then, that the Divine inscription, which directs the attention of the Jew to God, is possessed of its own potency, generating protective benefits, perverts a spiritual instrumentality into a cultic charm.... YL >>>> ? I hope I will be forgiven for resurrecting an old, old thread -- from 2012.? But I recently came across something when I was preparing for my Pirkei Avos shiur, and it made me think of this old thread. ? This is from _Ethics From Sinai_?by Irving Bunim.? On Pirkei Avos 5:22 he talks about the difference between the disciples of Avraham and the disciples of Bilaam.? The former have a sense of security; the latter have no sense of security in the world.?? ? ---quote-- Today we have all sorts of insurance policies: fire insurance, flood insurance, life insurance. On one level they represent a wise precaution [but mainly] the man of piety places his trust in the Almighty. When he closes his place of business at night, he knows there is a mezuzah on the door, to betoken His protection. At bedtime he recites the Shema, to invoke His protection. This is his basic insurance policy.... . The Sages tell of Artaban IV, the last King of Parthia, who sent his friend Rav a priceless jewel, with the message, << Send me something equally precious>>; and Rav sent him a mezuzah.? The king replied, <> Answered Rav < >> --end quote-- ? In a footnote, Bunim explains that that last sentence is a pasuk, Mishlei 6:22, and it applies to the mezuzah. This doesn't make the mezuzah an but does say that the mezuzah is protective. . (I am using << and >> instead of quotation marks in the hope of minimizing the number of random question marks AOL strews in my path.? If anyone can help me solve this problem please let me know.) . --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri May 25 13:29:34 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 16:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: . R' Simon Montagu wrote: > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards > went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing > towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", > and I cringe every time I go past. > > But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. ... I used to cringe too. But then I thought of a different limud zechus, and it's not just an excuse. I really believe this: They are not speaking the language that you'd like to think they are speaking. We are in the process of developing a new dialect, or creole, ... I don't know or care what the technical term might be, but consider the following phrases: making kiddush will be davening had paskened was mekadesh Technically speaking, I do concede that "davening k'vasikin" is meaningful, while "davening vasikin" is bizarre. But the truth, whether you like it or not, is that when someone says "davening vasikin", EVERYONE knows what the speaker meant. In this new language, there's nothing wrong with saying "davening vasikin". It is (I think) EXACTLY like the phrase "Good Shabbos", when the first word is pronounced "good" (and not "goot") and the second word is pronounced "SHABbos" (and not "shabBOS"). What language is that???? It's not Hebrew. It's not Yiddish. It's not English. It's something new. (Where "new" can have values of 50 to 100 years. Maybe more.) I am reminded of going to the bakery when I was twelve years old, and the sign by the brownies said that the price was: .10? each (If your computer messed that up, it is a decimal point, followed by a one, and a zero, and a "cents" sign. You know, a "c" with a line through it.) Twelve-year old me looked at the decimal point, and noted that the sign had a cents sign, and not a dollar sign. So I concluded that the price for the brownies was one-tenth of a cent each. I tried to buy ten of them for a penny. It didn't work. And I was pretty upset about it too. I knew I was right. Plenty of people tried to console me, but no one could explain my error. I was right, and everyone seemed to agree. It took about 40 years, but I finally figured out the lesson of that incident: What people SAY is not nearly as important as what they MEAN. Focus on the ikar, not the tafel. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sat May 26 19:46:16 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 22:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <68109a23-b784-405e-60d5-b1c30853273a@sero.name> Think of saying "netz" instead of "honetz" the same way you do about saying "bus" instead of "autobus", "phone" instead of "telephone", or "flu" instead of "influenza". I recently saw "'bus" written with an apostrophe, but that's very unusual. Most people have no idea that these are abbreviations of longer words. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Sun May 27 05:00:54 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 12:00:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is the meaning of Cholov Yisroel? Message-ID: Please see the video at https://goo.gl/S5mPTn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat May 26 18:36:57 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:36:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Behaaloscha YOU CAN'T WIN 'EM ALL Message-ID: <89C443B9-BCD6-4E3D-A485-59F3CF2C7515@cox.net> Both dedications, the dedication of the Mishkan by the Nesiim and the dedication of the Menorah by Aharon were required. The Midrash mentions that Aharon was depressed that neither he nor his tribe was included in the dedication of the Mishkan. This brings to mind the time when I gave a student of mine a part in the family service that he considered inferior and unimportant. Convinced I had the perfect answer, I confindently and proudly informed him about the dedications of the Mishkan and of the Menorah and how God comforted Aharon by saying that his part of the dedication ceremony was the greatest of all, in that he was charged with the kindling of the Menora. I was sure that would make my pupil feel much better but without batting an eyelash, my student immediately retorted: "Yeah, but you're not God!" I ended up being more depressed than Aharon! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:25:32 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:25:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? Message-ID: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and Reuvain claims insolvency. Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an ongoing business for Pesach? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:27:43 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:27:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? Message-ID: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose. (The gemara in b"b is worth looking at-what exactly is the halachic force of "people don't sell their homes"). Two items: 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? 2. What if the other fundraising fails-would the community sell the Beit Knesset? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 31 11:22:30 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:22:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns > beer over pesach), one source quoted is S?A C?M 99:7, which deals with a > case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows > money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din > is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and > Reuvain claims insolvency. > Do you think it?s a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an > ongoing business for Pesach? Not at all, for two separate reasons. First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. So in this case where the Jew sold not the chametz but the entire business, there's nothing to indicate that the sale was anything but serious and effective. Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to "pierce" it in the name of equity. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 1 03:28:46 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 06:28:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra Message-ID: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> With discussed "Higher" Bible Criticism before, we've discussed the IE on the topic before, RGS went the next step -- the Ramban on the IE on Bible Criticism. I am includng the comment, and I would have written something similar. :-)BBii! -Micha Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student R. Avraham Ibn Ezra has long been a controversial figure. R. Shlomo Luria (Yam Shel Shlomo, intro to Bava Kamma) respectfully but strongly rejects his entire approach to Torah commentary. What does the Ramban, one of the classical commentaries whose work serves as a foundation for modern Jewish thought, think of his predecessor, Ibn Ezra? He certainly disagrees often with Ibn Ezra, sometimes sharply. But there may be a more fundamental reason for opposition. At the end of Ramban's commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim, he writes that anyone who says that Ezra the scribe added to the Torah -- such as Gen. 13:6 or Deut. 3:11 -- is a heretic (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 p. 548). Ibn Ezra famously suggests that four verses imply post-Mosaic interpolations -- Gen. 12:6, 22:14, Deut. 3:11, 31:22. Ramban, who shows clear expertise in Ibn Ezra's Torah commentaryn quotes two of these four verses in describing the heretic! Coincidence? R. Betzalel Naor, in his annotated edition of Rashba's Ma'amar Al Yishma'el (Orot: Spring Valley, NY, 2008, pp. 25-27) finds this correspondence convincing. The author of the commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim must have been condemning Ibn Ezra as a heretic. Even though some supercommentaries and scholars dispute the claim that Ibn Ezra ever intended anything other than that Moshe wrote those verses prophetically, many believe he made the more radical claim.[1] If so, this passage from the Shir Ha-Shirim commentary condemns him as a heretic. However, R. Naor points out that Ramban did not write that commentary. R. Chaim Dov Chavel argues cogently in his introduction to that work that it was written by the earlier, kabbalist R. Ezra of Gerona (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 pp. 473-475). If so, we can ask whether Ramban agreed with R. Ezra's evaluation. R. Naor (ibid., pp. 136-143) makes the following points and suggestions: 1- Even in his introduction to his Torah commentary, Ramban expresses his mixed attitude toward Ibn Ezra, which he calls "a public rebuke and private affection." This might be used to describe a commentary that is both brilliant but occasionally sacrilegious. However, Ramban calls him "Rabbi" Ezra, a term of respect. 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him about Ibn Ezra. 3- Ramban unquestionably rejected any post-Mosaic interpolations into the Torah, as seen in his general introduction to his commentary. While hiss attitude toward the level of prophecy of the Torah varies (commentary to Num. 16:5), that is nowhere near the claim that any verse postdates Moshe. 4- Rabbeinu Tam wrote a poem in praise of Ibn Ezra. Perhaps this influenced Ramban to judge him favorably as an inadvertent heretic, which was a status that, according to the Ra'avad (Hilkhos Teshuvah 3:7), even great scholars fell into. 5- The Chida (Shem Ha-Gedolim, part 1, alef 89) quotes R. Binyamin Spinoza, a late eighteenth century rabbi, who deduces from Ramban's failure to argue against Ibn Ezra's radical suggestions that those comments must be late forgeries (interpolations?). Had Ramban seen them, he would surely have objected. In the end, once we determine that the commentary to Shir Ha-Shirim is misattributed, we can only speculate about Ramban's attitude toward Ibn Ezra. Maybe he agreed with R. Ezra of Gerona's condemnation or maybe he felt the belief was wrong but not heretical. Or maybe, as R. Naor suggested, he rejected the belief as heretical but not the person. (Republished from May '13) [1] On this disagreement, see R. Yonatan Kolatch, Masters of the Word, vol. 2 pp. 310-318. ------------------ J. C. Salomon May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late addition to the text. I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 1 08:03:13 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:03:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <70c7cc6f-c870-c610-b592-25a81940172f@sero.name> I find the entire idea that RABE's "secret of twelve" was a secret heresy to be without foundation, and think it more likely that this is wishful thinking by heretics who would like to find "a great tree" on which to hang their heresy. We don't know what the secret was, because it was a secret, but his comment on Vayishlach makes it unlikely to be what the "bible critics" claim it is. On Bereshis 12:6, he simply says: "If it is not so, then there is a secret here, and the intelligent person should be silent". On Bereshis 22:14, and Devarim 3:11 and 31:22 he makes no comment at all, and indeed there's nothing unusual to hint at, no reason to even suppose these pesukim might not have been written at the same time as what surrounds them. The "secret of the twelve" is in Devarim 1:1, on the words "Eleven days out of Chorev", which makes me think whatever this secret is relates to that, and perhaps to a mystical "twelfth day". It's there that he cryptically mentions these four pesukim, with no context or explanation; the theory that he was hinting at a deep secret heresy in his heart is therefore pure speculation and should be rejected. The Ramban's (or whoever wrote it) comment in Shir Hashirim only means that there existed such heretics in his day; there is not even the hint of a hint that RABE might have been among them. These are the same heretics who claimed him; there's no reason to suppose the Ramban agreed with that claim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sat Jun 2 20:49:06 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2018 23:49:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: >From R'Micha (Avodah V36n64): > When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? > We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. < If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; and "vaya'as kein Aharon." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 00:42:20 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 10:42:20 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua Message-ID: In last weeks parsha we have the Torah stating that Moshe's nevua was unique that Hashem spoke to him directly (see Rambam Yesodei Torah for the list of differences). However, I was bothered by the following question. A number of times the Torah writes Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe v'Aharon leimor where certain halachos are given over to both Moshe and Aharon. The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? In Behaalosecha it is clear that Aharon and Miriam dd not know that Moshe's nevua was different then theirs, yet, if Aharon heard these like a regular nevua as a vision not clearly then how did he not realize that Moshe got a clearer nevua then he did? The first thing Moshe did after getting halachos from Hashem was go over them with Aharon and his sons. Also, the pasuk says that Hashem called out to all 3, Moshe Aharon and Miriam to go out, and Rashi comments that it was one dibur something that a person cannot do. If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 01:54:52 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 11:54:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? Message-ID: At the beginning of Bamidbar the Meshech Chochma asks the following question. A Baal keri is prohibited from being in the machane leviya, if so how could the Leviim ever live with their wives (in the machane leviya) and become a baal keri? Ayen sham his answer. Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A Baal keri is prohibited from going there. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Jun 4 11:24:18 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:24:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> Message-ID: On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns >> beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a >> case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows >> money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din >> is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and >> Reuvain claims insolvency. >> Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an >> ongoing business for Pesach? [Zev Sero:] > Not at all, for two separate reasons. > First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones > property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a > going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and > continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected > to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. AIUI there was no change in the business other than the 'titular" ownership > Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get > away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently > made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of > the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that > the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he > still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity > the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the > Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that > he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So > none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not > an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own > chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, > and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that > CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to > "pierce" it in the name of equity. https://headlinesbook.podbean.com/mf/download/reyy6b/headlines_6-2-18.mp3 6/2/18 Owning Businesses in Halacha and Hashkafa: People who are making a difference- Freddy Friedman, Elchonon Schwartz, Rabbi Yosef Kushner, Nesanel Davis, Shimon Webster, Mr. Sol Werdiger The first half deals with a similar type of arrangement for nursing homes-so aiui you're saying it's up to the Rabbis to evaluate the "need" in each case to determine if haaramah is allowable? KT Joel Rich From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 13:46:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:46:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180604204625.GA25546@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:28:46AM -0400, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : : Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student ... : 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, : as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could : agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him : about Ibn Ezra. ... : J. C. Salomon : May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm : Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that : the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, : before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late : addition to the text. : I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that : certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might : have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate : extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight : verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. Except that the tell-tale idiom is "sod ha-12", not 8. From Devarim 1:1: ... And if you understand sod hasheneim asar... Pit stop: the standard text doesn't even say that, it says "(hasarim) [tz"l hashneim] asar". So there is a slight chance it doesn't even say 12. Back to the IE: ... also "Vayikhtov Moshe" (31:22), "VehaKenaani as Ba'aretz" (Bereishis 12:6), "Har H' Yeira'eh" (Bereishis 22:14), and also "arso eres barzel (Devarim 3:11), you will regonize the truth. If it does refer to the last 12 pesuqim (from Moshe going up Har Nevo), then there are 5 quotes in discussion. 4 refer to the future, likely quotes for someone to say were actually written later. But Og's iron bed? And besides, it's the last 8 pesuqim that amoraim argue how and if Moshe could have written them. Now, if Moshe couldn't write "and Moshe died", then it makes sense to argue that he couldn't write "and Moshe went up Har Nevo" if he never came back. But that is more conjecture, that this "12" is "12 pesuqim", and the last 12 pesuqim at that, and that it is related to chazal's discussion of last 8 pesuqim, and all this despite one of the quotes not having this "problem" of not being true when Moshe left us. And for all we know, the secret could be about prophecy. Even if all 5 were about the future, who knows what secret the IE posited to explain them? One of the parts of the Torah that is NOT in this list is the list of kings of Edom "lifnei melokh melekh liVnei Yisrael", Bereishis 36:31. On which the IE qrites: Some say that this parashah was written bederekh nevu'ah. And Yitzchaqi says in his book that this parashah was written in the days of Yehoshafat, and he explains the generations as he wished. This is why his name was called Yitzchaq -- kol hashomeia yitzachaq li. .. Vechalillah chalilah that the matter is as he said about the days of Yehoshafat. His book is worth burning... And he explains that the kings ran in rapid succession, this being warrior tribes of Edom. And the melekh Yisrael in the pasuq was Moshe, "vayhi bishurun Melekh. A lot of work if the IE was okay with later interpolations of narrative snippets of 12 pesuqim or less. In 2002, RGStudent reposed something from Cardozo at . See fn 50: Most enlightening is Spinoza's observation that some texts of the Torah, such as the ones in Genesis 12:6; 22:14, and Deuteronomy 1:2, must have been written many years after Moshe's death, since they reveal information that refers to latter days. Spinoza relies here on the famous Jewish commentator Ibn Ezra (1088-1167), who wrote that these verses were "mysteries" about "which the wise should be silent" (on Deuteronomy 1:2). The traditional understanding of Ibn Ezra, as also confirmed by the modern Jewish scholar Samuel David Luzzatto (ShaDaL) (1800-1865), is that these passages must be understood as prophetic and anticipating the future. .... However, in RGS's own essay on that web site writes: Also, phrases and even verses were added to the texts that perhaps even these prophets could not have written. For example, Ramban explains (Genesis 8:21) "G-d said in His heart" as meaning that this was only revealed to Moshe at the time of the writing of the Torah. See also Ralbag there and Moreh Nevuchim 1:29. Another case is Genesis 32:33, "Therefore the Children of Israel are not to eat the gid hanasheh." According to the Mishna and Gemara in Chullin 101b, as explained by Rashi, this verse was a later insertion by Moshe. See the Radak's commentary to this verse. It is possible that Ibn Ezra, in his "secrecy", believed that many more verses fall into this category and were inserted into pre-existing narrative by G-d to Moshe. His thesis there is that the Torah was redacted from pre-existing scrolls during the Exodus; that it was this redaction that was dictated to Moshe in Sinai. Since such megillos are named in a few places, it's a pretty hard thesis to totally dismiss. The only question is how much was already given in writing in texts like Seifer Milkhamos Hashem (cf Bamidbar 21:13). Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 14:21:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 17:21:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 11:49:06PM -0400, Michael Poppers via Avodah wrote: : If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two : recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; : and "vaya'as kein Aharon." But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. Y-mi Nedarim 9:4 (violna ed. 30b) has the famous machloqes between R' Aqiva and Ben Azai about whether the kelal gadol baTorah is "ve'havta lerei'akha" or "zeh seifer toledos adam". In the version in the introduction to the Ein Yaaqov, he quotes Ben Zoma, attributes Rav Akiva's opinion to Ben Nanas, and then adds a new opinion: Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi says: We have found a more inclusive verse than that, and it is, "The first lamb you shall sacrifice in the morning and the second lamb you shall sacrifice in the evening." Rabbi Ploni stood up and said: The halachah is like Ben Pazi as it is written, "As all that I show you, the structure of the Mishkan and all its vessels: so shall you do." That makes constancy kind of important. FWIW, here is how my discussion (ch 2. sec. 3) of that quote goes: There are two interesting implications to Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi's and Rabbi Ploni's words. First, Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi could be making the point that Rabbi Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov found in Ben Azzai's position -- the role of personal development. After all, there are a number of verses that discuss this offering; Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi chose a verse that discusses its constant and regular nature. In his opinion, this is the most important verse in the Torah -- even in his or our day, after the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash and there are no korbanos. Perhaps the point here is consistency in avodas Hashem in-and-of-itself, not limited to this one mitzvah. Just as service in the Mishkan has its schedule and routine, so too our observance must be a discipline with well-defined structure and consistency. Second, the anonymous rabbi endorses this view by quoting a verse about the Mishkan and its vessels' structure, their composition, not their service. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi statement is about something done in the Beis HaMikdash as part of its daily service, but the proof is about its structure. This rabbi is relating "so shall you do" not only to following the description of that structure Hashem gave us when building it but also to the discipline of the ritual within it. The discipline in avodas Hashem of the previous implication is a taken as fundamental part of what the building is. At least homiletically, we can say this is true of both microcosms -- not only the Mishkan, but also the human soul, as Rav Shimon ben Pazi is giving importance to structure and consistency even in our era, without a Mishkan or Beis HaMikdash. Discipline in avodas Hashem is not only part of the structure of what the Mishkan is, but also our own soul's structure. This homily would be consistent with Rav Shimon's statement ... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search micha at aishdas.org of a spiritual experience. You are a http://www.aishdas.org spiritual being immersed in a human Fax: (270) 514-1507 experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 15:06:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:06:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180604220616.GC25546@aishdas.org> On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Rn Toby Katz Avodah wrote: > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be > bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before > feeding their children. According the Tosafos (Yuma 77b) and the Yam Shel Shelomo (Chulin 8:31) there isn't any ru'ach ra'ah anymore. Unsurprizingly, the Rambam (Rotzeiach 12:5) doesn't mention ru'ach ra'ah when he discusses not putting food under your bed, his reason is "shema yipol bo davar hamaziq". If it is a modern and mundane issue, I would think ru'ach ra'ah is depression, not a physical illness. The day after Shaul learns he lost his throne, "vatilach ruach E-lokim ra'ah el Sha'ul". (Shemu'el I 18:9) On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:17:24PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Actually, you need to do both for neigl vasr, as you need to get rid of chatzitzos. AhS 161:1, MB s"q 7,10. So the question might be... What's the problem with chatzitzos? Can someone make an argument that it's about places where disease can hide? Then why haqpadah? I really don't know what to do with RASoloveitchik's suggestion that ru'ach ra'ah can be things like germs. If it's a saqanas nefashos thing, then pesaqim should indeed be more maqpidim about things like soap than about using a cup, koach gavra, etc... BUT... this is RAS. I am assuming he did indeed have an explanation. Keeping the discussion alive (and CC-ing R Harry Maryles) to see if we can get down to one. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water micha at aishdas.org that softens the potato, hardens the egg. http://www.aishdas.org It's not about the circumstance, Fax: (270) 514-1507 but rather what you are made of. From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Tue Jun 5 19:06:11 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 22:06:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. < Agreed, and both examples I mentioned are examples of doing, not knowing. The point is that not just "v'halachta bidrachav" but also that "v'halachta" in the path of the noted examples, that one should imitate paragons of *derech H'*. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 05:07:43 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah Message-ID: The article below gives many halachas that are applicable to situations where gentile workers are employed in one's home. IMO it is worth reading carefully. YL Click here to download "Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 6 10:49:54 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:49:54 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Why I support the private kashrut initiative of Tzohar rabbis Message-ID: <628e074c-450f-a464-ed95-2eca5d3ed825@zahav.net.il> Placing this article in Avodah because Rav Melamed uses the model of the 70 elders to show how differences in community leadership should be handled. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22250 A few critical paragraphs: But when groups and institutions try to impose their opinion on members of another circle, and abolish the status of their rabbis (and to boycott them from becoming rabbinical judges and rabbis) we are no longer speaking of a situation where the rabbis of Tzohar should also establish a kashrut organization, but rather a situation in which it is almost obligatory for them to establish one, just like other accepted rabbinic organizations, in order to give halachic and Torah expression to their part in the Torah. If they do not, then they are similar to a prophet who suppresses his prophecy, or as our Sages said: ? Yea, all her slain are a mighty host? ? this refers to a disciple who has attained the qualification to decide questions of law, and does not decide them? (Sotah 22a). How Does a Difficult Dispute Develop? At first, there is an argument over a focused halakhic issue. However, when an agreement is not reached, instead of agreeing to disagree and continuing to respect each other, one side thinks that the other has no authority to retain his position, because, essentially, his position is inferior, since he belongs to a liberal circle, or his position differs from that of most rabbis. Then, that same party departs from the particular halakhic issue they have debated, and moves on to a more acute arena, in which the main argument is that the rabbi against whom he is arguing with is not authorized to express a halachic position, for in any case, who appointed him to be a rabbi who can express a position at all? Since this argument is not convincing enough, and the rabbi who is being attacked remains in his position, consequently we are now moving over to a dispute of a different magnitude ? since we are no longer dealing with a person who rules on a matter without authority, but with a person who undermines the foundations of authority as a whole, and thus, it is compulsory to wage an all-out war against him? From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 11:31:07 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 18:31:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: Please see the article at Eretz Yisroel, Zionism,and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH This article is from The Jewish Observer Vol. 23 No. 6 September 1990/Adar 5751 and is available at https://goo.gl/LNRpZZ YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 7 01:06:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 08:06:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra Message-ID: The letter below appears on pages 113 - 114 of this week's Flatbush Jewish Journal. It is not clear to me that all FJJ readers appreciate the gadlus of Rabbi Shamshon Raphael Hirsch when it came to Torah. Indeed, last week MW (whomever this may be) referred to RSRH as "Reb Shamshon Refoel Hirsch" rather than as Rabbi or Rav or even Rabbiner. Therefore, I feel that I should refer FJJ readers to Rav Yaakov Perlow's article Rav S. R. Hirsch - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra that appears in The World of Hirschian Teachings, An Anthology on the Hirsch Chumash and the Hashkafa of Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, Published for the Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer Foundation, Feldheim, 2008. Reading this article will give one a true understanding of how great a Torah scholar RSRH was. Moreover, the following is from page 102 of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, Architect of Torah Judaism for the Modern World by Rabbi Eliyahu Meir Klugman. We also have the assessment of the K?sav Sofer, Rabbi Avrohom Shmuel Binyamin Sofer, Rabbi of Pressburg and leader of Hungarian Jewry. The K'sav Sofer first met Rabbi Hirsch in Vienna, not long after the latter assumed his post in Nikolsburg. On the first Shabbos after his return to Pressburg, a large crowd came to his home for Shalosh Seudos in order to hear his observations about the new Chief Rabbi. Their curiosity was understandable, since, as followers of the Chasam Sofer, the K'sav Sofer's father, they harbored deep suspicions of anyone versed in secular studies, which they considered a potent danger to the Jewish people. The K?sav Sofer described his meeting with Rabbi Hirsch in the following terms: ?We spoke at length on Torah subjects with the new ?Rosh Medinah? and whatever topic we discussed, his reply showed that he had Shas and poskim on his fingertips. We, the rabbonim of Hungary, have to consider ourselves very fortunate that he holds us to be his superiors as scholars, for if he were only aware of the extent of his own scholarship, we would have no rest from him.? Finally, a talmud muvhak of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, ZT"L, told me that Rav Hunter once told him that anything that Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch wrote is Kodesh Kedoshim. Based on this It should be clear to all that what RSRH wrote about one going to see the wonders of nature is to be taken very seriously. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 7 06:02:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 13:02:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? Message-ID: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, how else might the desired result be accomplished? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 7 07:48:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 10:48:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: [VBM] Chassidic Service of God (continued) Message-ID: <20180607144830.GA19716@aishdas.org> This is where our compartmentalization into camps holds us back. The Piaseczner Rebbe (the "Aish Qodesh", R' Kalonymous Kalman Shapiro zt"l Hy"d) is largely reinventing Mussar. Admittedly his goals are different; the elements of the ideal Jew that are emphasized in Chassidus and Mussar differ. But he procedes to build and advocate from scratch a toolset for somthing that another tenu'ah invested the lion's share of their effort on -- self-awareness. To quote RYGB's loose translation of REEDessler (MmE vol 5 pp 35-39), cut-n-pasted from : In our times: The qualities of "Emet" that personified the Ba'alei Mussar [Mussar Masters] are already extinct. We no longer find individuals whose hearts are full with profound truth, with a strong and true sense of Cheshbon HaNefesh [complete and rigorous reckoning of one's spiritual status and progress]... Contemporary Chassidus lacks the component that was once at its core: Avodas Hashem with dveykus... For today's era, there remain only one alternative: To take up everything and anything that can be of aid to Yahadus; the wisdom of both Mussar and Chassidus together. Perhaps together they can inspire us to great understandings and illuminations. Perhaps together they might open within us reverence and appreciation of our holy Torah. Perhaps the arousal of Mussar can bring us to a little Chassidic hislahavus. And perhaps the hislahavus will somewhat fortify one for a Cheshbon HaNefesh. Perhaps through all these means together we may merit to ascend in spirituality and strengthen our position as Bnei Torah [adherents of a Torah centered lifestyle] with an intensified Judaism. May G-d assist us to attain all this! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight, micha at aishdas.org and he wants to sleep well that night too." http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok Fax: (270) 514-1507 Yeshivat Har Etzion PHILOSOPHY > Great Thinkers > The Piaseczner Rebbe > Shiur #24: Chassidic Service of God (continued) Dr. Ron Wacks Ways of Achieving Hitragshut (continued) The Importance of Self-Awareness One of the primary keys for entering the gates of inner service is self-awareness. Remarkably, although a person is generally concerned for his own wellbeing, he is not always aware of what is happening in his own inner world. His psyche is in constant movement, expressing its will and its aspirations, but even though the person may sense something going on, he is not equipped to interpret it and to take the appropriate steps: The hiddenness and imperceptibility of what is happening inside him distances a person greatly from himself. He is unfamiliar with himself and ignorant of what goes on inside him. Even the psyche of the simplest person never ceases its restlessness and writhing, crying out in supplication over its lowliness, and over all the blows and trials and tribulations that he causes it through his foolish actions, speech, and thoughts. The fact that he senses none of this is because he gives no thought to listening to this tempestuous wretch.[1] A person naturally tends to occupy himself with matters external to himself; he is not attentive to his own inner workings. It is easier to engage with the outside world, with its affairs of greater and lesser importance, than it is to listen inwardly. Even when he detects inner movement, he is unable to decode and make sense of it: For that is the way of man: he always strive for that which is extraneous to himself, the affairs of the world, both those that are vital and those that are not. He interests himself in what happens at the end of the world, but he pays no heed to his own psyche, and does not listen and give attention to the business that is within him. Or he may sense it, but since even at the moment that he senses it his desire, his attention, and his thought are turned to the lowly muck of this world, he hears the moaning and its voice only weakly. This may be compared to a person who is asleep and a mosquito bites him on his forehead. If he is a merchant, he dreams that a bag of his merchandise has fallen on his forehead and struck him; if he is a tailor, he dreams that his needle has pricked his forehead, etc. Each individual perceives his inner workings in the guise of his own dreams.[2] The psyche expresses its longings in different forms, but often a person is unable to decode any of these spiritual needs, such as a desire for teshuva and the fear of God. Sometimes, when he feels something oppressive inside him, he goes to the refrigerator and takes out a bottle of sweet drink and some cake, or he tries to distract himself by joking with his friends. Often, a person makes the mistake of thinking that it is his body that is suffering physical hunger, and he believes that he can satiate it by filling his stomach - while in fact it is his psyche that is starved and crying out in distress: Sometimes the psyche of a Jew is animated by regret, teshuva, submission, fear of God, and so on, and the person feels some sort of movement and restlessness within himself, but he has no idea what the problem is. He thinks he may be hungry, or thirsty, or in need of some wine and wafers, or he may think that he has fallen into melancholy, and in order to lift his spirits he chatters playfully with the members of his household, or goes over to a friend to joke and engage in lashon ha-ra, gossip, foolishness, etc.[3] R. Kalonymus's grandfather, author of Maor Va-Shemesh, also addresses the connection between an unhappy psyche and stuffing oneself with food. Attention should be paid to the chain of wrongdoing: Bnei Yisrael complain, convincing themselves of how bad things are for them. This leads them to melancholy, which gives rise to the craving for meat and the punishment that follows: "And when the people complained, it displeased the Lord" - This means that they fell into melancholy... and the Lord's fire burned amongst them, for black bile is detestable and abhorrent, for it is a tinge of idolatry... and for this reason they were punished. And Moshe prayed, and the fire subsided, but it continued through their melancholy, for they felt a lusting and they said, "Who will feed us meat?" For as we explained, the lust for food is drawn from black bile... Therefore, one has to distance oneself far from melancholy, for it brings a person to all sorts of sins. And despondence begins with a growing desire to eat, as we see when a person is mired in black bile, heaven forfend, he eats with lust, ravenously, and very quickly.[4] When a person tries to "quiet" his inner distress with sweets and snacks, not only has his psyche not received what it really wanted, but it is greatly pained by his failure to understand its true needs. Sometimes, after a person continually ignores and steamrolls his inner voice, it simply grows silent: Sometimes, after all of these actions which he has done, he still feels inner discomfort, since with these worthless medicines not only has he not cured the sores of his psyche, nor given it relief from the blows that he has administered to it, but he has in fact added further injury and assault. But sometimes it happens that after these misguided actions he actually feels better, and his spirit is quieted within him, because the blows and injuries and sores that he has added through his actions have rendered his psyche unconscious, or he has piled mounds of dirt and refuse over it to the point that it is completely hidden. Then he will no longer hear even the slightest peep out of it - and he can relax.[5] The psyche also transmits signals of joy, not only distress. A person often misses these signals too, failing to give them expression. For example, when a person fulfills a mitzva or rejoices in his prayer, and his psyche awakens with joy and hitragshut, he will fail to notice this - both because of his general insensitivity to his inner world and because his attention is oriented elsewhere. R. Kalonymus argues that the way to achieve hitragshut and hitlahavut is not by "importing" new feelings from outside of oneself; they are already to be found inside him. However, they must be given more powerful expression and allowed to effect a greater influence on his consciousness: It is not new excitements that you need to seek, nor a heavenly-initiated awakening. First and foremost, the work is required of you yourself, for everything exists within you. You are capable of hitragshut, and you are a person who is able to attain fervor; you simply need to try to get to know yourself and what is going on inside. Your psyche is full of signals, shouts, and supplications, and all you need to do is to provide space within yourself within which it can be revealed and strengthened. Then you will come to know and feel your natural hitragshut, with no need to garb yourself and your needs.[6] R. Kalonymus not only demands self-awareness, but also explains how to attain it. A person has to learn to listen to his own inner world and ask himself questions: Is my psyche happy, and if so, about what? Is my psyche sad, and if so, why? What are the inner feelings that accompany me in this situation, and how did they come about? At first, this work will involve only the major movements of the psyche. It is not advisable to start with weaker movements, since, owing to their delicate nature, their meaning is not always clear. Attention should therefore be paid to the stronger signals, and when one notices them, he should "provide space" and allow them expression. This is facilitated through paying attention to them, strengthening them, and allowing them to reveal themselves through our power of imagination. We will now elaborate on each of these tools individually. (To be continued) Translated by Kaeren Fish _______________________ [1] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 29. [2] Ibid., p. 40. [3] Ibid. [4] R. Kalman Kalonymus Epstein Ha-Levi, Maor Va-Shemesh (Jerusalem, 5748), Parashat Beha'alotekha. [5] Ibid., p. 29. [6] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 30. Copyright ? 1997-2017 by Yeshivat Har Etzion From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 7 21:17:05 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 06:17:05 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <950f4b82-36d2-0f57-abef-73c113119730@zahav.net.il> RSH's third objection to Rav Kalisher is the key one (RSH couldn't imagine that non-religious Jews could be the vehicle for redemption). Once you say that "I can't imagine. . . " than everything else has to fit into that paradigm that you just set up for yourself. The author's conclusions are also strange. To mention all the benefits and great things that have come from the state but to still look at it as if it is a treif piece of meat boggles my mind. I would also add that if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - he should move here. Like I always tell my Reform Jewish friends - If you move here, you get a vote which is 10,000 times (at least) more important than Facebook posts. Ben From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 07:09:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:09:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi Sacks on 'The Great Partnership' Message-ID: <20180608140928.GA11777@aishdas.org> R/L J Sacks on Science and Religion. In short: It's Gould's notion of non-overlapping magesteria -- they can't contradict, the discuss different topics. But RJS says it so well, giving the idea emotional "punch". And sometimes even maaminim need a reminder that the point of religion isn't to fill in the gaps in our scientific knowledge. (I know I do.) Our rishonim offer answers to the question of why an Omnicient and Omnipotent G-d would create a universe that requires His intervention once in a while. His Wisdom inheres more in the things science CAN explain than in the miracles that even in principle can't be studied scientifically. (Pace the Ralbag, whose actual position on nissim is a longer discussion.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LltoUg_WL2k That said, I think this is overstatement, as they do overlap when it comes to discussion of origins. I would instead posit "barely overlapping magesteria" -- they only overlap at the fringes, where no open question can threaten my trust in either. Yahadus explains the "why?" of life to well to question, and many scientific theories do too well at the "how?" I have a question about where they seem to contradict? Nu nu. Scientists believe that quantum gravity has an answer, and don't expect either QM or Relativity to be overturned just because we have a question where their fringes overlap. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 09:19:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 12:19:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? Message-ID: From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) apply only to male Kohanim, or does it also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V?kidashto applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K?Hilchaso 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash. This description applies only to men and not to women. Although the daughters of Kohanim are entitled to eat Teruma and may eat from certain Korbanos that are designated only for Kohanim, they are not eligible to serve in the Beis Hamikdash. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:48:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:48:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? Message-ID: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> I wanted to talk this out here, as this se'if in the AhS appears to use the kind of reasoning that is exactly what I argued for decades with C rabbis (and more recently with one or two of the more innovative OO rabbis) isn't how halakhah should be done. AhS CM 89:2 discusses the reason for a taqanah that if a sakhir and the BhB disagree about whether the sakhir had been paid, the sakhir can make a shevu'ah binqitas cheifetz, and the employer would have to pay. Normally, f two sides make conflicting unsupported claims, the rule would be that the defendent (the nitba) would make a shevu'as heises (which is a less demanding shevu'ah than the shevu'ah BNC) and not pay. A taqanah beyond the usual hamotzi meichaveiro alav hara'ayah to disuade liars. The stated reason for treating the sakhir as a special case is that many times the employer has many workers, and it's more likely he wouldn't remember the details of who he paid what than the employee not remembering the details of getting paid. However, the AhS continues, this doesn't explain why chazal worried more about employers than salespeople. Someone who has a lot of customers is prone to the same parallel likelihood of confusion. So, he explains that the iqar haataqanah is because employees have a lot riding on getting paid, "nosei es nafsho lehachayos nafesho venefesh benei beiso, chasu chaza"l alav..." And therefore even if it's a boss who has only one employee, and he isn't overhwlmed keeping track of vay, lo chilqu chakhamim. Doesn't this sound bad? Chazal really had some social end in mind, so they invented some pro forma excuse to justify their conclusion. I guess that in dinei mamunus, Chazal can do whatever they want -- hefqer BD hefqer -- and therefore on /that/ ground they can force payment of a worker for the sake of social justice. But that's not what the AhS invokes. Thoughts? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 12:15:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:15:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din but a takanah. By definition, takanos are ends-driven; they're made not because this is what we believe Hashem ordered, nor to avoid some issur, but in order to achieve some desirable goal. The same applies to the usual shvuas hesses that Chazal instituted; it's to achieve the two desirable goals of creating a disincentive for defendants to lie, and of assuring the plaintiff that the courts are not biased against him. So I see no problem with Chazal making a special takana for the benefit of employees, since the Torah itself gives their needs priority, and gives the reason that employees often risk their lives for their livelihood. And just as the Torah does not distinguish between those employees who actually do risk their lives and those who sit on comfortable chairs in air-conditions offices and risk nothing more serious than a paper-cut or RSI, Chazal saw no need to distinguish between a lone employee and one among many. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 12:53:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:53:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:35PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din : but a takanah... Not just a taqanah, a taqanah that needs an justification for why they're not following the din deOraisa. And so simply saying "it's a taqanah" doesn't really satisfy me. DeOraisa, the employer would have the right to not pay the money. The usual taqanah for conflicting claims would require he make a shevu'as heises first. Here, we're putting the power to extract the employer's money despite the deOraisa. Had the taqanah not violated the deOraisa, but went "beyond" it, I wouldn't have asked. And as I said, had the AhS invokved hefqer BD hefqer, we would need no excuse for how Chazal can move money despite the deOraisa. But he doesn't. Instead, he says they came up with a justication that isn't real. That opens a whole pandora's box of ascribing hidden "social justice" reasons for legislation that has an explicit explanation already given. And it makes it sound like legal mechanism can indeed be nothing more than a hopp to jump through, rather than justification in-and-of itself. So my question isn't "how did they make this taqanah", but "how can you claim that they wanted to ignore a deOraisa because they thought they had a 'more moral' alternative, and then just found some way to legally justify it?" :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the micha at aishdas.org second time and as if you had acted the first http://www.aishdas.org time as wrongly as you are about to act now! Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 12:15:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 15:15:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:52 PM 6/8/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's >OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: >: A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto >: applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso >: 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he >: offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... > >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to be "honored" like all other Kohanim? I recall that there was a Kohein when I lived in Elizabeth who had a deformed hand. However, I think that he still got the first aliya. However, I do not think that he duchened. He left the shul right before duchening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:52:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:52:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: : A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto : applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso : 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he : offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 13:21:23 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:21:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:09PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to : >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. : : If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability : that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to : be "honored" like all other Kohanim? ... I think aliyah laTorah is different than duchaning because it's not about the kohein as a kohein, but mishum tiqun olam. So, we divy out the kavod according to strict rules, so that society runs smoother. Not based on qedushah. Maybe it's even kavod vs qedushah. Tangents: BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not a kofer. There is also a separate discussion is someone who is wheelchair bound can get an aliyah at all, or if the chiyuv for an oleh to stand is me'aqiev. From the pasuq "amod imadi". The accepted pesaq really only permits calling someone who can't stand if their reason for not being able to stand is obvious or known to the tzibbur. IOW, oneis Rachamanah patrei for his non-standing, but the kavod haTorah is an issue if it looks bad to the tzibbur. I didn't spend the same time researching this tangent, as you can tell by the lack of a single source. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe micha at aishdas.org you can be certain of improving, http://www.aishdas.org and that's your own self. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aldous Huxley From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:41:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9e545852-4e47-2e1a-0f1b-f6fe418d3daa@sero.name> I don't think it's accurate to say that mid'oraisa he doesn't have to pay. If he really does owe the money then mid'oraisa he has to pay, and has an *additional* obligation to pay this debt over all other debts, because of "lo solin". The only question is whether he really owes the money or not. Normally, the way the Torah left things, we can't be sure he owes it, so we can't *force* him to pay; we have to leave it up to his own conscience. But his obligation (or lack thereof) is unchanged. Now Chazal come along and meddle with that setup, for social reasons. In order to discourage defendants from falsely denying their liability, and in order to give plaintiffs a sense that justice has been done, they instituted the sh'vuas hesses. If you don't swear we'll make you pay, despite the Torah saying we can't. According to you, how could they do that? Here Chazal went a bit further: We can't make the defendant swear, because he may honestly have forgotten or got confused, so we tell the plaintiff that if he's willing to swear, not just hesses but binkitas chefetz, then we'll believe him, and once we do believe him the *Torah* says the defendant must pay. Comes the Aruch Hashulchan and asks, what about the exceptional case where the defendant is not confused and unlikely to have forgotten? And what about other defendants who may be confused or have forgotten? And he answers "lo plug" because there's a deeper reason for the takana here. It's not just that we're worried about the defendant inadvertently making a false oath; if he's really worried about that let him pay up, but if he's not worried we won't be. The deeper reason why we've given the plaintiff a slight edge here is that we're emulating the Torah itself, which made the "takana" of "lo solin" for the explicit reason that employees *in general* risk their lives and so deserve extra protection. And just as it did not distinguish between employees, so we won't either. I have a bigger question, though: This takana seems to be biased *against* the employee whose employer is a yerei shamayim. Without the takana the employer would decline to swear because he can't be sure he's right, and he'd have to pay. Now we say no, you don't have to pay until we test the employee, more rigorously than we were going to test you. So mah ho'ilu chachamim betakanasam? It seems as if our real concern here is not for the employee's welfare but to protect honest employers from employee fraud! That's surely a worthy goal, but opposite to the one the AhS posits. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 9 20:19:14 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2018 23:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Korach "There's Good Even In The Worst Of Us" Message-ID: The rabbis saw a hint that while the Korah rebellion ended so tragically, it had the seeds of redemption. In the Shabbos Maariv we recite Psalm 92: Tzaddik katamar yifrach, the righteous will blossom like the palm tree (v. 13). The last letters of those 3 Hebrew words (kuf, reish, chet) spell Korah. Although blinded by anger and envy, Korah's egalitarian vision will indeed be established. Then the "righteous will blossom like the palm tree, and grow mighty like a cedar in Lebanon, planted in the house of the Lord." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:47:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <36fd05b2-e021-0e98-cdcc-6e84353eb84b@sero.name> On 08/06/18 16:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. > Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the > first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not > a kofer. This is not just RMF, it's the plain halacha. A kohen who eats treif and breaks shabbos can even duchen, let alone get the first aliyah. Even if he's living with a nochris he can still duchen. But the moment she converts and marries him he can no longer duchen. And if he can't duchen then of course he can't get the first aliya either. (The baal mum is different. The only reason he can't duchen is because the deformity is in his hand; if it were anywhere else he could duchen. And even so he still has a *chiyuv* to duchen, which is why he has to leave before retzei in order to avoid it. A cohen married to a grusha doesn't have to leave, since he is a temporary chalal and thus has no chiyuv.) It seems to me that "vekidashto" *does* apply to the wives of cohanim, because for purposes of kavod the general rule is ishto kegufo, and a wife who marries up gets her husband's social status. As for his unmarried daughters, it seems to me that they too are included in their father's status for this purpose, since they are called by his name. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 11 08:07:53 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:07:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. There are two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Should the Kohanim be asked to leave the shul during Kriyas HaTorah, so that both Yisroelim will receive aliyos? A. The Mishnah Berurah (135:9) writes that a Kohen may not give up his aliyah because we are obligated to honor a Kohen. This is the case not only on Shabbos or Yom Tov when the Shuls are crowded and it will be noticeable, but even on a Monday or Thursday when it is less obvious. However, many poskim, including Igros Moshe (OC 3:20), write that if there is a pressing need on a Monday or Thursday, a Kohen may be mochel (forgo) his kovod and give up his right to the first aliyah. In such a situation, the Kohen exits the Shul before the Torah reading so as not to cast any doubts on his lineage. In contrast, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt?l held that it is not proper for a Kohen to relinquish his aliyah. Aside from the issue of the Kohen being mochel (forgoing) the honor of receiving the first aliyah, there will also be a deficiency in the Kriyas HaTorah itself. The Gemara (Megilla 21b) states that the three aliyos on Monday and Thursday and on Shabbos Mincha were instituted to correspond to the three categories of Jews: Kohanim, Levi?im and Yisroelim. If a Kohen is not called up for an aliyah, the Kriyas HaTorah is lacking this kiyum (fulfillment) of reflecting the three categories of Jews. Therefore, one should not ask a Kohen to forgo his aliyah, since this would diminish the fulfillment of the mitzvah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Jun 11 19:53:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:23:36 +0930 Subject: [Avodah] Kashrus - Wooden Sticks and Feathers Message-ID: If a wooden stick is used to stir a hot pot of non-K meat, it becomes non-K. It will in turn, render a pot of hot Kosher food non-K, if it is used, whilst fresh, to stir that pot. But, wood is not a food. May one eat the shavings of that wooden stick? Probably yes. Hog hair is not a food and it cannot be deemed to be non-K. Therefore one may sprinkle hog hair on ones food, or cook it in ones soup. Does it get worse if the hog hair is first cooked in a pot of non-K meat? Probably yes. This is an issue faced today by Kashrus agencies regarding food ingredients/additives that are extracted from non-foods, like bird feathers. In order to facilitate plucking, the dead, non-Shechted birds have been plunged into a tank of boiling water. Thus the feathers have absorbed the non-K taste of the birds. Although the feathers are dissolved in acids in order to extract what will be used as food additives, this consideration is not accepted regarding gelatine since gelatine is a 'food' at the conclusion of its processing, and it is similarly not accepted by the Kashrus agencies for feathers. Some suggest that there is a difference between the two. Gelatine is worse because it is extracted from the non-K item itself i.e. the skin and bones, whereas the non-K absorbed in the feathers, is not the source of the extracted food/additive which are derived exclusively from the feathers that are a non-food. Therefore, even though skin and bones do become inedible during their processing, this is just a temporary state, generated by acids and alkali, which are removed from the finished product and the finished product is essentially still the same skin and bones. Whereas the product extracted from feathers is entirely disassociated with the absorbed non-K flavour and is therefore K. Nevertheless, a well known Rav argues that in any case where the chemical is removed, the product returns to its non-K status, even in the case of feathers. It will permitted only if the chemical remains but is camouflaged by other additives. Therefore, feathers and what is derived from them remain prohibited because whatever chemicals are used to process and extract the foods/additives, are removed. Is it possible that the foods/additives extracted from the feathers are permitted because all, or almost all of the absorbed non-K flavour is removed - in other words, just as we can Kasher our wooden stick, so too we can deem the feathers to have been Kashered? Now if we were to actually Kasher the feathers or the wooden stick, we require 60 times the volume of the stick. For example, a 500g stick requires 30 litres [500gX60=30,000g] and 3 tonnes of feathers would require [3,000litresX60=500,000 litres] which we obviously dont have in the normal processing. Now the only reason we cannot Kasher in less than 60 is ChaNaN [ChaTiCha NaAsis Neveilah] This means, Kashering is not a process of dilution of the prohibited component that is absorbed until it is less that 1:60, in which case we could immerse the non-K spoon or feathers in 100 small pots of boiling water and each dip would further dilute the concentration of the absorbed Issur Kasheing is rather a process that MUST revoke the prohibited status. If it is not revoked - i.e. it is immersed in a pot that does not have more than 60, then EVERYTHING becomes non-K and the spoon is just as non-K as it was before it was immersed. In other words ChaNaN applies to Kelim. And yet the Kosher agencies permit the additives extracted from non-K feathers because the feathers are not food but a Keli, and are therefore not limited by ChaNaN. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Jun 11 11:09:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:09:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:19 PM 6/11/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would also add that >if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >he should move here. Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who come here collecting for all sorts of things? What would they do if there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious community of Jews in the US? Indeed, how many religious Jews living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things. Is this not a huge mitzva? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 11 20:48:41 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 05:48:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <4a055873-1dcb-8b0f-2b31-69cec4cbdb81@zahav.net.il> 1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. 2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - what does that mean? Ben On 6/11/2018 8:09 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the > frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who > come here collecting for all sorts of things?? What would they do if > there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious > community of Jews in the US?? (1) Indeed, how many religious Jews > living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things.? Is > this not a huge mitzva? (2) > > YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 12 05:36:49 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah Message-ID: Please see the article at Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah by Dr. Leo Levi This article appeared in the December 1988 issue of the Jewish Observer which is available at https://goo.gl/9JUkt4 YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 11:25:42 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:25:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? In-Reply-To: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <10180612182542.GA32068@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 01:27:43PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a : Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) : but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose... However, when fundraising, pidyon shevuyim comes first, even after the funds were raised and the building materials bought for the not-yet-existent shul. SA YD 252:1. And the Tur says this is the only mitzvah we may sell those building supplies for. : 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities : and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent : in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? Is this distinction more than semantic? You are asking whether the "other priorities" are outside the label "tzedaqah" and therefore "other halakhot", or within the label, and therefore tzedaqah's priorities would be "multivariate". But the word "tzedaqah" has multiple usages. For example, in the sense we have been using it, we've been including pidyon shevuyim and binyan bhk"n. But it could be used to refer to supplying the poor with their needs exclusively. Or to mean their needs and dei machsero. Etc... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. micha at aishdas.org I awoke and found that life was duty. http://www.aishdas.org I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:31:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 10:42:20AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like : Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem : spoke to both? ... : If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would : seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply : they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. Like "shamor vezakhor bedibur echad"? There is no proof they all heard the same thing, never mind in the same way. But that's not where I wanted to go. If we take the Rambam's approach to the uniqueness of Moshe's nevu'ah, then the difference isn't in the "Dibbur" (which didn't actually involve heard words, leshitaso). It's in the shomeia'. Moshe's seikhel was able to accept the nevu'ah unmediated. Others, the same message could only be received via koach hadimyon so that it reaches the navi's conscious mind cloaked in visions and metaphoric sensations. So, if Hashem did make one dibbur to both, Moshe would still receive it Peh-el-peh and Aharon would experience the revelation as a prophetic vision. OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then we are left with two possibilities: - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, and passing Torah down the generations, etc... - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording the kelal, there could be others. There are other potential exceptions, most enigmatically Bil'am (Yalqut Shim'oni 966) on the very pasuq that describes Moshe's nevu'ah as being "Panim al panim" -- "velo qam navi od beYisrael keMoshe", but among the other nations, there was Bil'am. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that micha at aishdas.org a person can change their future http://www.aishdas.org by merely changing their attitude. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:39:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:39:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? In-Reply-To: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180612203937.GB20060@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 01:02:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 : minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority : of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to : reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish : the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, : how else might the desired result be accomplished? Through unofficial norms. It wasn't all that long ago (at most a couple of decades) when speed was left to the chazan watching the rav (or the chazan himself, if the rav is at another minyan), and the norms of the minyan set the chazan's pace without a watch and often without conscious thought. But then, even in those days people were coming late. I think you're dealing with a misdiagnosis. To my mind, the only real way to get people to come on time and to stay for davening and not spend the time learning with breaks for prayer is to offer programming that helps people relate to davening. If you don't cure the problem of boredum, people will come late regardless of the scheduling system, and find excuses to step out, whether physically or mentally. I would suggest the minyan in question explore in that direction, rather than worry about how Yishtabach time is determined. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. micha at aishdas.org - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 12 14:24:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 17:24:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> References: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <233e14ea-9b86-d3dc-f8fc-2d8bb4c8c50c@sero.name> On 12/06/18 16:31, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part > of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah > itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, > and passing Torah down the generations, etc... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording > the kelal, there could be others. Other possibilities: * Moshe told Yehoshua what he should write the next day. * The Rambam says that after a navi's vision a mal'ach explains it to him. I see no reason why the mal'ach in Yehoshua's vision could not have told him exactly what he should write. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Wed Jun 13 06:07:13 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:07:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW SHOULD COME FROM THE LETTER Message-ID: <9D3675F5-16E2-4542-A632-D76A033B1BCE@cox.net> There?s the story of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi who, when studying Torah, heard the crying of his infant grandson. The elder rebbe rose from his studying and soothed the baby to sleep. Meanwhile, his son, the boy?s father, was too involved in his study to hear the baby cry. When R. Zalman noticed his son?s lack of involvement, he proclaimed: ?If someone is studying Torah and fails to hear the cry of a baby, there is something very wrong with his learning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 13 12:29:17 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 21:29:17 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Perhaps there are several aspects of nevuah. One is the hearing, which Moshe did better. Another is the experience itself.? Here, it doesn't matter if Moshe's experience was "better" than Aaron's and in fact the word better doesn't apply. Aaron experienced this totality called nevuah and he did it his way. After doing that, he isn't the same person, or the same cohen. The same would apply to the hundreds of thousands of people who experienced nevuah but didn't have anything recorded. They became different people, and their avodat Hashem was completely upgraded as a result of the experience. Ben On 6/3/2018 9:42 AM, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was > the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 13 12:51:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:51:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah Message-ID: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> >From your friendly neighborhood clipping service. Taken from , with transliteration added for Avodah digest purposes. R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" of "Torah lishmah" means. I intend to reply, once I have time to collect a mar'eh maqom or two. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Tvunah in English Beit Midrash for Birurei Halachah Binyan Zion Under the Leadership of Maran HaRav Asher Weiss Shlita Learning Torah L'Shma Introductory Note Our Sages[1] have greatly commended one who learns Torah Lishmo -- literally, for its own sake.[2] Many times in the Talmud [Pesachim 50b, Nazir 23b, Horiyos 10b, Sotah 22b, Sotah 47a, Sanhedrin 105b, Erchin 16b] they have stated that one should always learn Torah, even if it not Lishmo, for through this one will eventually reach Lishmo. The goal, though, is total Lishmo. Two questions have to be dealt with: Firstly, is there anything negative or positive if one enjoys one's learning? Secondly, what precisely is Torah Lishmoh? Position One -- Enjoyment Is Not Ideal The Agrah D'Kallah[3] states that the disciples of the Ba'al Shem Tov asked their master if there is a problem if one enjoys learning Torah. He answered that since this is the very nature of Torah, as is written in Tehillim[4], "the statutes of Hashem are straight, [they] gladden the heart," Hashem will not act unfairly towards a person[5] and punish him for having had such enjoyment. This statement seems clear that the ultimate aim would be not to derive any enjoyment from one's learning. A similar sentiment seems to have been echoed by Rav Chaim Volozhiner. He seems to writes[6] that one who enjoys his learning does not commit a sin.[7] On the other hand, the Eglei Tal[8] writes that he has heard some people make a grave mistake, thinking that the ideal is for one to learn without enjoyment. He argues vehemently that one must love and enjoy one's learning. The one whom the Eglei Tal was arguing with was the Yismach Yisrael. He writes[9] that the true learning of Torah is only when one learns with no intention of any enjoyment at all. My feeling is that there is room for both the position of the Eglei Tal and that of the Yismach Yisrael to be correct. On one hand, Hashem wants us to enjoy His Torah, and, as we shall discuss in length soon, it is the proper way for one to study Torah. However, there are many instances where one does not enjoy learning, either because one has had a bad day, or because it is a piece of material which really does not grab his interest. In such a case, one needs to recall the words of the Yismach Yisroel that one needs to study Torah even if one does not have any enjoyment. Position Two -- Enjoyment Is Ideal In my opinion, it seems clear from many Rishonim that enjoyment and pleasure in one's learning is an integral part of the process of Torah study. Firstly, the Mishnah in Avos[10] states that when one studies Torah one needs to know in front of Whom one toils. Rabbeinu Yonah[11] explains that just as the Torah was the plaything of Hashem[12], so to speak, before the creation of the world, so too one's Torah should be one's own plaything. This seems to state clearly that deriving pleasure for Torah study is an ideal. Secondly, the general rule regarding commandments is that they were not given for pleasure[13], and therefore the pleasure of having fulfilled a commandment is not Halachikally considered pleasure. For example, if one took a vow not to derive pleasure from one's fellow, one's fellow may still blow the Shofar on his behalf, since the mere fact that one's fellow is enabling the fulfilment of one's commandment is not considered pleasure.[14] However, regarding the commandment of Torah study, Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar writes[15] that the essence of the commandment is to enjoy one's learning. Therefore, says Rabbeinu Avraham, if one forbade one's fellow from using one's Torah scroll, one's fellow may not use it. Again, this is a clear statement that enjoying one's learning is ideal. [A note of explanation is in order. It is difficult to understand how Rabbeinu Avraham can state that enjoyment is the essence of learning Torah. It is understandable how it is an integral part -- but to be the essence? I think his intent is as follows. The Shulchan Oruch HaRav[16] argues that there are two separate commandments of learning Torah. One is to study the Torah, and the other is to know the Torah. In my opinion this particular formulation is difficult, since we do not find that the Rishonim count the commandment of Torah study as two separate commandments.[17] Rather, it seems that these two categories make up the commandment. The commandment is to learn, while the essence and purpose of this learning is in order to know the Torah. The proof to this understanding of the commandment is that the commandment of Torah study is the verse veshinantam levanekha -- "And you shall teach your children,"[18] and our Sages explain[19] that the word veshinantam is to be expounded from the root shinen -- sharp. The words of Torah should be totally clear to oneself, to the extent that if one is asked about a given Torah matter one should be able to answer immediately, without babbling. This teaches us that the essence of the study is to achieve clear knowledge. Since the clarity of Torah knowledge is the essence of the commandment of Torah study, and this clarity of knowledge brings one great pleasure, Rabbeinu Avraham writes that the essence of the commandment of Torah study is to have pleasure from it.] A third proof: If deriving pleasure from the study of Torah is not the ideal state, how could it be that our Sages instituted the words, "veha'arev na es divrei Sorasekha befinu" in the morning blessing on the Torah? However, it could be that this is not a proof. The Avudraham[20] cites two verses to explain the word ????? in this context. The first is from Malachi[21] -- Ve'orvah Lashem minchas Yehudah viYrushalayim kiymei olam ukhshanim qadmonios -- "And the flour-offering of Yehudah and Yerushalayim will be pleasing to Hashem as the days of old and the years past." However, his second verse is from Tehillim[22] -- arov avdekha letov, which the Ibn Ezra[23] explains is the same root as an areiv -- a guarantor -- "Guarantee Your servant for good". Accordingly, the blessing is to be understood as a request from Hashem that He should act as a guarantor that our children should know the Torah, and does not refer to a request for having pleasure from the Torah. On the other hand, Rashi[24] explains that this blessing is a request that the study of Torah be with the tremendous pleasure of loving, feeling loved by, and being close to, Hashem. His interpretation is also cited by the Avudraham.[25] According to this interpretation, there is strong proof that pleasure is an ideal part of the study of Torah. Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind on this thought. 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must learn Torah in order to fulfil it. Support for these Positions All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the Rishonim. 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov. 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Uniting the Opinions However, in my opinion, it seems that these are really three sides to one coin. Before I demonstrate this, I would like to show some indications in this direction: 1. Although Rashi in Brachos[38] writes that Lishmo means in order to find out what to do, however in his commentary to Ta'anis he writes[39] that Lishmo means to fulfil Hashems will. 2. Although the Ba'al Shem Tov seems to be of the opinion that Lishmo means in order to fulfil the will of Hashem, however two of his main disciples[40] write that one must learn in order to act. Therefore it seems to me that all these three interpretations are really three parts of one whole. The first step is that one has to learn in order to fulfil the will of Hashem. However, what is His will? It is that one should learn and know clearly His Torah. What is the purpose of us knowing his Torah? In order that one should know what to do. In light of this, it would seem that we can understand that which we quoted from Rav Chaim Volozhiner in the beginning of the Shiur[41], even though at face value his statement that "there is no sin," seems to contradict that which we quoted later in the Shiur from him.[42] According to my understanding of Lishmo it is not a contradiction. The earlier quote is directed at one for whom part of his motivation to learn is because of his enjoyment. The motivation, ideally, should be purely because Hashem said so. But one should most definitely enjoy one's learning when one is learning. [1] For example, Mishnah Avos 6:1 and Sanhedrin 99b [2] We shall later discuss another manner to translate this word. [3] Agrah D'Kallah Parshas Chayei Sarah d"h BeMidrash BeParsha Zu Kad Damich Rebbe Avahu [4] Tehillim 19:9 [5] Avodah Zarah 3a [6] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [7] We shall return to this statement in the end of the Shiur [8] Hakdamah to Eglei Tal [9] Yismach Yisrael Parshas Bechukosai [10] Mishnah Avos 2:14 [11] Rabbeinu Yonah ibid d"h VeDah Lifnei Mi [12] Mishlei 8:30 [13] Rosh HaShannah 28a [14] Ibid, as explained by Rashi d"h Mutar Litkoah Lo [15] Peirush Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar Nedarim 48a d"h Sefarim [16] [Blank on web. -mb] [17] See, for instance, Rambam Sefer HaMitzvos Mitzvah 11 [18] Devarim 6:7 [19] Kiddushin 30a [20] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [21] Malachi 3:4 [22] Tehillim 119:122 [23] Ibn Ezra ibid [24] Rashi Brachos 11b d"h Ha'arev [25] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [26] Degel Machane Efraim Parshas Vayishlach d"h Ba Na El Shifchasi [27] Yosher Divrei Emes Os 7 [disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch, who was a major disciple of the Ba'al Shem Tov]; Ma'or VeShemesh Parshas Vayetzei d"h Vayomer Eilav Lavan [disciple of the Noam Elimelech, who was a major disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch] [28] Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 2 and 3 [29] Chiddushei Chasam Sofer Nedarim 81a d"h Shelo Borchu [30] Reishis Chochmah, Hakdamah [31] Shnei Luchos HaBris, Chelek 1, Ba'asarah Ma'amaros, Ma'amar 6, Os 187 [32] Yerushalmi Brachos 1:2 [33] Peirush HaRosh Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen [34] Mefaresh (Rashi) Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen. [There is doubt whether the commentary printed as Rashi on Nedarim is actually from Rashi, hence this commentary is commonly referred to as "the Mefaresh (commentator)"] [35] Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah 10:5 [36] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [37] Tosfos Pesachim 50b d"h Vekan [38] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [39] Rashi Ta'anis 7a d"h Lishmo [40] Likutei Amarim of the Maggid of Mezeritch (otherwise known as Maggid Devarav LeYa'akov) Siman??, Sod Yachin U'Boaz Perek 2 [41] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [42] [Ed. Note] According to the later quote, as is clear from the end of Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 4, learning for the love of the pure understanding of Torah is Lishmoh. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 04:22:44 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:22:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How to pour nesachim, major differences between the first and the second beis hamikdash Message-ID: Yesterdays daf (Zevachim 61b) says that the mizbeach in the first beis hamikdash was 28x28 amos and in the second beis hamikdash was 32x32 amos. Rabin explains the difference as follows: In the first Mikdash, Nesachim would flow into Shisim (a pit south-west of the Mizbe'ach) down the wall of the mizbeach. In the second Beis Hamikdash they enlarged the Mizbe'ach in order that the Shisim would be within (under) the Mizbe'ach and they made the corners of teh mizbeach hollow so that they could pour nesachim in the mizbeach. At first (during the first Beis Hmikdash), they learned from the words "Mizbe'ach Adamah" that the mizbeach has to be completely solid. In the second beis Hamikdash they thought that drinking ('consumption' of libations) should be like eating (Korbanos that are burned, i.e. within the boundaries of the Mizbe'ach) and therefore made the holes to pour the Nesachim as part of the mizbeach. Therefore, they understood that Mizbe'ach Adamah" teaches that the Mizbe'ach cannot be built over domes or tunnels (that are not needed for the Mizbe'ach). According to the Rambam in Hilchos Mamrim, this is perfectly standard practice. Any Beis Din can come and darshen the pesukim differently then a previous beis din. However, according to others this is not so simple. For those who hold that there is one halachic truth, this would seem to be very difficult, in either the first or second beis hamikdash they did the avoda of the nesachim wrong. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 05:50:21 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:50:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40a627c0-37a1-a74d-6f72-165b6d6d9469@gmail.com> On 6/14/2018 8:17 AM, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org wrote: > Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 From: Micha Berger > ...who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah? If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah ... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. ... Another possibility: Hashem dictated the last pesukim about Moshe's death to Moshe beforehand, even before Moshe ascended the mountain, and Moshe dictated them to Yehoshua, who did not write them down until after Moshe's death. Thus, all the Torah, to the last letter, was revealed to Moshe, but it was Yehoshua who put the last pesukim in writing. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Jun 14 06:47:54 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: At 08:17 AM 6/14/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you >regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. >2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That >isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >what does that mean? I am going to give you an answer that I know you will not like and will dismiss out of hand, but IMO, it is the truth. Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to Eretz Yisroel. After all, I said, Orthodox Jews are interested in doing mitzvahs, and one can certainly do more mitzvahs in Israel. He responded by pointing out that the additional mitzvahs that one can do in Israel are only of rabbinical origin at this time. Furthermore, he went on, one has to keep in mind the following. The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the right spiritual level before you go." While reciting the Shema twice a day we say, ?Beware lest your heart be seduced and you turn astray And you will swiftly be banished from the goodly land which G-d gives you.? Thus it is clear to me that one must be on the appropriate spiritual level to live in Eretz Yisroel. Encouraging those who are not on this level to settle in Eretz Yisroel was and is perhaps a mistake. This is a radical statement, and many will react strongly to it. However, is it possible that part of the reason for what is going on in Israel today is a result of the fact that the vast majority of Jews living in Israel are not properly observant, and the statement quoted in Shema is being, G-d forbid, fulfilled? I am not the one to judge anyone else, but each person should look in the mirror and ask themselves if they are sure that they are spiritually elevated enough to live in Eretz Yisroel. As Reb Dovid said, "You just don't go to Israel." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:19:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:19:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? Message-ID: We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping that stringency. Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? KT Joel Rich From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:18:14 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:18:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? Message-ID: The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases (each iteration away from the primary source can cloud fine points, or Godel's incompleteness theorem at play?). I also see much more of the implicit sociological assumptions made over time (and wonder how we define the community [e.g., town, city, continent...] and time [every decade, exile...] that we measure). Two examples: 1) S"A O"C 153:12 (MB:76) discusses an individual who had a stipulation with a community to build a Beit Knesset (synagogue), it stays with him and his family but it's not transferable. Why not? "Mistavra" (it's logical) that that's what the community had in mind unless specifically stipulated differently at origination (me -- who measured? How?) 2) S"A O"C 153:18 (MB:95) concerning a private object (e.g., Menorah) used by the synagogue. Originally, the assumption was they became kodesh once used, however, "now" it's assumed that they remain totally private (as if this were the original stipulation). So how, when, and where did this change? Were the first people who acted this way sinners, but enough sinners makes it OK? KT Joel Rich From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:35:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:35:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17593052-ba12-6371-5050-960187b566d0@zahav.net.il> Yes we have heard this answer before, several times. Putting aside its multiple problems, it is basically rejecting the paper you linked, given that the paper's author supports the state albeit with several large reservations. You can't say that the aliya of the vast majority of people to Israel is a mistake and support the state at the same time. Ben On 6/14/2018 3:47 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if > one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the > exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D > forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong > deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be > on the right spiritual level before you go. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:36:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:36:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. ?Ben On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > > Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? > From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 14 15:07:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:07:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, micha at aishdas.org but it's smarter to be nice. http://www.aishdas.org - R' Lazer Brody Fax: (270) 514-1507 From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 14:18:33 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 21:18:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: , <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. > Ben ?1?/??? Which raises a question I?ve been thinking about lately. When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From zev at sero.name Thu Jun 14 15:39:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:39:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <76b76294-55ee-c10b-66b4-858544078685@sero.name> On 14/06/18 18:07, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the > : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to > : Eretz Yisroel... > > : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one > : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact > : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, > : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed > : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the > : right spiritual level before you go." > > This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It's much earlier than that. It's a Tosfos (Rabbenu Chaim, quoted in Tosfos, Kesubos 110b, sv Hu Omer). -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 22:37:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 07:37:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> Message-ID: <1d515cf4-41e6-53ed-9246-feaee76b81cd@zahav.net.il> I'd guess the latter - the Gemara is telling us you have to decide for yourself and that while the Gemara will give values and weight, it? leaves the final choice up to you. On 6/14/2018 11:18 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 15 01:27:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 04:27:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 06:07 PM 6/14/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the >: Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to >: Eretz Yisroel... > >: The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one >: does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact >: same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, >: in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed >: here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the >: right spiritual level before you go." > >This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. If so, then why are there Satmar Chassodim living in Israel? Are they all on a high spiritual level? And could it be that the Satmar Rebbe left Israel, for this reason? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmeisner at mail.gmail.com Fri Jun 15 05:27:58 2018 From: jmeisner at mail.gmail.com (Joshua Meisner) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 08:27:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > Question -- is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? On Jun 14, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Ben Waxman wrote: > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a > bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. The implication of this sugya is that given that one has made a neder, it is better not to keep it than to keep it. Clearly, it is not suggesting that one violate the neder but rather that one be matir it before a chacham. The meforshim provide different reasons why this is the case -- e.g., because the neder was made out of anger that would hopefully subside or because the neder is characteristic of ga'avah -- but a chumra taken on because a person perceives a need for a s'yag or similar reasons (or, for that matter, a neder bish'as tzarah) may not be what the gemara is referring to. Going back to RJR's question, to provide a few data points, while on the one hand offering a korban without making a neder is assur, one tanna used to be makdish his korban only after he brought it to the mikdash to avoid the possibility of stumbling. Not sure if these cases can be translated into nidrei issur. Josh From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 15 12:02:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 15:02:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Referring to "the holy month of Ramadan" In-Reply-To: References: <163fc9b81f2-c8f-124c4@webjas-vaa038.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180615190235.GA17319@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:18am EDT, Prof. Levine wrote on Areivim: : What about referring to the "holy month of Ramadan"? Aren't their : restrictions regarding what a Jew is allowed to do when it comes to : non-Jewish holidays? Interesting question... Yes, if Moslems are aku"m. But Islam is monotheistic. In fact, they're more pedantic about it than the Torah requires. E.g. Many Moslems believe that the Torah's use of "Yad Hashem" et al even acknowledging they are meant as metaphors shows Shaitan's alleged corruption of the text. So, it's not yom eideihem in the normal sense. For that matter, one might even argue that many versions of Ramadan observance are actually qadosh (in our sense of the word). They fast to learn self-discipline and empathy for those who are less fortunate, they give sadaqah to the poor (I'm bet you can guess that Arabic) and there is a point of having a nightly meal, iftar, in fellowship with the broader community, not alone or as a nuclear family. All values the Beris Noach would want them to be fostering. So, the previous intentionally provocative paragraph aside, is there really a problem talking about Ramadan or referring to it as they do, as "the holy month of"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The trick is learning to be passionate in one's micha at aishdas.org ideals, but compassionate to one's peers. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 12:09:48 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:09:48 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? Message-ID: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with whom did the PC disagree? Ben From hanktopas at gmail.com Sun Jun 17 18:49:29 2018 From: hanktopas at gmail.com (Henry Topas) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch Message-ID: Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in a din Torah pls? Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. Thank you and kol tuv, HT Sent from my iPhone From zev at sero.name Sun Jun 17 21:42:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:42:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? In-Reply-To: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> References: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 17/06/18 15:09, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. > In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered > putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim > on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with > whom did the PC disagree? The issue was the way he wrote about gedolei haposkim, especially the Bet Yosef. http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1640&pgnum=250 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 23:10:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 08:10:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] machloquet - good or bad Message-ID: <5c275a89-82ba-3763-db85-3c8663f1b5a9@zahav.net.il> Summary of a talk given on Shabbat and then my commentary: According to the Rambam, machloquet is a fashla, something we don't want. It started when students didn't properly learn from their teachers. Had they done so, Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai would not have had so many disagreements. Rav Kook and Rebbe Nachman had a much more positive approach to machloquet. According to RK, when say that talmidei chachamim bring peace to the world, it is because they know how to argue with someone yet respect him and his opinion. A talmid chacham knows how to be inclusive, how to allow for and even want other opinions. According to RN, machloquet is a reenactment of Creation. God created the world through tzimmzum, allowing space for others. When there is one opinion only, that opinion fills the entire space so to speak. When someone else comes up with a different opinion, the first person has to contract to allow room for the new idea. This in turn allows for even more opinions. Ad kan the class. Today we don't do machloquet very well or at least we struggle with it. We try and either destroy the other side or we say that the other position doesn't really exist. This week a rav made a statement about Rav Lichtenstein tz'l and his position regarding (a very minor) women's issue. The easiest thing to do if one wanted to know RL's opinion about something is to pick up the phone and ask his sons, his daughter, an extremely close talmid. Instead the rav simply heard something and made a conclusion. When he was shown that his conclusion was incorrect, he pontificated that RL really didn't accept the more liberal position, he simply gave in to pressure. Occam's razor says that if RL said something and did something, it is because RL believed that to be the right thing to do. There is no need to come up with any explanation. Simply accept that there is a machloquet in the matter. Similarly, there is a mechina whose rosh yeshiva said things about women's role in society which people in the left wing MO world don't accept. No one says that anyone needs to send their kid there, but to try and work to shut down the mechina? You can't accept that someone, who BTW probably agrees with the LW on a whole bunch of other subjects, differs with you? You want to shut them down? Come on people, get a grip. From yherczeg at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:15:11 2018 From: yherczeg at gmail.com (Yisrael Herczeg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:15:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Re: Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." ::This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It is also in the Tashbetz Kattan. Yisrael Herczeg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:53:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:53:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is One Required To Live In Israel? (Bava Batra 91a) Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NKZ2eR by Raphael Grunfeld. (Note: Raphael Grunfeld is a son of Dayan Dr. Grunfeld who translated the Horeb and other works by RSRH from German into English.) First, it is not universally accepted that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel. Rashi?s commentary on the Torah as understood by the Ramban implies that there is no obligation to live in Israel. Rabbeinu Chaim, one of the Tosafists of the twelfth century, states clearly that following the destruction of the Second Temple and the exile from Israel, there is no longer any requirement to live in Israel. The Rambam agrees with Rabbeinu Chaim and accordingly did not include living in Israel in his list of the positive commandments. In more contemporary times, the Rebbe of Munkatch, in his responsa Minchat Eliezer, endorses Rabbeinu Chaim?s position. The Rebbe of Satmar, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, points out that the Shulchan Aruch does not include the mitzvah of living in Israel in its code of law. The majority opinion prevailing in the halacha, however, follows the Ramban and maintains that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel today. Although it is preferable to live in Israel, there is no obligation to go. However, once you live in Israel, there is an obligation not to leave. In fact, the language used by the Ramban in his supplement to Sefer Hamitzvot is that ?anyone who leaves Israel? ? ?kol hayotze mimenah? ? is like an idol worshiper. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:56:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:56:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In just a few weeks, we will observe Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av. This particular Rosh Chodesh is always only one day long, and this year it happens to fall on Erev Shabbos. This means that when Shabbos occurs, Rosh Chodesh will be over. I want to discuss the ramifications of a person who begins Shabbos early in this situation. Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal. (I know that there are poskim who advise one to eat a kezayis of bread after tzeis, but they don't require it.) In my experience, mealtime goes much quicker when there are fewer people at the table. This past Friday, for example, I went to a very nice minyan, beginning Kabalas Shabbos and Maariv shortly after Plag, I took a leisurely stroll home, and despite our best efforts at taking our time through the meal, my wife and I were still ready for Birkas Hamazon a full five minutes before shkiah. In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? I don't recall ever learning about this particular situation. There is an analogous but very different situation that I *have* seen discussed, namely that of a Seuda Shlishit that begins on Shabbos Erev Rosh Chodesh, and continues into Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos. In that case, the poskim give a wide variety of answers, but (among the poskim who *don't* pasken to say both) it is not always clear whether their rule is to base oneself on the beginning of the meal, or the end of the meal, or the holier of the two days. Further, some of them make a distinction, paskening differently for one who is merely benching after tzeis but didn't actually eat after tzeis, as opposed to one who actually ate [food in general or perhaps bread specifically] after tzeis. All that is a good starting point for my situation, but it is only a starting point. A tremendous difference between the two cases is that in the more common case, the calendar day DID change during the meal, to some extent or another. But in the case that I'm asking about, the calendar day did not actually change, only that the people involved are doing the mitzvah of Tosefes Shabbos. To be more explicit: Imagine a couple that goes to an early minyan on Erev Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Av. They daven Maariv, make Kiddush, and say Birkas Hamazon, all before shkiah. Then, after benching but still before shkiah, imagine that the wife gives birth to a boy. This boy will have his bris milah a week later on *Erev* Shabbos, and his bar mitzvah will be on Rosh Chodesh. Is it possible that his parents should have omitted Yaaleh V'Yavo from Birkas Hamazon? Of course, I understand that the answer may depend on details like whether or not the meal continued after shika, or even past tzeis. But I am most curious about the simple case, where benching was before shkiah. And the other cases will perhaps flow from that one. Any and all sources are appreciated. Thanks in advance. (Disclosure: I have other questions about the calendar and a person who begins Shabbos early, but I'm starting with this one, and perhaps I'll open new threads later about the others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:10:57 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:10:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What to do with old pots Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I found an old set of pots in my parents' basement. They have not been used in many years. No one remembers if they were milchig or fleishig. I would like to use them for milchig. May they be kashered and used for milchig? A. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Commentary on Nidah 27a) writes the pots may be designated for meat or dairy without kashering. The pots have not been used in more than 24 hours. After 24 hours any taste that was absorbed in the pot becomes foul, and on a Torah level the pot can be used for meat or dairy without kashering. Nevertheless, there remains a Rabbinic obligation to kasher pots even after 24 hours have elapsed. However, in this case, we may apply the principal of ?safek d?rabbanan l?kula? (in cases of doubt that pertain to a Rabbinic prohibition one may be lenient). Additionally, Igros Moshe (Y.D. II:46) writes that if a utensil is not used for more than a year, there is an opinion that holds that it does not need kashering. Although we don?t follow this opinion, it can act as an additional mitigating factor. However, since one can avoid the doubt by kashering the pot, it is proper to do so. Although the Magen Avrohom (OC 509:11) writes that the custom is not to permit kashering a fleishig pot to use it for milchig, in this case kashering is acceptable since it is only a chumra (extra stringency). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 04:30:24 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:30:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder Message-ID: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don?t know the exact reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That?s only known by HQBH. However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah that you?ve taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 07:50:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:50:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Learning, Spirituality, and Neo-Chassidus In-Reply-To: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> References: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180618145018.GE28907@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 1:14pm, R Aryeh Stein wrote on Areivim: > Rabbi Shafran's letter to Mishpacha included the following paragraph: >> It's easy to say that a person has a relationship with Hashem wherever >> he is, regardless of what he is doing, but it's not true. Many of us break >> that connection through destructive habits and the like, and sugarcoating >> them doesn't make them any less destructive. "Feeling spiritual" may >> be better than feeling bad about yourself, as quoted in the article, >> but are we to be content with feeling spiritual? I think the real problem with R' Avi Shafran's article was picked up in the replies. It's not an either-or. Rather, people whose core learning is the regular gefe"s or shas-and-posqim aren't getting inspired by intellectual pursuit *alone* and are looking for a better connection to the emotional and experiential aspects of Yahadus. Addition, not replacement. The question is more: Are we content with thinking the right thoughts while being parched spiritually? > Rabbi Moshe Weinberger was very disturbed by this paragraph in which > Rabbi Shafran seems to state that one's relationship with God can be > severed if one engages in destructive behavior. > He didn't discuss this specific point in his response to Rabbi Shafran > that was printed in Mishpacha, but he dedicated two shiurim to > demonstrate that Hashem's love for every Jew is eternal and > unconditional (see links to shiurim below) At 03:59:40PM -0400, Zev Sero via Areivim wrote: : To Hashem's love may be unconditional, but the direct connection a : person has with Him can certainly be severed; that is what kares : means. See Igeres Hateshuvah ch 5-6: : https://tinyurl.com/y9hckn5t : https://tinyurl.com/y6wtghxf But on another level, I don't think a person or even an object can be fully severed from the Borei, because withough Or Ein Sof, there is no such thing as existing. This fits kareis as per the Rambam, that the onesh after misah is ceasing to exist. (Except that we would have to translate the Baal haTanya's "Or Ein Sof" language into the Rambam's chain of sikhliim.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:14:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:14:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180618151454.GF28907@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:49:29PM -0400, Henry Topas via Avodah wrote: : Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in : a din Torah pls? : Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. A to'ein is a plaintiff. Could you ever have a din Torah in CM without a to'ein and nit'an? Ah, just googled. I take it you mean a to'ein rabbani, a modern Israeli coinage in order to avoid calling someone an oreikh din, since the job was defined in a way so as to avoid violating "al ta'as atzmekha ke'orkhei hadayanim" (Avos 1:8). The Yerushalmi, Kesuvos 4:10 and BB 9:4 (same quote; both gemaros are short and it's easy to find the quote), says the issur in the mishnah is telling only one side the law when they're still trying to phrase their claim. See also Kesuvos 52b and the Ritva d"h "asinu". So, while I don't have a maqor for when it became normal to have to'anim rabbaniim, I would think the place to look is the earliest shu"t that explain how they're not orkhei din. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, micha at aishdas.org The end is near. http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Moshe Sherer Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:57:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:57:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms Message-ID: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> See "Hezekiahs Religious Reform -- In the Bible and Archaeology" on the Biblical Archeology Society web site at . Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to get rid of everything hidden in private homes. A large 9th-century horned altar was discovered [in Beersheba] -- already dismantled. Three of its four "horns" [rectangular projections on the four corners of the top of the altar] were found intact, embedded in a wall. Their secondary use indicates that the stones were no longer considered sacred. The horned altar was dismantled during Hezekiah's reign, which we know because some of its stones were reused in a public storehouse that was built when the Assyrians threatened Judah and was destroyed by the Assyrian army in 701.... Next we move to Lachish. The second most important city in Judah after Jerusalem, Lachish was a military and administrative center in the Judean hills.... In 2016, an 8th-century BCE cultic place at Lachish was uncovered next to the main city gate. Archaeologists have called this cultic place a "gate-shrine." In it were found two small horned altars, whose horns had been cut off and embedded in an adjacent wall. Further, a square toilet was found installed in the shrine but was never used. The toilet was more of a symbolic act of desecration (see 2Kings 10:27) -- part of Hezekiah's cultic reforms. The best candidate for the elimination [of these cultic sites and others] is King Hezekiah, who probably ordered the abolition of all official cultic sites. Only the Jerusalem Temple and small, household shrines were spared. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. micha at aishdas.org Life is about creating yourself. http://www.aishdas.org - George Bernard Shaw Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:48:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:48:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder In-Reply-To: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> References: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180618154848.GG28907@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 07:30:24AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don't know the exact : reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That's only known by HQBH. : However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah : that you've taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. To do a mitzvah Hashem obligated you in, yes. But one you've taken on yourself? I don't know. As for untuitiveness, see my 9/8/2001 post at . But it ties together why Hashem would command men in something He didn't command women to that mitzvah likely being of more value to a man, to the greater reward. A line of reasoning that doesn't apply to volunteerism. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten micha at aishdas.org your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, http://www.aishdas.org and it flies away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 18 12:50:21 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:50:21 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? On 6/18/2018 5:57 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's > portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the > archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to > get rid of everything hidden in private homes. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 12:13:52 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:13:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chukas Message-ID: <0955AA8C-8FE3-48BA-A965-3E9AA6A10782@cox.net> 1) Four Torah laws cannot be explained by human reason but, being divine, demand implicit obedience: a) to marry one's brother's widow (Deut. 25:5); b) not to mingle wool and linen in a garment (Deut. 22:11); c) to perform the rites of the scapegoat (Lev. 16:26, 34); and d) the red cow. Satan comes and criticizes these statutes as irrational. Know therefore that it was the Creator of the world, the One and Only, who instituted them. Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 19:8). 2) [Ch.19:1] "Hashem spoke to Moses and to Aaron saying:" Symbolically the cow came to atone for the sin of the Golden Calf, as if to say let the mother come and clean up the mess left by her child. If this be the case, this explains why the commandment was directed to Aaron, the one who made the calf. 3) [19:2] "Zot chukat ha-Torah...." This is the statute (also translated as "ritual law," or "decree") of the Torah......" This unusual expression occurs only once more in Bamidbar 31:21. The rabbis have commented that it should have said ?Zot chukat ha parah.? Why does it sound as if this chok is the whole Torah? There are several explanations such as only Jews can be ritually impure. A non-Jew cannot have tum?ah. Also, since a chok is incomprehensible, it is as if you have observed the whole Torah if you follow an irrational, illogical commandment. 4) The Midrash to this chapter focuses primarily on one paradox in the laws of the Red Cow: Its ashes purify people who had become contaminated; yet those who engage in its preparation become contaminated. I thought of a contemporary example of something that would appear just as paradoxical. Radiation treatment is used to treat many forms of cancer, and yet, the same radiation can cause cancer. For someone who has no knowledge of medicine, this would appear as irrational as the paradox of the Red Cow. In a similar vein, the Midrash notes a number of such paradoxical cases of righteous people who descended from wicked parents, such as Abraham from Terach, Hezekiah from Ahaz, and Josiah from Ammon. The Talmud adds the paradox that it is forbidden to drink blood, but an infant nurses from its mother, whose blood is transformed into milk to become the source of life (Niddah 9a). You won?t go broke if you follow the chok. But if you don?t keep trying, you?ll end up dying. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 12:24:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:24:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180618192417.GC12350@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:50:21PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, : had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real : reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split : with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have : been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira : in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? I dunno. Look at David haMelekh. He had what to do teshuvah for as well. (Yeah, yeah, I know, kol ha'omer David chatah... But let's look at the navi's presentation of David, if not the historical figure.) However, he owned his mistakes, did teshuvah. And indeed, excelled at singing shirah. It seems there is a big difference between someone who errs, but stays connected to the Borei through it all well enough to be moved to song, and someone who doesn't. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, micha at aishdas.org and after it is all over, he still does not http://www.aishdas.org know himself. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Jun 19 00:15:18 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:15:18 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive into a hostile Arab town? Ben From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 19 03:01:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 06:01:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive : into a hostile Arab town? I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, no? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 19 06:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Used Metal Pots Bought From a Non-Jew In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Q. I bought a set of used metal pots from a non-Jew. Do I kasher them first or do I tovel them first? A. Shulchan Aruch (YD 121:2) writes that one should first kasher the pot and afterwards immerse it in a mikvah. If one toveled the pot first before kashering, it is a matter of dispute among Rishonim whether the tevila was effective. The Rashbam (cited in Beis Yosef YD 121) writes that toveling a pot before kosherization is like immersing in a mikvah while holding a sheretz (unclean item) and the tevila is ineffective. However, other Rishonim disagree and maintain that tevila is a separate mitzvah and is not connected with kashering. The Shach (YD 121:5) writes that if one was to tovel a pot before kashering, tevila should be repeated without a bracha because of the uncertainty. Nonetheless, the Dagul Merivava writes if the pot had not been used in the past 24 hours, one may tovel before kashering. After 24 hours, the non-kosher taste that had been absorbed in the pot is ruined. At that point the absorbed taste is no longer similar to a sheretz. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 19 08:17:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:17:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <3cd91821-d660-3a72-164e-c3abb8aaf807@sero.name> On 19/06/18 06:01, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone > : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the > : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the > : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive > : into a hostile Arab town? > > I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, > no? I don't know the answer, and wouldn't dare try to pasken it, but I do see a big question. The person is in no danger now. He will be in danger only if he chooses to drive on Shabbos. Is it permitted to help him do so safely? Does it make you an accomplice to his avera? Does hal'itehu larasha' perhaps apply here? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ydamyb at mail.gmail.com Tue Jun 19 05:19:56 2018 From: ydamyb at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:19:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 6:17 PM Akiva Miller wrote: > Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and > begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal > before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal... > In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a > regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling > Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Akiva Blum From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jun 19 09:44:50 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 16:44:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10d8a9cc4d8f47e593bd2928a907b8fd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. -------------------------- I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you can daven maariv after plag-would he say if you did that you don't say retzeih if you ate later? BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 05:11:06 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 08:11:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some degree or another. Would they pasken the same way if the Seuda Shlishis was earlier, and - for whatever reason - he had davened maariv and said birkas hamazon on Saturday afternoon after Plag Hamincha? I concede that it is a bizarre example, but the boundaries of halacha are defined by exactly this sort of situation. It's not done nowadays, but a person *IS* allowed to daven maariv on Shabbos afternoon after Plag. If someone did so, and did it during seudah shlishis, and then chose to say Birkas Hamazon while the sun was still above the horizon on Shabbos afternoon, perhaps he should indeed say Retzeh? Perhaps not, but I'd love to know what a posek might say. Summary: The question in this thread concerns someone who is benching on Friday afternoon which is Rosh Chodesh but he already said the non-RC maariv. This is VERY analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday afternoon which is Shabbos but he already said the non-Shabbos maariv. It is NOT so analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday night and he already said the non-Shabbos maariv, and the only argument in favor of saying Retzeh is that the meal began on Shabbos. I just thought of another difference between Friday Rosh Chodesh and the situation cited by RAB. If a person davened Maariv during seuda shelishit - and presumably included Ata Chonantanu - then he has verbally and explicitly declared Shabbos to be over, and it would be contradictory to reverse this by saying Retzeh in the benching (even if the sun is still shining on Saturday afternoon). BUT: When someone says maariv on Motzaei Rosh Chodesh he merely omits Yaaleh V'yavo, and there is no explicit declaration that RC has ended, so perhaps he could still include Yaaleh V'yavo on Friday afternoon. [There would still be a problem of including both Retzeh and Yaaleh V'yavo in the same benching, but some poskim do allow that in the Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos situation.] Akiva Miller From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 20 13:47:08 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:47:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi S. R. Hirsch Takes On The Rambam Message-ID: My grandson Daniel Levine who is studying in Yeshiva KBY and I are in the process of reading RSRH's Nineteen Letters with the notes written by Rabbi Joseph Elias. Today we read part of letter 18. While I knew that RSRH criticizes the RAMBAM, I was surprised at how strong this criticism is. Some of what is in letter 18 is posted at https://goo.gl/o3uXdg Below is a sampling. "Pressure of the times demanded more: the underlying ideas of the Tanach and the Talmud were recorded in the aggados, but again, in a veiled form, requiring of the student an active effort on his part in order to grasp the inner spirit, which really can be passed down only by word of mouth." "However, not everybody grasped the true spirit of Judaism. In non-Jewish schools Yisrael's youth trained their minds in independent philosophical inquiry. From Arab sources they drew the concepts of Greek philosophy and came to conceive their ultimate aim as perfecting themselves in the perception of truth. Hence rose conflict. Their quickening spirit put them at odds with Judaism, which they considered to be void of any spirit of its own; and their view of life was in contradiction with a view that stressed action, deeds, first and foremost, and considered recognition of the truth to only be a means toward such action." And so the times brought forth a man of spirit who, having been educated within an uncomprehended Judaism as well as Arab scholarship, was compelled to reconcile this dichotomy within himself. By giving voice to the way in which he did this, he became the guide for all who were engaged in the same struggle. It is to this great man alone that we owe the preservation of practical Judaism until the present day. By accomplishing this and yet, on the other hand merely reconciling Judaism with the ideas from without, rather than developing it creatively from within, and by the way in which he effected this reconciliation, he gave rise to all the good that followed- as well as all the bad. His trend of thought was Arab-Greek, as was his concept of life. Approaching Judaism from without, he brought to it views that he had gained elsewhere, and these he reconciled with Judaism. Thus to him too, the highest aim was self-perfection through recognition of the truth; and the practical, concrete deeds became subordinate to this end. Knowledge of God was considered an end in itself, not a means toward the end; and so he delved into speculations about the essence of God and considered the results of these speculative investigations to be fundamental axioms and principles of faith binding upon Judaism. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ydamyb at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 21:34:54 2018 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:34:54 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, 4:46 p.m. Akiva Miller via Avodah, < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > R' Akiva Blum wrote: > > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. > > Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are > presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and > benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some > degree or another. > > Please see the MB 424:2 where he quotes the MA specifically about where one davened maariv while still day that he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. I wonder about a case where one said kabolas shabbos, then ate and davened maariv later. I would think that too would be sufficient. Akiva -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 21 03:56:40 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:56:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Timeless Rav Hirsch Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/ZEcnxP The writings of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (RSRH) deeply resonate with many people today, as they have since the time he penned them in the middle of the nineteenth century, using them to recreate a community of modern, Torah-faithful Jews in Frankfurt that had all but disappeared. Many find that, ironically, his words seem more suited for our times than when he composed them. He stands almost alone among commentators in dealing with many themes of modernity: cultural evolution; our relationships with non-Jews; the Jewish mission to the rest of civilization; freedom of the will versus determinism; autonomy and totalitarianism; understanding the impact of paganism on the ancient world. Of course, his treatment of symbolism. This web page contains links to commentaries on the parshios by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein based on the writings of RSRH. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 06:00:23 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:00:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: Perhaps the machmirim would say to respond, "It is Shabbat and it is assur to drive, so I cannot tell to how to go. BUT I will tell you this: Do not go on such-and-such a road, because it will take you through such-and-such a dangerous area." That would not be a problem by those who the OP refers to as machmirim, it seems to me. (Of course, personally, I would label Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as the machmir, and would use the response he suggests: "It pains me that you are driving on Shabbat, so to minimize the Chilul Shabbat, I will give you the very best directions...") Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 21:02:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:02:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. And R' Joel Rich asked: > I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent > and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you > can daven maariv after plag - would he say if you did that > you don't say retzeih if you ate later? This situation is raised by Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen in "The Radiance of Shabbos" (ArtScroll). He writes (pg 95?), "If one interrupts a prolonged meal to daven Maariv or recite Havdalah, he does not say Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon afterwards. If one merely said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, he should still recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon. Rabbi Cohen cites MB 263:67 that if one said "Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol" during the meal, it is a "Tzorech Iyun" whether he can say Retzeh. Then he cites Eliya Rabba 299:1, Petach Hadvir there, Chayei Adam 47:24, Kaf Hachayim Palagi 31, and Rav Moshe Feinstein all as saying that one *can* still say Retzeh, but that Shulchan Aruch Harav 188:17 says not to. Personally, I am surprised that so many poskim distinguish between Maariv/Havdala on the one hand, vs. Omitting Shem Umalchus on the other hard. Here is a situation which will illustrate this point: Suppose someone had a long seuda shlishis, and after Tzeis he said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, and then he actually did a melacha. Would those poskim still say that he should recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon? Akiva Miller From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 21 18:01:47 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 01:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Individualism? Message-ID: <6b39dd928de144b0ba94b9a16c4318c5@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Anecdotally, it seems to me I've seen an increase in "individualistic" practices across the orthodox spectrum [e.g., davening at one's own pace with less concern as to where the tzibbur is up to (shma, shmoneh esrai, chazarat hashatz . . .), being obvious about using a different nusach hatfila, wearing tfillin at mincha . . .] I'm curious as to whether others have seen this? If yes, any theories as to why? (e.g., outside world seeping in?) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Jun 22 13:51:26 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:51:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In Avodah V36n72 (to which I'm humming "Chai, Chai, Chai/Am Yisrael Chai" :)), RJR asked: > BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? < Iff we're considering when one ended the meal; but then you're comparing unlike items (BhM vs. Ma'ariv), not to mention that BhM is a Torah-level *mitzva* while Ma'ariv is .... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 23 19:24:37 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 22:24:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BALAK "JACOB'S TENTS, ISRAEL'S DWELLING PLACES, MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD" Message-ID: "How goodly are your tents, O Jacob; your dwelling places, O Israel." [Num. 24:5] Why the repetition? What does each of these terms [tents and dwelling places] represent? And furthermore, why is the first appellation used "Jacob" and the second one "Israel?" In addition to the sensitivity and modesty demonstrated by the arrangement of the tents and camps, the Sages (Sanhedrin 105b) expound that these terms refer to the habitats of Israel's spiritual heritage. Tents (Ohalecha), alludes to the study halls, and dwelling places (Mishk'nosecha), which is related to Shechinah, or God's presence, alludes to the synagogues and Temples (Sforno). Rav Kook has a novel interpretation. He says that the verse, which mentions tents first, reflects a lower level and hence, uses the name Jacob, the first and lesser name. However, the verse which mentions dwelling second, reflects a higher level. Thus, it uses the name Israel, Jacob's second and more elevated name. The reason Rav Kook considers "tents" to reflect a lower level and "dwelling places" a higher level is because the tent is inherently connected to the state of traveling. It corresponds to the aspiration for continual change and growth. The dwelling is also part of the journey, but is associated with the rests between travels. It is the soul's sense of calm, resting from the constant movement, for the sake of the overall mission (sort of a parallel to Shabbos). I delved into the gematria aspect of this and came up with some heavy, mystical stuff. The gematria for "Ohalecha Ya-akov" (your tents O Jacob) is 248. There are 248 positive mitzvot. The word 'Avraham' and 'bamidbar' (In the wilderness) is also 248, as is the phrase 'Kol Adonai Elohim' (the voice or sound of Hashem, God). The word 'romach' (spear) is also 248. Now to tie all this together-- Balaam had intended, in a manner of speaking, to use a 'spear' to harm the Jewish people and curse them 'in the wilderness.' However 'the voice of Hashem, God' caused Balaam to turn the negative to the positive, (symbolized by the 248 positive mitzvos). Thus when Balaam said "How goodly are your tents O Jacob," he was blessing the Jewish people completely right from 'Abraham.' The gematria for "Mishk'nosecha Yisrael" (Your dwelling places, O Israel) is 1,381. As Rav Kook said, this part of the verse was on a higher level. In Gen: verse 25 (last part) and verse 26 (first part) we have: "Vayar Elohim ki tov. Vayomer Elohim na-a-seh Adam b'tzalmeinue" ("And God saw that it was good. And God said: "Let us make man in Our image..."). The gematria for this is also 1,381 as is the word "Ha-ashtaroth" (the principal Phoenician goddess, the consort of their chief male deity, Baal). Though Balaam was steeped in idolatry ("Ha-ashtaroth"), when he pronounced the second part of the phrase, ("mishk'nosecha Yisroel") God 'saw that it was good.' And so, the "image of God" wins out! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 25 07:17:25 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:17:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Waiting After Some Cheeses Before Eating Meat Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I know that we are supposed to wait after eating certain cheeses, before we can then eat meat. After which cheeses should one wait, and what is the basis for this practice? A. The Rama (Yoreh Deah 89:2) writes that the custom is not to eat meat after eating hard cheese. The waiting time for this is equivalent to the amount of time that one waits after eating meat, before then eating dairy foods. (See Taz ibid. 89:4, Aruch HaShulchan ibid. 89:11, Chochmas Adam 40:13.) There are two reasons that one needs to wait after meat before then partaking of milk; these two reasons apply as well to eating certain cheeses after meat. The first reason is that of basar she?bein ha-shinayim ? meat that gets stuck between the teeth ? which takes a considerable amount of time to dislodge or disintegrate, before which one may not consume milk. (Rambam, Hilchos Ma?achalos Asuros 9:28) The second reason for waiting after eating meat is meshichas ta?am ? an aftertaste left in the mouth, due to meat?s fattiness; only after a substantial lapse of time does this aftertaste dissipate, whereupon one may then consume milk. (Rashi in Chullin 105a s.v. ?Assur?) Poskim apply both of these reasons to cheese: Hard cheese, due to its firm and brittle texture, is like basar she?bein ha-shinayim, and is termed gevinah she?bein ha-shinayim ? cheese that gets stuck between the teeth. One therefore needs to wait a considerable amount of time for such cheese to dislodge or disintegrate before then consuming meat. (Sifsei Da?as Yoreh 89:2) Also, cheeses that are very pungent and leave a noticeable aftertaste are like meat that has meshichas ta?am; one must wait for the aftertaste to dissipate before then eating meat. (Taz Yoreh Deah 89:4) Although some classical poskim argue as to whether one or both of the above rationales for waiting apply to cheese, contemporary poskim rule that both apply. The next installment of Halacha Yomis will discuss further details. View OUKosher's list of Aged Cheeses. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sun Jun 24 23:26:22 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:26:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] [Commentary] Rabbi Meir Soloveichik: Why Christians Are Reading the Rav In-Reply-To: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: [RET emailed me this under a subject line that began "Too long for Avodah thought you might be interested..." But I thought his reluctance was missplaced. I just held on to the piece for its own digest. -micha] Jun 20, 2018 The nature of the dilemma can be stated in a three-word sentence. I am lonely. - Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik In 2015, I was invited to a conference held at a Catholic University in Spain, celebrating the first Spanish translation of *The Lonely Man of Faith*, the seminal philosophical essay of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik (my great uncle), reverently referred to by many Orthodox Jews as "the Rav." Published 50 years earlier, the essay contrasts two biblical accounts of the creation of man and teases out two personas, known as Adam the First and Adam the Second. In the first chapter of Genesis, humanity is created in the image of God and instructed by the Almighty to "fill the world and subdue it." Adam the First, Rabbi Soloveitchik suggests, is majestic; through his God-like creative capacities he seeks scientific breakthroughs, to cure disease, to build cities and countries, to advance the health and comfort of mankind. But then there is Adam the Second, who in Genesis 2 is created from the dust of the earth and remains in the sanctity of the garden of Eden, "to work and protect it." This represents the religious aspect of man, man who is ever aware of his finitude, who finds fulfillment not in majestic achievement but in an intimate relationship with a personal God. These two accounts are given, Rabbi Soloveitchik argued, because both are accurate; both Adam I and Adam II are divinely desired aspects of the human experience. One who is devoted to religious endeavors is reminded that "he is also wanted and needed in another community, the cosmic-majestic," and when one works on behalf of civilization, the Bible does not let him forget "that he is a covenantal being who will never find self-fulfillment outside of the covenant." The man of faith is not fully of the world, but neither can he reject the world. To join the two parts of the self may not be fully achievable, but it must nevertheless be our goal. In his letter of invitation to the conference, the president of the Spanish university reflected on how Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings spoke to his own vocation. As a leader of a Christian school, he said he grappled constantly with the challenge of being an *hombre de fe* in a Europe that, once the cradle of Christendom, was now suddenly secular: As Adam the First understandably and correctly busies himself with the temporal concerns of this world, we encourage our students to not lose sight, within their own hearts, of Adam the Second, the thirsting Adam that longs for a redemption that our technological advances cannot quench. We hope that our students, who come to our university seeking degree titles that will translate into jobs, will leave it also with awakened minds and hearts that fully recognize the deep aspirations that lie within their youthful spirits, and which *The Lonely Man of Faith* so eloquently describes. The letter reflected a fascinating phenomenon. As Orthodox Jews mark this year the 25th anniversary of Rabbi Soloveitchik's passing, more and more of his works are being studied, savored, appreciated, and applied to people's own lives -- by Christians. As interesting as this is, it should not be surprising. *The Lonely Man of Faith* actually originated, in part, in a talk to Catholic seminarians, and today it is Christians who are particularly shocked by the rapidity with which a culture that was once Christian has turned on them, so that now people of faith are quite lonely in the world at large. In his essay, Rabbi Soloveitchik notes that though the tension between Adam I and Adam II is always a source of angst, "the contemporary man of faith is, due to his peculiar position in secular society, lonely in a special way," as our age is "technically minded, self-centered, and self-loving, almost in a sickly narcissistic fashion, scoring honor upon honor, piling up victory upon victory, reaching for the distant galaxies, and seeing in the here-and-now sensible world the only manifestation of being." Now that the world of Adam I seems wholly divorced from that of Adam II, people of faith seek guidance in the art of bridging the two; and if, 70 years ago, Reinhold Niebhur was a theologian who spoke for a culture where Christianity was the norm, Rabbi Soloveitchik is a philosopher for Jews and Christians who are outsiders. The Catholic philosopher R.J. Snell, in a Christian reflection inspired by the Rav's writings, wrote that "like Joseph B. Soloveitchik in *The Lonely Man of Faith*, I am lonely," and he tells us why: In science, my faith is judged obscurantist; in ethics, mere animus; in practicality, irrelevant; in love, archaic. In the square, I am silenced; at school, mocked; in business, fined; at entertainment, derided; in the home, patronized; at work, muffled. My leaders are disrespected; my founder blasphemed by the new culture, new religion, and new philosophy which...suffers from an aversion to the fullness of questions, insisting that questions are meaningful only when limited to a scope much narrower than my catholic range of wonder. Yet Rabbi Soloveitchik's thesis remains that even when society rejects us, we cannot give up on society, but we also cannot amputate our religious identity from our very selves. Adam I and Adam II must be bridged. This will not be easy, but a theme throughout Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings is that all too often religion is seen as a blissful escape from life's crises, while in truth the opposite is the case. In the words of Reuven Ziegler, Rabbi Soloveitchik insisted that "religion does not offer an escape from reality, but rather provides the ultimate encounter with reality." Traditional Jews and Christians in the West face cultural challenges to their faith -- disdain, scorn, and even hate -- but if the challenge is faced with fortitude, sophistication, and honor, it will be a religious endeavor worthy of being remembered. And as both traditional Jews and Christians face this challenge, it will often be as compatriots, in a fellowship that we may not have foreseen 50 years ago. After attending the conference, I was emailed by another member of the administration, the rector of the university. He thanked me "for the pleasure of sharing that deep friendship which is a sign of the community inspired by the principles of the second Adam," and added, "[I] really enjoyed the time we passed together and the reading of the book of Rabbi Soloveitchik," which was, he reflected, "so stimulating for a better understanding of my own life and my faith." To be a person of faith is indeed to be lonely in this world. But more and more, lonely men and women of several faiths may be brought together by *The Lonely Man of Faith.* From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:42:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:42:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627194234.GE22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:18:14PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand : the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic : sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's : underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases... This is why the Maharal (Be'er 1, ch 19 or so) says that the Tur is only usable because of the BY, and SA, because it comes with the suite of nosei keilim. Speaking after years of learning AhS daily... There is a strong feel for the flow of the pesaq and how each area of halakhah is reasoned through by going to Tur, BY, SA, nosei keilim, AhS. It could be the Maharshal too would be more bothered by the Yad than by the other codes, IFF once studies the Tur or SA (or MB) with the other texts that explain how we got there. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The worst thing that can happen to a micha at aishdas.org person is to remain asleep and untamed." http://www.aishdas.org - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:36:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:36:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627183655.GC22635@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 11:54:52AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At : the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking : against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi : comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas : keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same : question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A : Baal keri is prohibited from going there. Or to put it less obliquely... The pasuq there (Bamidbar 12:4) refers to their location as Ohel Mo'ed. But the idiom is not necessarily referring to the Mishkan. Moshe went to the Ohel Mo'ed to get nevu'ah *outside* the camp. (Shemos 33) It had a pillar of cloud at the door, not at a mizbeiach. In Bamidbar 11:16 we learn that the 70 zeqeinim, after getting ruach haqodesh at the Ohel Mo'eid, returned to the camp. The Sifrei Zutra where (Bamidbar 11) writes: And he set them round about the tent the tent for speaking which was outside the camp. They made two tents, a tent for service and a tent for speaking. The outer tent had the same dimensions as the inner one, and the Levites served in both with the wagons. Two ohel mo'eds, the mishkan, and the nevu'ah center. The Ohel Mo'eid in this story also has a cloud at the door. So, I would think it was Moshe's place of nevu'ah, not the Mishkan. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and micha at aishdas.org this was a great wonder. But it is much more http://www.aishdas.org wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a Fax: (270) 514-1507 "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:38:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:38:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627193824.GD22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:19:19PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency : greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? It depends why gadol hametzuveh ve'oseh. The accepted theory is that it's because the YhR chimes up when a prohibition -- issur or bitul asei -- is involved (what pop-psych would describe as the attractiveness of "forbidden fruit"), so so one gets greater sekhar for winning the greater battle. Lefum tzaara agra. In which case, the YhR would work against keeping a neder, and so one should get more sekhar for fighting that battle. I argued that it's that someone we are obligated to do is indeed obligated because we need its effects more than someone who isn't. In which case, no one *needs* the chumerah for basic development; because if they did, it would have been obligatory. Then there would be no added value for keeping the chumerah in terms of the substance of what he's doing, but there is added value to keeping a neder. Meanwhile, it's subject to the Chullin 2a: "Tov shelo tidor mishetidor velo meshaleim." (Qoheles 5:4) Utanya: Tov mizeh umizeh, she'eino nodei kol iqar. -- Divrey R' Meir. R' Yehudah omer: Tov mizeh umizeh, nodeir umeshaleim. The gemara then continues by limiting R' Yehudah to nedarim of "harei zu" not shavu'os of "harei alai". Which would appar to include maintaining a chumerah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:07:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:07:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah In-Reply-To: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> References: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180627180708.GB22635@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 03:51:17PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote: : ... : R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" : of "Torah lishmah" means. ... :> Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions :> :> We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing :> opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. :> :> 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion :> of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent :> generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to :> fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice :> was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind :> on this thought. :> :> 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing :> in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo :> [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, :> one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is :> learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] :> :> 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh :> means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to :> learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah :> is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- :> i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar :> with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must :> learn Torah in order to fulfil it. :> :> Support for these Positions :> :> All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the :> Rishonim. :> :> 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara :> in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir :> bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the :> commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, :> that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." :> :> 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text :> reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake :> of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, :> for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out :> of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of :> the Ba'al Shem Tov. :> :> 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] :> and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Along the lines of #3, Yesushalmi Beraikha 1:1 (vilna 1a), Shabbos 1:2 (vilna 7b): One who learns but not in order to do, would have been pleasanter that his umbilical cord would have prolapsed in front of his face and he never came into the world. The Meshekh Chokhmah, Devarim 28:61, explains this in terms of the idea that the soul learns Torah with a mal'akh before birth. Someone who wants to learn as an end in itself would have been better off staying with that mal'akh! And (citing the intro to Qorban Aharon) a soul that was not born is a seikhel nivdal who grasped his Creator. All that is being given up by being born. But, if one is learning al menas laasos, which one can only do after birth, then their birth had value. The other opinion in the Y-mi is that someone who is lomei shelo al means lelameid is better off not existing. Again, the MC, notes, because the point of learning is to bring it into the world. The MC also gets this from Sanhedrin 99b, where the gemara concludes that "adam la'amal yulad" is for amal peh -- speaking Torah. While the gemara doesn't say al menas lelameid is a definiition of lishmah, the transitive property would lead me to conclude that's the implication. Al menas and lishmah... can they be distinguished? And if not 4. Al menas laasos. (I have discussed this MC before. He ends up showing that in terms of priorities, one who is going somewhere to teach doesn't have to stop to do mitzvos maasiyos; but someoen who is actually learning (and not teaching) has to stop even for a hakhsher mitzvah (maasis). This is one of my favorite shtiklach; worth a look! (There is a complete copy with a bad translation scattered among .) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jun 29 11:07:36 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 18:07:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? Message-ID: >From OU Kosher Yomis Q. What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? A. Chazal, the Talmudic Sages, prohibited cheese that is not made under the special supervision of a Jew (Avodah Zarah 29b, 35a-b). Various reasons are advanced for this rabbinic prohibition, but the reason accepted by most halachic authorities is the concern for the use of rennet enzymes from the stomach flesh of neveilah/non-kosher animals. Unsupervised cheese is termed Gevinas Akum. Cheese is only permitted if it is Gevinas Yisroel ? Jewish-supervised cheese (Yoreh Deah 115:2). This rule is unrelated to the rules of Cholov Yisroel (Jewish-supervised milk) and Cholov Akum/Cholov Stam (milk not under Jewish supervision). Therefore, even if a person eats Cholov Stam dairy products, he may only eat Gevinas Yisroel cheese. According to the Rama (Yoreh Deah 115:2) and many other poskim, Gevinas Yisroel is obtained by the mashgiach visually supervising the incorporation of the enzymes into each vat of milk in the cheese-making process; this way, the mashgiach will verify that the enzymes are kosher. According to the Shach (ibid. 20) and many other poskim, the mashgiach must manually add the enzymes to each vat of milk in the cheese-making process. The Vilna Gaon (ibid. s. 14) provides the rationale for this: Gevinas Yisroel is similar to Pas Yisroel (bread with onsite Jewish involvement) ? just like Pas Yisroel means that a Jew actually participated in the baking process, so too does Gevinas Yisroel mean that a Jew actually participated in the cheese-making process. Contemporary poskim rule that the basic halacha follows the Rama, although kashrus agencies typically endeavor to fulfill the Shach?s requirement as well. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:00:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:00:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Game Theory and Bankruptcy Message-ID: <20180629190056.GA23432@aishdas.org> Nobel Laureate R/Dr Robert Aumann famously (in our circles) explained the distribution of funds in the mishnah on Kesuvos 93a. In that mishnah, a man left behind 3 wives -- but the case works for 3 debts in general. Whatever wife 1's kesuvah is worth in the mishnah would be the same as if 1 of 3 creditors were owed the same amount. It is the creditor version that is the topic of AhS CM 104:15. But it only holds in cases where the assets aren't real estate, or if the debts are loans without certified contracts, if all the debts' contracts have the same date -- in other words, in cases where one doesn't pay the oldest loan fast. Creditor A is owed 100 zuz, creditor B is owed 200 zuz, and creditor C, 300. And the debtor has left than 600 zuz to divide. The AhS notes that there is a minority opinion that would have them divide as we today would probably consider more intuitive -- proportionally. A gets 1/6 of the assets, B gets 1/3 (ie 2/6) and C gets 1/2 (=3/6). And in his day this was a common practice. So, while one may say this became minhag hamaqom and thus a tenai implicitly accepted when doing business or lending money, the AhS recommends that if the creditors assume this division, beis din seek pesharah and divide this way. However, iqar hadin is as per the mishnah. Which the gemara tells us is R' Nasan, and R' Yehudah haNasi disagrees. (Stam mishnah, and the redactor of mishnayos doesn't mention his own opinion???) The first 100z has three claims on it and is divided in thirds. The second 100z has two claims on it, and is divided equally between B & C. And whatever is left is given to C. What this means is that whomever has the biggest loan is most likely to absorb the loss. RRA explains this case in two papers. The first, aimed more at mathematicians, invokes the Game Theoretic concept of nucleolus. (R.J. Aumann and M. Maschler, Game Theoretic Analysis of a Bankruptcy Problem from the Talmud, Journal of Economic Theory 36, no. 2 (1985), 195-213.) In the second, written for people who learn gemara, he avoids all the technical talk. ("On the Matter of the Man with Three Wives," Moriah 22 (1999), 98- 107.) The second paper compares this mishnah to the gemara at the opening of BM, and derives a general rule, RAR saying that no other division in Qiddushin would follow the same principles as the 2 person division in BM. Here is an explanatory blog post on Talmudology blog ("Judaism, Science and Medicine"), by R/Dr Jeremy Brown. (The blog would particularly be interesting to someone learning daf who is interested in science or math.) The aforementioned AhS gives two sevaras for R' Nasan's position: The first is that the first division is taken from the beinonis (mid-quality property) of the debtor's or the estate's holdings. Therefore, it has to be divided separately from the rest of B & C's debt. Each has claim to the full 100z, so each gets equally. The second division is taken from the beinonis of what the person owned that the time he started owing B & C money, and if there is non left, from the ziburis (lesser quality). Again, different material, so it is divided without consideration to the remainder of the debt to C. merchandise. Therefore, it is accounted for separately The second explanation focuses on why this case is different than shutefus, where the shutefim do divide proportionally to their investments. The debtor's assets are entirely meshubadim to A just as much as to B or C. C can't get his 300z until A's 100z is accounted for, no less than the other way around -- each has full power to halt distribution of any of the man's assets. So the division is by shibud, which is equal. But with shutefim, the profit is clearcut. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late micha at aishdas.org to become the person http://www.aishdas.org you might have been. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - George Eliot From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Migo vs Chazakah Message-ID: <20180629194917.GA8106@aishdas.org> AhS 82:18 is a qunterus on migo. Looking at #6 (within se'if 18), RYMEpstein looks at two gemaros that discuss migo bemaqom rov -- BB 5a and Qiddushin 64. In BB, Raza"l say that while rov adif meichazaqah, this is not true for every chazaqah. Chezqas mamon outranks rov (you don't make someone pay up on a "probably"), because the mi'ut yeshno ba'olam, so we can't take something out of his hands -- maybe he is of the mi'ut. This is true even though chezas haguf adif mechezqas mamon and migo adif meichezqas haguf. So chazaq IOW: rov > migo rov > chezaqa chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon So rov > chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon But chezqas mamon > rov -- where mi'ut yeshno be'olam, without bitul Acharei rabim lehatos is a case of bitul, so if the majority of dayanim rule that the nit'an has to pay up, that rov does trump chezqas mamon. Hoserver the gemara in R' Nasan says: "Mah li leshaqer?" ki chazaqah dami. Lo asi chazaqah ve'aqrah chazaqah legamrei. (R' Nasan shows up in two of my posts in a row!) Migo doesn't trump chazaqah, because assuming a person wouldn't give that particular lie is itself a chazaqah. Which is it? Another related issue that confuses me is what kind of chazaqah is a chezqas mamon: One could say it's a chazaqah demei'iqara -- preserving the status quo of who has the money. One could say it's a chazaqah disvara -- normally property belongs to the person holding it. Now, say the to'ein is tofeis the money he claims. This can at times work, because it shifts which is hamotzi meichaveiro when they get to BD. However, we know this is a normal case of the person holding the money, we know how he got it. So how would my chazaqah disvara apply? OTOH, it's not your usual case of presrving the old halachic state, because everyone agrees that before the dispute, the property was the nitan's. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger How wonderful it is that micha at aishdas.org nobody need wait a single moment http://www.aishdas.org before starting to improve the world. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anne Frank Hy"d From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jun 30 21:01:59 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? Message-ID: Naaah, of course he was not Jewish. The subject line was just to get your attention. But then again.... I would not have surprised me if Bil'am had said, "I can't do what my god doesn't let me do." After all, religious people of *any* religion generally refrain from going against the will of their god. Likewise, I would not have been surprised if he said, "I can't do what Hashem doesn't let me do." He is a professional, and he knows the rules of the game (most clearly seen in maftir). He knows who he is dealing with, and if he is trying to curse the Jews, it would be a good idea to follow the rules of the Jewish God. But Bil'am didn't say either of those things. What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase. There have been plenty of polytheists who accept the idea that there are many gods, One of them being Hashem, the God of the Jews. But in this pasuk, we see that Bil'am goes beyond accepting Hashem as *a* god - he accepts Him as "my God". I checked my concordance and found about 50 cases in Tanach of the phrase "Hashem Elokai", spelling "Elokai" with either a patach or a kamatz. It seems that this was the ONLY case where this phrase was used by a non-Jew. Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Sat Jun 30 22:44:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 01:44:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180701054415.GA28439@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 12:01:59AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me : do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase... : Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding : has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply : spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now : it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not : have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I : guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. This works well with my recent (few minute old) blog post. I argue that the whole point of Bil'am might have been to illustrate how monotheism and deveiqus don't guarantee being good people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Aspaqlaria Bil'am the Frummy by micha ? Published 18 Tammuz 5778 - Sun, Jul 1, 2018 Sun, Jul 1, 2018 The Medrash Tankhuma (Balaq 1) says: And if you ask: Why did the Holy One blessed be He, let his Shechinah rest upon so wicked a non-Jew? So that the [other] peoples would have no excuse to say, `If we had nevi'im, we would have changed for the better', He established for then nevi'im. Yet they [these nevi'im] broke down the moral fence of the world... For that matter, the Sifrei says on the last pasuq of the Torah: And another navi did not arise again in Israel like Moshe: In Israel, [another] one did not arise, but among the nations of the world, one did arise. And who was it? Bil'am ben Be'or. So here you have a prophet with the abilities of Moshe (whatever they meant by that) and yet he was no paragon of moral virtue. He didn't teach them how to lift themselves up, but how to corrupt the Jews. So how does that address the complaint of the nations? They had their navi, but they said it was unfair that they didn't have nev'i'im to give moral instruction -- and Bil'am wasn't capable of leading them in that way. Perhaps Bil'am stood for them as an example to teach them just that point. The nations are described as complaining that if they only had a navi they would have been as good as the Jews. But Bil'am was there to show them nevu'ah wasn't the answer. Even being a navi and having the Shechinah rest upon them is not sufficient to make an ideal person. The whole detour into telling us about an event in the lives of Balaq and Bil'am is such a departure from the rest of the Torah, it is considered a separate book. "Moshe wrote his book and Parashas Bil'am" (Bava Basra 14b) So why it it included? Based on the above suggestion, the section teaches us about the dangers of frumkeit. We can get so caught up in the pursuit of deveiqus, one's personal relationship with G-d, one can end up as self-centered and honor-seeking as Bil'am. We need to start out pursuing moral and ethical behavior, ehrlachkeit, and then the connection with the Divine can be harnessed to reach those goals. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 30 21:01:27 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pinchas Message-ID: <56A42568-E095-442F-A19F-017F306492C3@cox.net> ?Pinhas? has turned back Chamasi, my wrath, from the people of Israel.? (Num.25:11) Pinhas has proven his unusual power to turn back God?s wrath from Israel through a very courageous, difficult and controversial act. The Vilna Gaon brilliantly observes that in the word chamasi (my wrath), the two outside letters ches and yud read chai ? life ? while the inside letters mem and sav read meit ? death. The hidden meaning is that by Pinchos facing squarely what has taken place on the outside, he has miraculously turned back the wrath of the Almighty. In doing so, he has removed death (meis) from the inside, replacing it with life (chai). Why do we pray with a set text? An opinion recorded in the Talmud states that prayers correspond to the daily sacrifices offered in the Temple which are mentioned in this coming week's portion of Pinchas. (Numbers 28:4) It has been argued that this opinion may be the conceptual base for our standardized prayer. Since sacrifices had detailed structure, so too do our prayers have a set text. If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 08:09:35 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 01:09:35 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: This year's incarnation of the Gebrochts discussion attempts to discuss the Halacha and I think traverses territory not clearly enunciated in the past. Also I would not characterise this as Gebrochts-bashing; I dont believe anyone is troubled by those who say, "My Rebbe/My tradition is not to eat whatever it may be" the issue is that Gebrochts is promoted as Halachically legitimate and therefore preferred if not mandated. The ShA HaRav declares firstly, that as far as the Halachah is concerned, there is no concern with Kneidlach during Pesach, see the link - http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=25074&st=&pgnum=486 He does however advise that it is a valid stringency his first observation/proof however is that flour can be found on the surface of the Matzos and later on says this is quite common However, A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years B] no other Posek ever verified this claim this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within the finished Matza - but C] there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already been made D] even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link provided - It is universally accepted these days that flour is not added to a dough already made and there is no Matza baking program that permits adding flour to the already made dough Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 18:30:38 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 21:30:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The not-Korban Pesach Message-ID: I had asked: : It has come to me attention recently that the Torah never refers to : the Pesach as a Korban... : My question is this: Whatever reason it was, why the Torah avoided : using that word in this context ... why did Chazal feel differently? Upon further research, it seems that my question was based on the *mistaken* assumption that the Pesach was unique in this regard. It turns out that while the Torah does use the word "korban", it never uses phrases such as "Korban Tamid", "Korban Todah", or "Korban Musaf". These were referred to simply as the Tamid, the Todah, and the Musaf, just as the Pesach was. Apparently, construction of the phrase came much later, and was applied to them all. Exception: The "Korban Mincha" is mentioned three times in Vayikra 2, but that would change the whole question drastically. I should also clarify: these phrases aren't missing only from the Torah, but from the whole Tanach. They seem to have arisen after the Tanach. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sun Apr 1 20:40:08 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 23:40:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b27445d-5dde-c27e-a809-871e12258604@sero.name> On 01/04/18 11:09, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years Who is "we"? > B] no other Posek ever verified this claim > this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within > the finished Matza - but > > C]? there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not > thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product > the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already > been made Perhaps you mean no *other* posek, because this one clearly says it. It's no surprise that nobody before him mentions it, because he says it's a recent phenomenon. > D]? even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link > provided - This is a bizarre claim. The teshuvah "admits" no such thing. First of all, the footnote is obviously not part of the teshuvah, not by its author, and thus completely irrelevant to anything. Second, the footnote does not "admit" such a thing either. It brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 1 21:12:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 06:12:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions, one that basically is an exception that proves the rule and the other is a real exception. 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. 2) Powered chalav nochri. Labels here are supposed to state that a product containts powered chalav nochri (if it does). This was the result of a lawsuit.? I guess that no one wants to start listing every possible kula that goes into a food product. OTOH? if meat isn't halaq, labels generally don't state it. They only state the meat's halaq status if it is halaq. Ben On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: > I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the > lines to fine, or it becomes unusable. Once it's certifying a product > as lacking qitniyos, it might as well stick to avoiding all qitniyos > rather than having a confusing (to some) explanation on each package > which minhagim can or can't use the product. > > The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that > in a number of ways. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 1 18:58:35 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 21:58:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which >is eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give >his full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are >15,000 Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. Have patience and watch developments. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 2 07:10:57 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:10:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 01/04/18 21:58, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >> I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which is >> eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give his >> full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are 15,000 >> Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. > > Have patience and watch developments. Do you claim prophecy, or are you breaking silence on some vast and hereto unsuspected conspiracy? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 3 08:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180403150030.GA23693@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 06:12:23AM +0200, Ben Waxman wrote: : On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: :> I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the :> lines to fine, or it becomes unusable... :> The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that :> in a number of ways. : I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions... I think what I said is really particular to the US, or maybe chu"l as a whole. Where people who keep kosher will suffer with less, and people who don't won't care what has a hekhsher and what doesn't. Few people will make a less observant choice if an Amerucan hekhsher chooses to be more machmir than their own minhagim require. Non-Mehardin rabbanut has a strong motive away from least common denominator. They have a responsibility to a large population that will buy with a hekhsher IFF and only if the sacrifice is not too onerous. : 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that : they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that : proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any : case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically : stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. I recall the marshmallows sold in the US with a long explanation as to why the mei qitniyos they contain are a non-issue. Tha candy with a teshuvah on every wrapper. (Even better than Laffy Taffy or Bazooka Joe!) Unfortunately, they all have the same one. Pretty much the same thing. But didn't work in the US in the long run, as the rightward drift continued. :-)||ii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 3rd day micha at aishdas.org in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Chesed: What is perfectly Fax: (270) 514-1507 balanced Chesed? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 3 21:58:05 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:58:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin Message-ID: One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, he does this privately, since the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was sitting up front without wearing tefillin. When I asked his brother, who does put on tefillin during Chol Moed, about this, he told that the rabbi put on tefillin during Chol Moed until he married. "Our minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed," he said. My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in the ladies section. Thus I do not understand how the rabbi of the shul that I davened in yesterday could sit up front facing everyone without wearing tefillin. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 06:28:11 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:28:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Professor L. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 12:58 AM > My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them > in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put > on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should > not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in > Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in > the ladies section. This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom came from different places with different minhogim. According to halokho, what the acharonim say about wearing t'fillin or not halakhically does not apply here. Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where there was a mnhag hamokom. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 4 07:44:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:44:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin References: Message-ID: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 09:28 AM 4/4/2018, Mandel, Seth wrote: >This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." >But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from >Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom >came from different places with different minhogim.... >Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where >there was a mnhag hamokom. If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 08:07:12 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 15:07:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: , <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: From: Prof. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 10:44 AM > If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section > than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin > can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section Any shul has the right to set up its own rules, and anyone who davens there has to follow its rules. That is also halokho. Even if they were to make a rule, for instance, that one must wear green on Chanukka. Or that the shul must say the prayer for the State of Israel. But to claim that it is halokho that in America people who daven with t'fillin may not daven together with people who do not is wrong. There is no such halokho in America. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 4 20:58:28 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 05:58:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6b0af463-987c-0e3e-d5a2-27cb630b86ba@zahav.net.il> On 4/4/2018 6:58 AM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is > to put on tefillin during Chol Moed,? he does this privately,? since > the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. > > > Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin > during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was > sitting up front without wearing tefillin.? When I asked his brother . > . . . . > Wouldn't the rav in question be the proper person to ask? ?Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at mail.gmail.com Wed Apr 4 23:46:31 2018 From: meirabi at mail.gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: The ShA HaRav does not initiate this ban on Gebrochts as his own, rather he bases himself upon the propositions of Poskim which we are now exploring, and it seems that they actually do not support the proposition to create a ban against Gebrochts. A] The observation made by the ShA HaRav, which is central to his anti-Gebrochts argument - is un-supported. Our Poskim and our personal experience, has verified that there is no such thing as flour being found on the surface of baked Matza. B] The ShA HaRav does not issue his own assessment [other than observing flour on the surface of baked Matza] but relies upon other Poskim to support the proposition that flour remains within the finished Matza. However, no such thing is found in the Poskim, other than in situations where flour is added to a dough which is ALREADY formed. No Posek ever suggested that a normal dough may not be thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product. And the ShA HaRav admits this by saying that nowadays the dough is made very hard, dry, with very little water i.e. it is not surprising that Poskim have not discussed this as it is a concern that is due only to this recent change. But no other Poskim from his time endorsed the reasoning that flour is found on the surface of baked Matza etc. C] it is surprising to hear a devoted Chabadnik suggesting that the footnotes found in the KeHos, the official Chabad publishers' publication - are completely irrelevant to the Teshuvah. There are 2 versions to understanding note 33 on the link provided = here is the gobbledigook version - "it brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions" = here is the plain speak version - "this is the best we can find to support the proposition" which is, however which way you turn it, no support at all for this new concern of flour remaining within the baked Matza. One can hardly but suspect that the footnote was added because the Taz and MaAv that the ShA HaRav next refers to, is no support at all for banning Gebrochts, because their observations are exclusively applicable to thick soft Matzos that were under suspicion of having had flour added to the dough during its kneading - and as we mentioned - this had already been comprehensively stamped out by the times of the ShA HaRav. Remember, they were kneading soft dough for soft Matza and it was quite likely that the dough may have been a little too loose and one would be tempted to add more flour to it. So there we have it - if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not - then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha - then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Apr 7 20:38:51 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 23:38:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Isru Chag Message-ID: <64A81636-64D4-4FF1-B35D-C25381E32A1C@cox.net> The gematria for Isru Chag is 278, the same gematria for l'machar found in Bamidbar, Ch.11, vs.18. This is in the Sidra, Beha'alotch, where God has Moshe establish a Sanhedrin because Moshe complained that he could not carry on alone. God says to Moshe: "To the people you shall say, 'Prepare yourselves for tomorrow and you shall eat meat..." There is an interesting tie here. The day after a festival is the "morrow" and even though the holiday is over, we must always be preparing ourselves. As a matter of fact, in counting the omer, we are preparing ourselves for mattan Torah in 50 days. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Sat Apr 7 21:15:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 14:15:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 "Rabbi Meir G. Rabi" wrote: > So there we have it -- if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your > parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o > Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and > enjoy Pesach Is RMG Rabi's post on Gebrokts consonant with the comment of the Mishna Brura. The Chafetz Chaim stated that even though one may have doubts as to the Halachic imperative of being careful (yes, perhaps needlessly) about Matza Shruya, nevertheless, "one should not be MAZNIACH [translate as you will] those who have this Chumra" In particular, it seems to me that the practice of actually keeping Shruya is very much in line with many other Chumras that people have. Consider Garlic on Pesach, for example. I would posit that today the chance of garlic inducing Chametz is akin to itinerant matza flour being present on a baked Matza. Nonetheless, those who have this Chumra, keep it. They keep it because of the Minhag to be Machmir on Pesach! That Minhag, by its nature is concerned with the infinitessimal. There are many other examples. The Belzer don't eat carrots because of a Chametz incident. They were Machmir from then on. Lubavitchers has an incident with sugar and were Machmir from then on to pre-cook it. Halacha on Pesach does admit the concept of remote Chumras! Yes, for those who look at things from a non Pesach purist halachic view, may well scratch their heads. Nonetheless, the Chafets Chaim taught us that we should not be Mazniach. The idea that Pesach cannot be enjoyed without Kneidlach is fanciful, and not directly born out by plain Halacha. The Halacha specifies Meat and Wine as primary inputs from Gashmiyus food that give rise to happiness. Yes, B'Sar Shlomim (not chicken) and wine (good enough for Nisuch Hamizbeach?) To state "if you are CONCERNED about Halacha... eat Kneidlach" is perhaps a worse actualisation than "Mazniach" as it implies that such people are acting in perhaps some antinomian-like chassidic voodoo practice. [ One can argue quite cogently, for example, that wearing a Gartel today is also "not in line with the Halacha". (We wear underpants!) We do not, however, dismiss such practices. [On Shruya see also Gilyoney Hashas from Rav Yosef Engel Psachim 40b]] The Ari z'l stated that he would never 'talk against' a minhag yisrael/chumra on Pesach. In summary, and I've felt that RMG Rabi, Halacha is not a pure science which leads to a true/false conclusion for every question that is investigated using the rules of the Halacha. Admission: My father a'h had the Minhag from his family (likely via Amshinover fealty) not to eat Gebrokts. This is Toras Imecha for me, especially on Pesach, and whilst I know that in general this practice is unique to families who follow the minhogim of the Talmidei HaBaal Shem, and is most minor, I state quite openly that deciding NOT to follow a family minhag/chumra on Pesach would be FAR more upsetting and disturbing to me than not eating Kneidlach. I'm happy to wait for the last day, and for the record, I am not a fan of them, despite my wife being a superlative cook. Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a "hot dog roll". "It is only the anticipation of redemption that preserves Judaism in Exile, while Judaism in the Land of Israel is the redemption itself." Rabbi A.I. Hacohen Kook From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 8 05:55:41 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 12:55:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent actions of Simcha Felder. >From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv "Using his leverage as the swing vote in the divided State Senate, Sen. Simcha Felder appears to have strong-armed a provision into the budget that significantly changes state oversight of yeshiva curricula, political observers say. " I have talked to some people who live in Willimsburg, and the picture they paint of the level of secular education in Hassidic yeshivas is not a good one. One Satmar woman who lives in Williamsburg told me that her sons received no secular education in the Satmar yeshiva they attended. For the record NYS law requires that all children receive a secular education. What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf R. Barukh Schick of Shklov (d. 1808): When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . . . He urged me to translate into Hebrew as much secular wisdom as possible, so as to cause the nations to disgorge what they have swallowed, making it available to all, thereby increasing knowledge among the Jews. Thus, the nations will no longer be able to lord it over us-and bring about the profaning of God's name-with their taunt: "Where is your wisdom?" R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. I:Iayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, 6 through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash. The Gaon of Vilna's sons: By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... 8 First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): I cannot refrain from repeating a true and astonishing story that I heard from the Gaon's disciple R. Menachem Mendel. . . . 10 It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. This included its inner and outer manifestations. He explained: All secular wisdom is essential for our holy Torah and is included in it. He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. He especially praised music, explaining that most of the Torah accents, the secrets of the Levitical songs, and the secrets of the Tikkunei Zohar could not be comprehended without mastering it. ... He explained the significance of the various secular disciplines, and noted that he had mastered them all. Regarding the discipline of medicine, he stated that he had mastered anatomy, but not pharmacology. Indeed, he had wanted to study pharmacology with practicing physicians, but his father prevented him from undertaking its study ,fearing that upon mastering it he would be forced to curtail his Torah study whenever it would become necessary for him to save a life. . . . He also stated that he had mastered all of philosophy, but that he had derived only two matters of significance from his study of it. . . . The rest of it, he said, should be discarded. To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw for this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 8 05:22:36 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 08:22:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Message-ID: <9ABBE35B-0F5B-4CD1-917D-550FD3E33394@cox.net> 9:1 "Vay'hi bayom hashemini..." The Sages teach that the word "vay'hi" often indicates that trouble or grief is associated with the narrative (Megillah 10b). What trouble or grief could there have been on that joyous first day of Nissan? It presages the tragic deaths of Aaron?s sons, Nadav and Avihu. Another explanation: Even in the midst of our greatest rejoicing, a Jewish wedding, we pause for a moment to recall the destruction of the Temple and the fragility of life through the breaking of the glass. Here, too, we have such a happy occasion, but the "Vay'hi" is to remind us of our fallibility and the frailty of life. There are many commentaries on Aaron?s response when told of his sons' deaths: Vayidom Aharon, ?and Aaron was silent.? It is somewhat coincidental that the third syllable of vayidom sounds a little like the English word ?dumb.? One of the literal meanings of the word ?dumb? is mute and unable to speak. It seems to me that Aaron?s silence was his inability to speak due to shock. Many people would faint dead away if told of such news. So it really isn?t surprising that his reaction was one of a deafening silence. When two egotists meet "It's an I for an I" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 8 12:08:57 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2018 21:08:57 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rabbis Ben Nun, Sherlo, and Rimon have come out strongly against the wheat substitutes and feel that they should be banned. In their opinion, the primary reason for the kitniyot minhag is to prevent mixing up the various grains. Eating these types of products will lead to the same confusion. Ben On 4/8/2018 6:15 AM, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: > Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they > essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and > pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are > quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a > "hot dog roll". From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 07:29:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 10:29:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180409142919.GG25254@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 12:55:41PM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects : in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent : actions of Simcha Felder. : : From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv ... : What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular : studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept : only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time : studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, rather than the one you're critiquing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 07:54:47 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:54:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: Message-ID: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:29 AM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with >the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? > >You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh >in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, >rather than the one you're critiquing. And what do you do with the GRA's statement When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . simply ignore it? This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech cannot go against the facts. Also from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf Friesenhausen's critique, however, was hardly confined to the left; he also had to contend with the right: I appeal especially to all those who fear God and tremble at His word, that they not heed the false claims of those who plot against secular wisdom . . . , unaware that those who make such claims testify against themselves, saying: "We are devoid of Torah, we have chosen folly as our guide." For had the light of Torah ever shone upon them, they would have known the teaching of R. Samuel bar Nachtmeni at Shabbat 75a and the anecdotes about Rabban Gamaliel and R. Joshua at Horayot 10a. Also, they would have been aware of the many talmudic discussions that can be understood only with the aid of secular wisdom. Should you, however, meet a master of the Talmud who insists on denigrating secular wisdom, know full well that he has never understood those talmudic passages whose comprehension is dependent upon knowledge of secular wisdom. . . . He is also unaware that he denigrates the great Jewish sages of the past and their wisdom, as well. Worst of all are those guilty of duplicity. They speak arrogantly in public, either to appease the fools and gain honor in their eyes, or out of envy of the truly wise, disparaging those who appreciate secular wisdom, yet in their hearts they believe otherwise. See in the above link the Chasam Sofer's evaluation of Rabbi Friesenhausen. He was indeed a talmud Chacham. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 08:17:47 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:17:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:54:47AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : And what do you do with the GRA's statement .... : simply ignore it? Yes, that's exactly what the Chassidim who run the mosedos in question do with many of the Gra's statements. Why would it surprise anyone if they ignore this as well? As for me, as in your question, "what do you do", that's an entirely different issue. : This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree : with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech : cannot go against the facts. It may be more productive to ask about 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on and 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. Being surprised when Chassidim don't see the world the way the Gra did isn't really useful or warranted. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 11:28:06 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 14:28:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 1144 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 13:30:59 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:30:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180409203059.GB4975@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is : not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with : what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find : that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Or any of a million other things someone who disagrees with the Gra might suggest. A few years back there was a storm, and my son's grade school rebbe ended up losing a son to a downed power line. The friend who tried saving the son died immediately. The boy lingered for about 2 weeks. We attended the levayah. The father was proud that his young son went to his Maker pure, unsullied even by learning the alphabet. Alef-beis, yes, the child knew; but they hadn't yet begun the English alphabet. Not a sentiment I would share. In fact, hearing it from a rebbe who taught my son in a MO school, I found it kind of startling. But it's a perspective. And if it fosters accepting ol malkhus shamayim and ol mitzvos, raising children who are "ohavei H', yir'sei E-lokim, anshei emes, zera qodesh..." who am I to say it's not the right answer for someone else? :> It may be more productive to ask about :> 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on :> and :> 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. : Rabbi Dr. Shnayer Leiman, who wrote the article from which the : quotes come... I meant in each point something different than what your responses reflect. To spell out further: 1- The reports that lead you to believe the norm for secular education in chassidishe chadorim today is actually as weak as you believe. Rather than the likelihood that the more extreme stories are the ones more often reported. They could all fully be true, and yet not reflect the experiences of a statistically significant number of American students. Or perhaps they do. I would want statistics, not anecdotes, before judging. For example, I did not notice it any easier to teach Sukkah 7b-8a "sukkah ha'asuyah kekivshan" and the diagonal of squares vs circles or their areas to MO Jews who weren't themselves in STEM fields than to American chareidim. And if things were so bad, how do so many end up "in computers", if not in a job that requires as much post-HS education as mine? 2- How do they understand those "facts" about needing limudei chol to succeed in limudei chodesh. Which of the numerous possible responses I refered to in response to the first snippet in this email they actually believe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 15:12:48 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 18:12:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:30 PM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: >: One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is >: not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with >: what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find >: that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... > >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 15:31:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 18:31:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409223134.GD12000@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:48PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's : >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. : : Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" : is learning? I hope not. I am implying that it is valid for the chassidim whose school you are critiquing to believe so. And yes, they probably believe that the Gra's hisnagdus was an error caused by his exposure to the wrong set of ideas. They *certainly* believe that of RYBS. (Or at least did in his lifetime. I see an "acharei mos - qedushim" effect currently going on with RYBS's memory.) As I wrote, I am defending the position in an eilu va'eilu sense. It is not a position to which I personally subscribe, nor could subscribe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com Mon Apr 9 23:17:53 2018 From: rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com (Rabbi Meir Rabi) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:17:53 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Gebrochts - MInhag but absolutely no foundation in Halacha Message-ID: My Gebrochts postings have been to clarify one point - it is wrong to claim that Gebrochts is Halachically mandated or justified and points to anything other than a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition. and I do thank RIB for his query to which the answer is a firm NO - my observation - [if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach] - is in no manner a violation of, "one should not be MAZNIACH [ridicule] those who have this Chumra" IF they do not eat Gebrochts FOR THE RIGHT REASON i.e. a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition BTW - I do not see this in the ChCHayim, pity RIB did not provide sourcing But it is in the ShTeshuvah [460:2] - Nevertheless those who wish to sanctify themselves by refraining from that which is permitted - soaked and cooked Matza, even that which has been [baked hard] and ground [again referring to the corrected practice of making Matza meal from thinner hard baked Matza and NOT from thicker soft Matza which was grated on a Rib Ayzen, and at greater risk of being underbaked and Chametz] - should not be ridiculed. RIB has not suggested any argument to associate not eating garlic during Pesach with Gebrochts, and I have no idea what makes one Chumra IN LINE with other Chumras. Neither do I understand the significance to our discussion/disagreement. We both urge those who do not wish to eat Gebrochts/Garlic etc because their parents etc did not - to keep their tradition. However, the natural corollary is - that IF you DO NOT have such a custom - then eat them and enjoy Pesach because there is no legitimate Halachic imperative. Also, the reference to Keneidelach being an important contribution to Oneg Yom Tov is not of my making - it comes from great and highly respected Poskim. It is also not correct to characterise this Minhag as being concerned with the infinitesimal - because that is the Halacha - a speck of flour can become Chametz and ruin your entire Pesach. Indeed this was the very point I am making - there is no substance in Halacha to support this concern - if there was it would be Halacha. And finally - If anything, the urging that we not be Mazniach, demonstrates that Halacha has no concerns about this issue. We ought to however, nevertheless, not ridicule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 01:37:42 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:37:42 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: " Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge." You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a question of cost/benefit for the masses. Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is greater then benefit. The people you listed were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 02:23:50 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:23:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: At 04:37 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will >affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a >question of cost/benefit for the masses. > >Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be >harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is >greater then benefit. The people you listed > >were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 03:05:03 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:05:03 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular > studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am > paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular > subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not > study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" > > I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from > observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of > Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. > > YL > > And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: "All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are largely Orthoprax." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 02:16:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:16:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: Will those who are against the teaching of secular subjects simply ignore what R. Yhonason Eybeschutz wrote in Yaaros Devash 2:7 (as translated by L. Levi in Torah and Science, pages 24-25)? For all the sciences are ?condiments? and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impureand how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:32:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:32:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:31:27AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: :> Is that a common interperation of minhag hamaqom -- that there be :> a common practice in all things? I understood minhag hamaqom to :> be designated practive by practice. : Otherwise the concept of Minhag Ha Makom is meaningless.... Again, why? It is meaningful to say, "here, the minhag hamaqom is to say "umoried hageshem", not "gashem", without making reference to anything else the qeillah might do. Why do we need a context of a qehillah that has many such rules rather than a few? And how many? : Many people wear tefillin on chol hamoed in Eretz : Yisroel, including some gedolim. However, some do : it betzinoh so it is not so well known. You misspelled, "a tiny percentage". : One such godol is the Erlauer Rebbe. You can go : in his beis medrash and see him with tefillin. He : keeps the minhogim of his zeide, the Chasam : Sofer, to wear tefillin on chol hamoed and daven nusach Ashkenaz. One may argue that the Erlau community has their own minhag, and their beis medrash it's own minhag hamaqom. But that raises questions of how one defines "maqom" that I don't know how to answer. .... : Bekitzur, Al titosh toras imecho, keep on : following your minhog and Al yisbayeish., as the : Rama says in beginning of Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim. Minhag avos is inferior to minhag hamaqom. In fact, we have had a hard time finding its basis. The best I can come up with is that minhag avos means that in the absence of a minhag hamaqom in your current location, you should follow the minhag hamaqom of your prior location even if that means the location of your avos. :> For other things? Give it time. How long did it take Jews from Provence, :> Italy and elsewhere to congeal into a single minhag Ashkenaz? : On the contrary, I doubt that the Chassidim will : ever eat Gebrokts on Pesach, the Sephardim will : stop eating kitnyos, and the non-Chassidic world : will stop eating Gebrokts on Pesach. And yet nowadays Sepharadim make an Ashkenazi qutzo shel yud, to be yotzei lekhos hadei'os. Yekkes and Litvaks eat glatt out of necessity (go find reliable non-glatt), but how many would eat that piece of non-glatt if they found a reliable hekhsher for it? Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. The choilam is far broader in the US than its ancestry; and in other communities, tav-lessness caught on. How many non-Morrocans in Israel celebrate Mimouna nowadays? It seems from the media, this minhag is spreading. (I think it would be a beautiful thing for "misht-night" communities to adopt. After a week of not being guests, make a point of sharing food and showing it had nothing to do with a lack of friendship.) I see lines coalescing. These things take centuries, and accelerate as people who remember pre-migration life pass away. We just begun. I think it is less that a Minhag America can't emerge than the mashiach won't give it the time necesssary to emerge. And Minhag EY may go back to being by sheivet and nachalah, but in any case its evolution will be radically changed by the rapid influx of the rest of Kelal Yisrael. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:03:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:03:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:37:30PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as : a trivia question for now). There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one were considered propitious for a large crop. (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:12:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:12:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101226.GC31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 07:50:13AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat before Biur : Chametz? What makes this mitzva different from so many other mitzvos, where : we cannot eat until doing rhe required act? When the issur de'oraisa begins is a machloqes tannaim (RH 28a-b): Rabbi Yehudah holds starting from chatzos, R Meir - from sheqi'ah. (Does the issur start from when the non-qorban could be shechted, or when it could be eaten?) The Rambam in Chameitz uMatzah 1:8 pasqens chatzos, as do we when we make the zeman 1 hour before chatzos (rather than 1 hour before sheqi'ah). MiDerabbanan, it's pushed earlier, and that's the safety margin. But I don't think that's enough to make it a morning mitzvah that it must be done first thing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:19:33 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:19:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 02:15:47PM +1000, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: : Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they : essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and : pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are : quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a : "hot dog roll". It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. Like not declaring quinoa to be qitniyos. And unlike declating peanuts to be. (Which some of Eastern Europe did, and as RMF attests, some didn't.) For that matter, is there anyone whose ancestors had the minhag of qitniyos but didn't include corn when it was brought over from the New World? Since minhag is by definition informal and mimetic, what happens to catch on or not doesn't trouble me. Boils down to a qasheh oif a masseh. (You can't ask a "question on a story"; how it happened is how it happened, unreasonalbe or not.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From isaac at balb.in Tue Apr 10 03:24:59 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:24:59 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> On Apr 10, 2018 at 8:19 pm, wrote: > It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, > even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. > There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels > would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of another term. From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 02:59:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:59:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] PESACH -- AFTER 400 YEARS GD'S IN A HURRY TO REDEEM US? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410095948.GA31049@aishdas.org> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:28:48PM +1100, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: : We begin the Seder with Matza being a reminder of our suffering -- but we : conclude it with a new perspective -- Matza reminds us of how quickly Gd : took us out of Egypt. Actually, that's the end of Maggid, not the end of the seder. Later than that in the seder, Hillel reminds us of a third aspect of matzah -- al matzos umorerim yokhluhu. Not that of slavery, nor of leaving, but of the midnight in between, and every Pesach thereafter. There is a fourth aspect: Lechom oni -- she'onim alav devarim harbei. Rashi takes this idea so seriously that he holds you're not yotzei the mitzvah with matzah eaten before Maggid. Matzah that didn't have the haggadah is not lechem oni. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:51:53 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:51:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> References: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> Message-ID: <20180410105153.GB23901@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:24:59PM +1000, Isaac Balbin wrote: : It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the : Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of : another term. The only thing we know for sure is that it included some subset of grain-like foods and of legumes. Any reason as to why is a post-facto theory. Multiple exist. In principle, pasqaning one such shitah is right, and therefore the rabbanim who made a din must have intended to include the new case is possible. But not compelled. We often leave a gezeira off where it originally ended because it's not for us to ban more things than Chazal did. All the more so in a case like qitniyos, when it's not a rabbinic issur but a minhag. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 05:14:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 08:14:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10.4C.08474.AFAACCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:05 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies >curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not >higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance >is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study >http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p >which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: >"All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, >when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are >largely Orthoprax." I am not claiming that the study of secular subjects is any sort of guarantee that one will remain religious. The reasons for someone to give up observance or to water down their observance are complex. However, for many reasons it is important to have a basic secular education. One of them is to open up some opportunities to earn a living. And let me be clear, I am not talking about a "Harvard" secular education. But I see no reason why someone born in the US should not be able to speak, read and write English. I have an Op Ed piece that will appear in this week's Jewish Press on the topic of secular subjects in chassidic yeshivas. In part it reads Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. Parents do not have a blanket right to determine the education of their children. Would you say that a parent has a right to send his child to a school that preaches Antisemitism and prejudice? Also, based on my experience as an educator for over 50 years, I have to say that parents do not always know what is best for their children educationally. Choosing to enroll one's sons in a school that does not give a basic secular education is a very poor choice. Also, having a school that does not give a basic secular education is against the law as is clear from my recent Jewish Press article. Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma let alone a Regents diploma? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Tue Apr 10 04:29:37 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:29:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: It's not only the lack of secular education (that R' Yitschok Levine refers to) or knowledge to interact with the secular world (that R. Hirsch z"l is reported to have referred to) that is the problem; it's the abysmal standard of the education they do receive, the overall intellectual integrity, and their attitude to anything scientific. Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. As far as i recall, the Munkatche Rebbe [frequently?] visited the Natural History Museum when he could. There is such a terrific gap in some of our children's education that it's hard to believe it's not going to be detrimental in some way to their development. [I know I'm spouting to the 'converted', but thanks for the opportunity to at least voice my concerns somewhere.] Dovid Rubin From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 06:07:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:07:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. I will just deal with one of the things you raised. If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against the crowd, this practice would end. YL The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of Volumes I-IV. The German custom to bring a young boy to the synagogue with a wirnpel (wrapping for t he Torah scroll) has no connection whatsoever to the practice of the chalaka (the Arabic term for Upsherin) observed by Sepharadirn and later ad opted by many Chasidirn. Th e custom of holding a special celebration marking the boy's first haircut developed among these groups. The celebration takes place at a specific age, usually three. Th e festivity is customarily held near the gravesite of a tzadik or in a synagogue. T his custom was unknown in ancient Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities. The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are found in accounts written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim. Some three centuries later, we find the first indications that the custom had made its way into Chasidic circles. The most important source concerning the chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. The details of this story are somewhat vague, and it is unclear whether the Ari-zal made a chalaka for his son, or whether the account refers to his disciple, Rabbi Yonatan Sagish. There is also some question as to whether the Ari-zal participated in Lag Ba 'omer events in Meron after his kabalistic insights because the custom to conduct a chalaka on Lag Ba 'omer runs in opposition to the Ari-zal' s final ruling that forbade hair cutting during the orner period. Furthermore, the custom of the chalaka has given rise to some questions as to the propriety of hair cutting at a gravesite or synagogue, which might constitute an infringement upon the sanctity of the site. Some have also questioned the permissibility of haircutting on Lag Ba omer, during bein ha-rnetzarirn (the three weeks before Tisha B' A v) or during Chol Ha 'rno 'ed. Yet another concern was the immodest behavior that occasionally accompanied this event. :Most Sephardic and Chasidic rabbis applauded, or at least defended the practices observed in their circles, though there were those who forbade The custom in this manner. Rabbi Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik of Brisk (1889-1960) disapproved of bringing children to rabbis on their third birthday for the chalaka, claiming that this practice "has no reason or basis." He noted that there are sources indicating that one should introduce the child to matters of Torah at the age of three, but none that involve haircutting. Rabbi Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky [the "Steipler Ga'on," (1899-1985)] also opposed this practice, and would send away parents who brought their children to him for the chalaka haircut. The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. Some, however, dismissed this argument, claiming that to the contrary, the chalaka perhaps began as an ancient Jewish practice which was later adopted by the gentiles. There are some older customs, originating in the times of Chazal and the Ge'onim, such as fasting on Erev Rosh Hashana and the ceremony of Kapaprot on Erev Yom Kippur which were opposed by some rabbis since they feared that their origins could be found in pagan rites. In any event, although some communities accepted this custom, Ashkenazi communities \yere never aware of such a practice. They did not receive this tradition from their forebears, and they found no mention of it in the writings of the Rishonim. The ancient tradition among Ashkenazi communities was to cut a boy's hair at a very young age. In fact, during the times of Chazal, parents would cut an infant's hair not long after birth, and they even permitted cutting a baby's overgrown hair on Chol Ha 'mo' ed. In the times of the Rishonim, too, boys' hair in Ashkenaz was cut already within the first several months after birth. The phenomenon of children with overgrown hair simply did not exist in Germany, and a boy with overgrown hair would have been mistaken for a girl. The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no special affair was held to celebrate the event. .. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:21:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:21:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 09:07:38AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for : >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. : : I will just deal with one of the things you raised. I only raised one thing. You are discussing an example, and not the point. : If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go : against the crowd, this practice would end. Which has nothing to do with the general principle of whether the resettlement of Jewry post-war should or shouldn't evolve into new minhagei hamaqom, nor the topic I raised -- the claim they actually are. Nor the reason why I raised the topic: the idea that minhag avos is only a stop-gap, a way to manage when in a maqom that has no minhag. Nor the reason for my post: Your claim that minhag hamaqom only has meaning if the maqom has loits of minhagim. That it can't be applied one-off to whatever practice is under discussion. And if you are correct, what's the threshold of minhagim that unify a community sufficiently to qualify. Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line accordingly. : The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: : Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of : Volumes I-IV. WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. : The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are : found in accounts : written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... It has to be earlier. Originally, chalaqah was held at the qever of Shemuel haNav on the 43rd of the omer, his yahrzeit. See teshuvos haRadvaz 2:608. (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get associated with a haircut at age 3. The move to Meron and Lag baOmer happened when the Ottomans restricted access to the qever in the 1500s. But that has little to do with upsherin in general, eg on a birthday.) The Radvaz, R' David b Shelomo ibn Zimra, was among the gerushei Sefarad, who ended up in Tzefas in 1513 and eventually end up in Egypt where he was RY (he taught the Shitah Mequbetzes, R' Betzalel Ashkenazi) and ABD. So, upsherin was already a practice old enough to get recorded as minhag by someone who lived through the transition from rishonim to achronim. : The most important source concerning the : chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. What makes this "post important source" if the practice predated the Ari by generations? Raising questions about a tradition that the Ari practiced it is a distraction if he isn't the basis of the minhag. AND, the problems with the story isaren't around upsherin, but around making a celebration the night of Lag baOmer, again nothing to do with making one on the child's 3rd birthday. (Unless it too is in the wrong part of the omer or during the 3 weeks. Issues we already navigate for bar mitzvah parties that aren't on Shabbos.) .... : The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice : stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka : transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's : hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in : ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation : of pagan ritual... All I know is that people invoke a similar Hindu practice. And while Hindus may wait to age 3 before making a celebratory first haircut, waiting until 5 or 7 are more common, and not making any ceremony at all is most common. (Although a girls' only haircut being at 11 months is most common.) Observant Sikh men never get a haircut. In Mongolia, between 2-5, girls get their first haricut when they are 3 or 5, boys when they are 2 or 4. No match. China - 1 month. (They wait until after the bulk of infant mortality; lehavdil but yet similar to our considering a child who dies in their first month a neifel.) Poles: a pre-Xian tradition that survived into the 1700s was 7-10. Ukraininans, 1st birthday. Polenesians, teens. Yazidi, originally 40 days, now, 7-11 mo. Interestingly, Moslem boys get their first haircut at 1 week old -- in other words, on the 8th day. In short -- no culture that wikipedia or google found for me has a special haircut for 3 yr old boys ceremony. And yet, I turned up much else. We've seen similar attacks on shlissel challah ('tis the week for that perrennial) based on a difficult to assert connection to key-with-cross breads in Xian communities that were nowhere near the areas where shlissel challah originated -- in either time or space. And yet, the same people continue dressing up their children in Purim costumes, despite the similarity to Carnivale -- and both being local to Italy in origin. Or milchigs on Shevu'os starting in the same region that already had Wittesmontag on the Monday before the Xian Pentacost. For that matter, both of those customs are first originated LATER than chalakah! ... : The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or : other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic : communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern : Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. : Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no : special affair was held to celebrate the event. Is using the haricut to tell the boy "You're not a baby now, time to start chinukh in earnest with alef-beis" really so terrible? Nothing will make that point as deeply as weeks of build up, followed by changing the look in the mirror. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From sholom at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:09:18 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:09:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> References: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <22b69f274e57a0d24c6dcbc45c456a93@aishdas.org> > : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? > : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as > : a trivia question for now). > > There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one > were considered propitious for a large crop. > > (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) REMT wrote me off line and noted: "I don't know its source, but I first heard it when I was a young child." He also answered my trivial question, writing: "In a leap year, the parsha read eight times will always be Acharei Mos. I know of no one commenting on its significance." It just occurs to me that the main event in parshas Acharei Mos occurred on the same day as the events in parshas Shemini. Kol tuv! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 09:30:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:30:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 11:21 AM 4/10/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line >accordingly. > >: The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: >: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of >: Volumes I-IV. > >WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. It was not RSRH who wrote this, but Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger who has spent much time investigating minhagim. >: The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are >: found in accounts >: written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... > >It has to be earlier. Again you are questioning Rabbi Hamburger. I suggest you contact him about this and the rest of your post. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:31:21 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:31:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 09:07, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >> Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >> children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. > > I will just deal with one of the things you raised. > > If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against > the crowd,? this practice would end. YL That is simply not true. The Baal Shem Tov and his talmidim practised it, and that is more than enough for most people. That not everyone did it is irrelevant; very few practices had unanimous support. The BeShT was far greater than the sources you cite, and many more people follow him today than follow those people, so they would have no reason to change. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:35:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:35:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, > and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get > associated with a haircut at age 3. Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From seinfeld at jsli.org Tue Apr 10 10:08:53 2018 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:08:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Playing devil?s advocate here. For the record, I have college and graduate degrees, my children all read and write well etc. However, in response to Prof. Levine. If the cost of that exposure to American secular culture (language, history, values, etc.) is that a certain percentage of children may be enticed by it and go OTD - more than would have otherwise - then, yes, it makes sense. That?s an unacceptable cost. I?m not saying that that is a real cost, but that is the perception. If you want to change the practice, you have to change that perception (which may have some truth to it, I don?t know). >Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America >cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade >science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he >has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the >history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what >happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the >mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic >knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the >digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of >HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has >no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. > From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 10:29:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180410172934.GA1877@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:35:39AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : >(This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, : >and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get : >associated with a haircut at age 3. : Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. As per the same discussion in previous years.... That's what the rishonim run with -- see Rashi and Radaq on the pasuq. Although Rashi says 22 mo in our girsa, I think the other girsa of 24 mo is more likely, because... As the Radaq points out, this fits halakhah, that the time a woman is mish'ubedes to nurse is 24 months. But while elegent, it is not mukhrach that Chanah kept to the minimum. (Thinking out loud: The exchange in 1:22-23 fits better if it was about Chanah not attending an aliyah laregel that was after Shem'el was 2. After all, why would Elqanah have pushed her to bring ShMemu'el to the mishkan before it was safe?) More to the point (and back to repeating myself), there is a machloqes in the medrash whether Shemu'el lived 52 or 53 years. And since that's 50 years after he was weaned and brought to the Mishkan, it implies a machloqes about when he moved into the Mishkan. The minhag was apparently based on the position that he was niftar at 52, and thus moved into the Mishkan at 3. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:06:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:06:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? Message-ID: One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has no inherent "Jewish" quality.) However, there are opinions that say that the Jews spoke Egyptian while in Egypt. I have posted some selections from the Sefer Lashon HaKodesh, History, Holiness, & Hebrew by Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/jews_egypt_hebrew.pdf While it is true that according to one Medrash the Jews did speak Hebrew while in Egypt, there is another Medrash that contradicts this. >From the above reference: GOD SPEAKS TO THE JEWS IN EGYPTIAN While the above sources point to the notion that the Jews in Egypt did not speak Egyptian, there is another Midrash that implies otherwise. This Midrash likens the Jews in Egypt to a prince who was kidnapped for an extended period of time. Finally, his father the king decided to exact his revenge on the kidnappers and release his son. Upon saving his son, the king conversed with the child in the language spoken to him by the kidnappers. Similarly, explains the Midrash, after God redeemed the Jews from exile in Egypt, He spoke to them in Egyptian.221 The Midrash explains that the Jews had been in Egypt for many years, where they had learned the Egyptian language.222 Therefore, when God wanted to give them the Torah, He began to speak with them in the Egyptian language with which they were already familiar. He began by proclaiming, "I (anochi, ) am Hashem, your God ... !"223 According to this Midrash, the word "anochi" in this context does not denote the Hebrew word for "I"; rather, it refers to the Egyptian224 word anoch (11:ix), which means "love" and "endearment."225 One Midrashic source even explains that the Jews forgot Lashon HaKodesh, which is why God had to speak to them in Egyptian. >From page 99 THEY SPOKE LASHON HAKODESH, BUT TOOK ORDERS IN EGYPTIAN Similarly, we can posit that even when exiled to Egypt, the Jews indeed continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, they were not accustomed to accepting orders in Lashon HaKodesh; their Egyptian taskmasters spoke to them only in Egyptian. Therefore, at Mount Sinai, when God was giving the Jews the Decalogue, He spoke to them in Egyptian, the language in which they were accustomed to "taking orders." THEY MAINTAINED THE ESSENCE OF LASHON HAKODESH, IF NOT THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE Even if we assume that the Jews completely forgot Lashon HaKodesh, we can still reconcile the contradiction based on a previously mentioned concept set forth by Rambam. Rambam, as we already mentioned, writes that Lashon HaKodesh is called so because it lacks the explicitness found in other languages, making it a chaste and holy language. Therefore, one can explain that although the Jews in Egypt spoke the Egyptian language, they did not deviate from the moral standards manifested by Lashon HaKodesh. God had to speak to them in Egyptian since that was the only language with which they were familiar. However, they did not change their manner of speaking; that is, they internalized the refined and moral linguistic style of Lashon HaKodesh, which they maintained even when speaking Egyptian. And from the Chapter Summary After discussing Joseph's personal exile to Egypt, we segued into discussing the Jews' collective exile to Egypt. A well-known Midrash states that the Jews in Egypt did not change their language, meaning that they continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, another Midrash states that God began presenting the Torah to them in Egyptian, because that was the language that they spoke in Egypt. While these two Midrashim seem at odds with each other, we presented several approaches to reconcile them and give a more concrete answer as to whether the Jews in Egypt spoke Lashon HaKodesh or Egyptian: ? Radak explains that there were some Jews who were not enslaved, and they spoke Lashon HaKodesh exclusively. Their not-so-fortunate brethren spoke Lashon HaKodesh between themselves, and Egyptian with their Egyptian overlords. ? Alternatively, it is possible that all the Jews spoke Lashon HaKodesh, yet God presented them the Torah in Egyptian because they were acclimated to accepting orders in that language. ? A third possibility is that since the hallmark of Lashon HaKodesh is its embodiment of holiness and purity, even if the Jews forgot the literal language, they could still be said to speak Lashon HaKodesh- The Holy Language-if their manner of speech remained holy. After the Jews exited Egypt and eventually arrived in the Land of Israel, establishing their own rule, it is clear that Lashon HaKodesh alone served as their spoken language. This arrangement lasted for several centuries until the language began receding under Babylonian influence, toward the end of the First Temple period. Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may not be true. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:22:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:22:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Legendary Chassidic Rebbe Admits: The Noda BiYehudah Was Correct In His Opposition to Lisheim Yichud Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/QEUCPq However, what is less well known, is that the Divrei Chaim, despite being a great Chasidic leader, actually said that the Noda BiYehuda was correct in the matter, and, based on that, his followers do not say lisheim yichud before sefira. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:39:28 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:39:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:06 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews > from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. > Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their > children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far > as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has > no inherent "Jewish" quality.) > > > ... > Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may > not be true. > > YL > > > May not be true is the operative word, there is no disputing that there is an opinion in Chazal that it is true and that the Jews spoke only Hebrew in Egypt. This is the opinion that the Chasidim follow and therefore they are against speaking English. I don't see how you can find fault with them when they are following a valid opinion in Chazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:10:49 2018 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Yehuda Gluck) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 04:10:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Wed Apr 11 02:59:49 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: R? Moshe Yehudah, Thank you for taking notice of my post! ?Only a narrow band of Torah studies are benefited by a narrow band of secular studies? - I agree with you - but only in part. 1. If I may add the word ?directly? to your statement (- ?only a narrow band of Torah studies are *directly* benefited?), as, arguably, the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education [though admittedly, this was not the thrust of my original statement]. 2. Re the case in point, Chullin and biology. Though, in general, the biology syllabus does not necessarily help in learning Chulin, biology could be taught in a manner that would: i.e. a teacher familiar with the various sugyos, could give a thorough grounding in anatomy, etc. This would be better than relying on Temunei Chol [or similar compilations], which (might) stifle critical thinking. Furthermore, an appreciable amount of Torah literature is based upon a medieval understanding of chemistry and anatomy. A fuller understanding of those thinking processes, coupled with a comparative study of [human] biology and the basics of modern chemistry, could conceivably open the door to a much fuller Torah experience. Indeed, a syllabus could conceivably be drawn up that would both benefit the Ben Torah and satisfy the requirements of an Examinatory Board. 3. Re maths; again, you are right, so far as a basic understanding of the sugyos are concerned. But to appreciate maths as a backbone of the world?s structure and thus marvel at the???? ????? , to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory to deeper areas of the Torah [which surely some of them will want to learn], requires a fundamental grounding in the subject. Dovid Rubin Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ________________________________ From: Moshe Yehuda Gluck Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 9:10:49 AM To: 'The Avodah Torah Discussion Group' Cc: 'D Rubin' Subject: RE: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:23:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:23:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Lets take a step back for a second. There has been a machlokes for thousands of years (see the Gemara in Berachos 35) whether the ideal is torah only or for lack of a better phrase torah im derech eretz. There is no disputing that in the last 200 years the overwhelming majority of Gedolim have been in the Torah only camp and in the 20th century the Torah im derech eretz is pretty much RYBS and the followers of R' Hirsch. I can provide an almost endless list of Gedolim who had zero secular education and knew kol hatorah kula while on the other hand the list of Gedolim who had a secular education is much much much smaller. Your position regarding secular studies while certainly a valid one is unquestionably the minority opinion and therefore it is ridiculous for you to simply dismiss the other opinion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 03:23:23 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 10:23:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <79615f4629784da49fb5941943399ebd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. ----------------------------- Bingo-and probably true on a micro level but not, I fear, on a macro level. I used to tell my boys that 80% (not based on a study but the handy 80/20) rule)of what they learned would not be used later, the problem is you don't know which 20% will be. Look here for the background of the inventor of the m-16 and you'll see what he brought together https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Stoner Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 04:40:52 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 07:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote, and I quote his closing last paragraph in full: > Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them > to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend > a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma > let alone a Regents diploma? The first and second sentences don't have any logical connection that I can see. There are plenty of boys who attended a Hassidic yeshiva, who now earn enough to support a family. Diplomas are not guarantees, and I'm don't know how much they help. They certainly don't help as much as drive and persistence and elbow grease. My boss, for example, asks me for help occasionally with English spelling and grammar, but that doesn't seem to have hampered his ability to own his business at half my age. (His mathematics abilities are a good example. He understands enough of the concepts that he can figure out anything on his calculator without my help. But he avoids doing even simple arithmetic in his head. And because he refuses to do the arithmetic in his head, I make more mistakes than he does.) Akiva Miller From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 11 06:22:58 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:22:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <1F.0A.18065.33C0ECA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:10 AM 4/11/2018, Moshe Yehuda Gluck wrote: >I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that >a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. >What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion >sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some >secular knowledge in order to understand them. Please read RSRH's essay The Relevance of Secular Studies to Jewish Education (Collected Writings VII) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 06:50:01 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:50:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption Message-ID: Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:20:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:20:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org> I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:45:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:45:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:50:01PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may : be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? All I have is the reverse. R' Gedalia Felder (Yesodei Yeshurun 2 pp 188-191) holds that an adopted child can be called up "ben Micha Shemuel", but that this shouldn't be done when the adopting father or the son is a kohein. In order to avoid confusion about the child's kehunah. (Or that of a future descendent, when people vaguely remember his name years later). I assume leviim too, but that's not in my notes. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 12:08:20 2018 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:08:20 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> References: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Tangentially, there is a convention to write the name of a chalal in official documents as Ploni ben Ploni Vehu Kohein, to signify the difference in status between father and son. I'm not sure that this would be recommended (or desirable) in the case of an adopted child. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 11 23:46:36 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 01:46:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: I suspect that some will feel that my position on the issue "secular" studies comes from the left of center. First off, we need to delineate what we mean by "secular" studies. This word as we use it today is far different from the science the GRA or the many achronim, rishonim and of course Chazal learned in the sense of math, astronomy and biology. Today that word would also include many areas such as social studies, psychology, philosophy, evolutionary biology, cosmology, comparative religion, black studies, sexual awareness, cultural studies etc, etc, that could lead a young untrained mind into problematic areas that could raise many question they are not prepared to deal with. The scientific study required by the various sugios in shas and halacha really require a minimal study of some elementary math such as some trig and geometry, some values such as that of Pi, square root of 2 etc and Pythagoras theorem, astronomy (mainly lunar orbit, seasonal and diurnal calculation), anatomy and some other limited areas of biology plus a handful of other concepts. By this logic much of what we call science today would be excluded from being necessary for learning Torah. Mi'sevoras libi, I would say that the study of much of what we think of in modern parlance of the many new fields of mathematics and the physical sciences such as the many branches of modern physics both classical and relativistic and quantum mechanics, the many branches of chemistry, biology and medicine and of course modern astronomy including much more than just solar system dynamics (mainly lunar & seasonal) and positions of a handful of stars are mandated for a very simple reason -- an understanding (the deeper the better) in these fields makes one truly understand that the world is so highly complex and functions so beautifully that this it can not be a random happening and that there must be a borei olam. A havana into the very ultra small as we find through quantum mechanics and particle physics, or into the wonders of the atom and chemistry and how things combine, or into the wonders of dynamics, optics, elec & magnetism, or the modern fields of solar and stellar astronomy and spectrographic analysis and through the beauty and understanding exposed through the many modern branches of modern math including advanced algebraic theory, statistical analysis, advanced calculus and vector and tensor analysis and the many other fields to numerous to mention here that are so useful throughout all of modern science.. These literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam. The understanding of biology from its lowest levels of its physics and chemistry to the molecular with the tremendous complexities at its molecular and cellular levels and onto its study at the organic and systemic levels, through developmental biology of the miraculous changes from conception through the fetus to birth, infancy and childhood to the adult and ultimately death. Many of these may not help much with the simple peshat of any particular sugio in shas, but they surely create emuna and tremendous yiras haromeimus. No one who has even the smallest inkling of any of this knowledge could believe that existence as we now can begin to perceive it is a bunch of random events. Just the mind boggling complexity of the functioning of a single cell is awe inspiring. With so many thousands of things happening in each cell with perfect timing, with everything just in the right place at the right time in each of the billions of cells in our bodies. Worst of all, leaving a young mind unexposed to many of these areas and without proper training in them leaves him vulnerable to the many questions he will eventually encounter as he goes through modern life. He will not be prepared to deal with evolution, cosmology, philpsophy etc that he will surely encounter no matter how well shielded he may be. In addition to the above, in our modern society some of the above may be needed merely to functional and earn a living in todays highly technical society and he will be severely limited in the types of parnasa available to him. I am sure that many will differ substantially from my position above. Please excuse my rambling and repetition at times and run on sentences in the above. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 12 10:20:51 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 17:20:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not utter the phrase with the congregation? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Apr 12 12:42:50 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:42:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "There is no way that a "Rabbinical committee (namely the Rabbanim/Poskim/Rebbeim of the respective chassidishe Yeshivos whom Simcha Felder is representing) decided that systematic secular education is forbidden by Orthodox Jewish law. The reason is that the Torah requires one to study secular subjects. I have posted part of an article by Dr. Yehudah Levi from his book Torah Study. " Of course there is. Dr. Yehuda Levi is coming from a Torah Im Derech Eretz point of view however, Chasidim and most Charedim have a different viewpoint, namely Torah only. You seem to be a classic case of someone living in an echo chamber. The only opinion/derech that you recognize as legitimate is Torah Im Derech Eretz. As I stated many times, Torah Im Derech Eretz is a small minority, the overwhelming majority of gedolim rejected it. So much so that Gedolim like R' Baruch Ber could not believe that R' Hirsch thought that it was lechatchila. R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch wrote a teshuva (end of Bircas Shmuel Kiddushin) where he explicitly forbid a secular curriculum: ?What emerges is (a) that according to the Torah the obligation of Banim Ubeni Banim means you must make your children into Geonei and Chachmei Torah ? and not merely to prepare them for life as a Jew. But rather, you must teach them and get them to learn the entire Torah, and if chas v?sholom you do not, you violate the entire Mitzvah of learning Torah as per Banim Ubnei Banim. ... (c) To learn secular studies on a regular basis is prohibited as per the Rama 246:4 ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 12 12:34:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:34:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu In-Reply-To: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180412193406.GA7972@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:20:51PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to : bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "barchu : hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in : order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait : and not utter the phrase with the congregation? See the Agur, Hil' Berakhos 98, which can be found at . The Maharam miRothenburg held the sha"tz needn't say it at all. R' Yehudah al-Barceloni says he should say. The Agur adds: and we are noheig to say it. The next source, the Avudraham (or to be accurate: Abu-Dirham), says that the sha"tz says it to be among the community of mevorkhim. He cites the Y-mi (Berakhos 7:3). And he adds that R' Yehudah b"r Barzili Barceloni (I assume the same source as the Seifer haAgur) writes in the name of R' Saadia that even though the sha"tz said "haMvorakh", and therefore didn't remove himself from the klal, he needs to return himself to the klal "legamrei" and day "Barukh H' Hamvorkh". Like in bentching, where the leader says "nevareikh" and yet repeats the responses of the rest of the zimun. No answer there. However, note that the assumption is that Borkhu doesn't need the sha"tz or the oleh to repeat it. The sha"tz needs to repeat it for his own sake, so as not to exclude himself from the kelal of mevorkhim. (Except according to the MmR, who doesn't believe the sha"tz has such a need.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 12th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Gevurah: What aspect of judgment Fax: (270) 514-1507 forces the "judge" into submission? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 01:31:53 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:31:53 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am surprised that you even bothered to quote him." And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his teshuva. There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 02:10:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 05:10:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: >"In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz >wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am >surprised that you even bothered to quote him." > >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with >his teshuva. If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in EY are pursuing higher secular education. >There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' >Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and >Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through >this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not >with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to >learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a >book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the >Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of >issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even >happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas >and poskim. Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat and Yom Tov (holy days) - and furthermore, it is better to occupy oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). >And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but >Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after >them." as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as >the Mishna Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of >people are capable of studying Torah all day. Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? The following is taken from Rav Schwab on Chumash, Parshas Acharei Mos. "At all times the Torah's unchanging teachings must be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, attitudes, relationships to man and beast, and positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and evaluation of the Torah. "What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the 'ways of the Earth.' The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world that surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities that confront him. "What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more crucial it is that this wisdom be conveyed to the Jewish contemporary world. It must be transmitted in a language that our generation understands and that will attract the searching youth, the ignorant, the estranged and the potential ba 1al teshuvah to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah leader must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. "There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose life task is to enlighten and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those 'messengers of G-d' the highest respect and a loyal following. These are the kohanim and levi'im of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. "Yet education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore it becomes mandatory for the present day 'Tribe of Levi' to initiate and encourage an educational system that can serve the other "eleven tribes who comprise the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meets its challenges, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head-on the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. "The Divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Sun Apr 15 05:53:59 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:53:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Micha Berger) In-Reply-To: References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com>, <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org>, Message-ID: This reply was sent earlier to R' Michah and is still valid: I agree. With respect, I did allude to ?learning skills and a mode of thinking? in both of my previous posts: ?the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education?, ? to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory?, and my reference to ?the [lack of] overall intellectual integrity?. Related to this: Is it incorrect to posit that a lot of ma?amorei Chazal was formulated in accordance to their understanding and cultural absorption of sciences of their day? Can we not further Torah with our understanding of modern science, both peripheral and integral ? even though clearly lacking their sya?ato dishmayo and Ru?ach HaKodesh? Is that not the derech taught both by the Ba?al Shem and his disciples, and the GRA and his school [to use the chochmoh of the world..]? Another q: Do we view Torah SheBa?al Peh on a par with Torah SheBiKsav, in the sense that it must be learnt ?as is?, without consideration of the worldview that shaped those comments? [I rather think we can see two views in the Rishoinim.] Dovid Rubin ________________________________ From: Micha Berger Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 5:20:06 PM To: Moshe Yehuda Gluck via Avodah Cc: Moshe Yehuda Gluck; 'D Rubin' Subject: Re: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:39:19 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:39:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:45:43 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:45:43 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 3:01 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a > regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance > secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > > > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > > The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he > already knew shas and poskim.? > > > Can you verify this assertion? > Not really but given that the Gra was a super genius and the stories that abound about how much he knew as a child it is certainly plausible to believe so. The fact is that no one really knows how old the Gra was when he learned these things so your assertion that he learned mathematics as a youth is unprovable as well. > > > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > > Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in > 1518? > > > Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there > would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. > > > And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple according to the Rama, the study of Torah is what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get us into the world to come and the study of secular studies will not. That fact remains the same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 03:39:38 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:39:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >> And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his >> teshuva. > If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who > attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend > the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in > Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today > offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. Touro College was established against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim see http://haemtza.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/yosefs-folly.html for example for details. > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in > EY are pursuing higher secular education. Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a pig with a streimel (see http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html ). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: " *Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the other nations, she didn't want to burn them, rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need any outside wisdom and therefore she was priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the world with his wisdom which was solely torah based. * *We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt."* >> There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch >> Ber. The Rama writes: >> "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >> and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will >> acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other >> wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all >> other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called >> by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the >> Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he >> knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >> regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance >> secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles > Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also > learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He > taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning > of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is > permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this > excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible > and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh > De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his > decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy > only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat > and Yom Tov (holy days) -- and furthermore, it is better to occupy > oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). Not sure what you point is here, the Rama is quoted exactly as I wrote, you cal leanr secular studies only now and then and only after you know shas and poskim. > And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but > Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them." > as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as the Mishna > Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of people are > capable of studying Torah all day. > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in 1518? From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 05:01:14 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:01:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:39 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. >R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a >pig with a streimel (see? >http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html >). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak >Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: > >" Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn >them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the >other nations, she didn't want to burn them, >rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need >any outside wisdom and therefore she was >priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the >world with his wisdom which was solely torah based.? > >We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish >home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish >wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt." Too bad this statement does not differentiate between un-Jewish and non-Jewish. as RSRH did. I agree that we do not want un-Jewish influences in the Orthodox world. However, there is no problem with non-Jewish influences. I wonder if they are against the use of, for example, modern medicine or electricity or running water, and countless other things that are "non-Jewish wisdom and come into Chareidi homes. >>There is no question that the simple reading of >>the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: >> >>"But it is not for a person to learn anything >>but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >>decisors that come after them and through this >>they will acquire this world and the world to >>come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >>In any case, it is permitted to learn through >>happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >>isn't a book of heresy.? This is what called >>by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person >>should not take a trip in the Pardes until he >>has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] >>and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> >>The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >>cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >>only that, but he writes that even happenstance >>secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > >Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > >The Gra was sui generis, when he studied >mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim.? Can you verify this assertion? >>And how many people are capable of capable of >>learning "anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >>and the halachic decisors that come after >>them."? ? as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah >>in Koheles as well as the Mishna Brurah make it >>clear that only a very small percentage of >>people are capable of studying Torah all day. > >Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > >Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah >less in 2018 then it was in 1518? Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 09:44:37 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:44:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:45 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not >for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna >and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come >after them and through this they will acquire >this world and the world to come. But not with >learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple >according to the Rama, the study of Torah is >what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get >us into the world to come and the study of >secular studies will not. That fact remains the >same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person >should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. The facts do not remain the same in 2018 as in 1518. The day school movement in the US as well as all of the Orthodox schools throughout the world where secular studies are routinely taught from kindergarten on show that things have changed. Please spend the time to read "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 ? 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 The Jewish Press, July 6, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916)" "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1786-1879)" "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1654 ? 1785) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 08:07:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:07:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi >world agrees with his teshuva. > >There is no question that the simple reading of >the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything >but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >decisors that come after them and through this >they will acquire this world and the world to >come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >In any case, it is permitted to learn through >happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by >the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should >not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and >he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >only that, but he writes that even happenstance >secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. I must admit that I do not understand your assertion against secular studies in conjunction with Torah studies even for boys at a young age.. The day school movement in the US was founded on the principle of a dual curriculum. The model was RJJ. Today in the US the vast majority of yeshivas follow this model save for some of the Chassidic yeshivas. Gedolim like Rav Yitzchok Hutner (Chaim Berlin), (Mr.) Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz (Torah Vodaath), Rav Avraham Kalmanovitz and Rav Shmuel Birenbaum (Mir), Rav Dr. Yosef Breuer and Rav Shimon Schwab (Yeshiva RSRH) , to name just a few, headed yeshivas in which boys were taught Torah and secular studies in elementary and high school grades. I am sure they were well aware of what the RAMA wrote and paskened that it did not apply today. Even in Europe in the 19th century there were some places where secular and Torah studies were taught along side each other. The Kelm Talmud Torah was one. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelm_Talmud_Torah "In addition to Jewish subjects, students studied general subjects such as geography, mathematics, and Russian language and literature for three hours a day. The Kelm Talmud Torah was the first traditional yeshiva in the Russian empire to give such a focus to general studies. " There was the L?mel-School in Jerusalem where both Torah and secular subjects were taught. So I really do not understand why you focus on the RAMA when it is clear that yeshiva education in many places, since the 19th century and throughout the 20th century involved a combination of Torah and secular studies. What are you arguing about? YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 11:16:15 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:16:15 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> On 4/15/2018 11:10 AM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, > in EY are pursuing higher secular education. I just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different story entirely). From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 10:14:25 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:14:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916) ... There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in have secular studies: 1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would have had no students 2. The law mandated secular studies Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a bdieved. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:22:23 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:22:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:14 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in >have secular studies: >1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send >their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would >have had no students >2. The law mandated secular studies When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young people. >Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but >as a bdieved. Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! YL From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:29:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:29:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <4C.65.18065.A7C83DA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:16 PM 4/15/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I Just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went >through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these >colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or >should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different >story entirely). And many of those who attend these institutions find their secular knowledge woefully inadequate and probably wish they had a stronger secular education when they were younger. Look at the first part of the video at https://goo.gl/WKrKyT and see what he says about his own yeshiva education. At about 2 minutes in he says he discovered that he didn't know anything when it came to being prepared to work. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 15 05:48:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:48:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria Message-ID: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> The leprosy mentioned here was special kind of leprosy which only the Jewish people suffered from only in Israel. It never occurred outside of Israel, even in a Jewish home. The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical but rather a spiritual disease. The Rabbis comment: b?sorah tovah hee l?Yisroel ? "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and mortar to act as if it were alive. It would be most unusual for a house to become sick just like a human being. Such an illness borders on the miraculous. Why does the Torah say that a house may be afflicted with leprosy? It means that a Jewish home is different from other homes; it has life and spirit attached to it. When the people who live in these homes are sinful, the very bricks of the home reflect that sinfulness. The Rabbis tell us that leprosy is a sign of evil and sin; therefore, it is natural that house would manifest leprosy as a sign of its inhabitants evil. Now we can understand why the rabbis say it is good news when a house is stricken with leprosy. If one can notice the disease before it spreads, he has a chance to cure it. When the disease goes unnoticed, the real trouble ensues. Since in today?s world we don?t have the warning of leprosy attached to our houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. The Bible will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible Dwight L Moody -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 11:02:08 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:02:08 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sunday, April 15, 2018, Prof. Levine wrote: > When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 > there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young > people. > Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a > bdieved. > Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 15 12:45:46 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 19:45:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. _______________________________________________ Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 13:08:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 16:08:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <13.9E.29097.691B3DA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:02 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >This is not something to be happy about. This is >more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu >torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very >difficult decision to violate the Halacha in >order to save the next generation. This was not >uncommon in America of that time. Young >Israel???s sponsored mixed dances for the same >reasons. However, now that the Torah community >is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. ? On the contrary, this is something that is appropriate for our time and the future. Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? See my article "Frum or Ehrliche?" The Jewish Press, October 20, 2006, page 1. This article is also available at "Frum or Ehrlich". Letters to Editor Also see "The Obligation to Support a Family" The Jewish Press, February 18, 2015, front page. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 15:35:12 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 18:35:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the > community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the > congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l?olam vaed" > and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included > with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not > utter the phrase with the congregation? Incidentally, the same situation and question applies by the Borchu prior to Birchos Krias Shema, as per S"A 57:1. I can't bring any source, but in my mind, the simple answer is that if the oleh would say it together with the congragation, he might not be heard. The delay is to insure that no one mistakenly thinks that the oleh is excluding himself. I was going to ask a related question about Kaddish that has bothered me for some time. Namely: When the Kaddish-sayer says "Yhei Shmei Raba" himself, why does Mishne Brurah 56:2 tell him to say it *quietly*? But I am *not* going to ask that question, because RJR's post has forced me to compare these tefilos carefully, and I have found a difference that might help to answer his question. RJR was very correct when he used the word "command" to describe what the oleh is saying. The word "Borchu" is indeed the tzivui/imperative form of the verb. But no comparable command exists in Kaddish. Yes, the Kaddish-leader does command them "v'imru", but he even specifies what it is that he wants them to say. Namely, a simple "amen". And so they do. May I suggest that the "Yhei Shmei Raba" is an impromptu addition, that the tzibur adds of their own accord, NOT commanded to do so by the Kaddish-leader. Thus, there is no fear of causing any illusions that he is somehow excluding himself. Indeed, he himself added to the praise by saying "Yisborach v'yishtabach", which (one might say) is simply an expanded version of "Yhei Shmei Raba". So I guess the real question on MB 56:2 is not why the leader says Yhei quietly instead of loudly, but perhaps we could ask whether the leader really needs to say Yhei at all. Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 20:59:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:59:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <54519ad6-5f2a-1c69-4e5f-2d8f0fa2f2a5@zahav.net.il> 1) Is the community as strong as it was back when Torah was transmitted orally? 2) Who is the rabbi who is going to overturn decisions made by the Ta'naim (as opposed to overturning decisions made by school administrators in the 50s)? On 4/15/2018 9:45 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es > laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. > KT From hankman at bell.net Sun Apr 15 18:13:32 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:13:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> R? Marty Bluke wrote: ?R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah.? My response to R? Marty makes a number of assumptions that may not be universally accepted but that I firmly believe. The times are different, the level of knowledge is different both in the physical sciences and in Torah hakedosha. Dare I say that these as a function of time seem to be moving on trajectories that are unfortunately inverse to each other ? particularly in the latter time frame that we live in ? most intensely over the last 10 to 12 decades but can already be clearly seen over the last 4 centuries. With each dor we can see an ongoing diminution in the level of our Torah havanah while a commensurate level of greater scientific understanding has come about (with perhaps the exception of a very few yechidei de?ah such as the Gra and a few others who may have achieved levels more common in much earlier times before them). While Chazal tell us ?haphoch v?haphoch d?kol bah? and that certainly for those who are capable of a great level of Torah understanding such as those of Chazal who were doresh all the essin or all the taggin in the Torah probably could have been able to find quantum mechanics or tensor analysis or molecular biology in the Torah if they so chose. Certainly if the scientists of our day were able to discover these facts, Chazal certainly were able to as well. But I would point out that there is no maimre in Chazal that relates to having discovered any of this knowledge through their pilpul and passing this on to us. Perhaps they did not feel it important enough to report. But this level of understanding in Torah in our times is sadly not available in our times. Given the level of limud for the average person (unlike for some of the gedolim of our times) in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics. The average person (maybe I am just giving away my matsav) will not find much yira or emuna from learning that which is typical of our yeshivos (say a sugia in shas say ?succa govoah m?esrim ama or a sugia on movuy or on tumas negaim ? of hilchos melicha or muktsa in shulchan aruch etc). For the average person these are not awe inspiring subjects and unfortunately only a true godol or great talmid chochom could extract yira and emunah from these cut and dry subjects. Such inspiration for the average yid are fewer and much further in between from most of his limud of Torah. This as a result of our sad diminution in our Torah learning ability. Today, given our greater abilities in understanding the Borei?s briah it is much easier for us to find yira and emuna from our hisbonenus in them. So ?of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none? is Torah, but a very solid adjunct in our times for a vehicle to further inspire yira and emunah would very effectively be math and scientific knowledge. Part of the mitsva of emuna, is not simply belief, but to go out and prove to your satisfaction (to be doresh v?choker) the truth of the Borei and his achdus and that he is the Borei olam and revealed Himself to us at matan Torah and so on. To the extent that science facilitates this search it is a MITSVA and not just mere secular studies at the cost of Torah studies. Clearly the experience our ancestors experienced at yetsias Mitzrayim, al hayam (ma sheroaso shifcha al hayam etc) and revelation on sinai etc was more than enough to inspire tremendous yira, awe and emunah without the need for any help from science (which was not great in their period in any case) and on through the period of the nevi?im and the batei mikadash and later Chazal inspiration was possible through there havana of Torah alone. But I do not see that to be the case in our generation and times. ?So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah?? Because in our day it may be another additional (I hesitate to say ?more? effective way b?avonoseinu harabim for most people) very effective way for most average people.? So today, for the yechidei olom the tried and true method of attaining great yira and emunah through limud Torah may be the best way to go as we have witnessed these great traits in our great gedolim, but that recipe may not work so well in our times for everybody else without additional help. I am also not comfortable with the notion that there are certain areas of knowledge that are off limits to even our gedolim. I feel quite confident to assert that in our time, non of even our gedolim come to discover the great advances in science through there limud hatorah. If they know these subjects it came from sources outside of their linudei kodesh. But Chazal was not constrained in their knowledge. They were required to know shivim loshonos, they studied kishuv and astrolgy and the chukos hagoyim and certainly the science of their day (sometimes even quoting chachmei ha?umos and cf the Rambam quoting Aristo often etc [I also imagine the Rambam learned his medicine in the conventional way mostly including sources outside of Torah]). I feel sad for many talmidei chachamim in our day who lack the background in (sometimes in even minimal) math and science to grasp that they are saying a peshat in a sugia that could not be, and to seek out another peshat therein or to at least realize there is a problem they need to deal with to get a proper havana. Also the chiyuv to teach a son an umnus, obviously means, other than the chiyuv to teach one?s son Torah. We do not assume that his limud haTorah will suffice to teach him an umnus as well. The conventional ?secular? methods of teaching an umnus are to be followed. If you want your son to be a carpenter, send him to carpentry school ? do not expect him to come from yeshiva a talmid chochom AND a carpenter just from his limud haTorah. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 16:30:43 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:30:43 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: Is it not likely that the prohibition is against non-Torah learning which serves no purpose other than engaging in those studies for their own interest and excitement? There is no prohibition against learning any skills for earning a livelihood. Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and research. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 18:06:13 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:06:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. It seems to me that there is indeed one very obvious exception, namely, the chometz which the Rav has not yet sold to the non-Jew. (I suppose that one could avoid this situation by delaying the bittul until the very end of the fifth hour, but the danger of missing that deadline scares me.) I have not seen any sifrei halacha, nor any pamphlets or bulletins or websites, that mention this point. Perhaps everyone just presumes that people have this exception in mind when they say the bittul? Here's a better way to phrase my question: Would a mental reservation be valid in this case? Perhaps halacha ignores the mental reservation, and only cares about the actual words of the bittul - which explicitly refers to ALL the chometz. If halacha does allow this exception - and people do have this exception in mind either explicitly or implicitly - then there is no problem. But I would like to hear that this is confirmed by the poskim. Some might say, "What's the problem? There is chometz in his house, but he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" No, I can see two very serious problems. But before I go further, I must reiterate that these problems would only arise in the case where one does his Bitul Chometz BEFORE the Rav transfers ownership to the non-Jew. (If the ownership transfer occurs first, then at the time of the Bitul, there is no problem, because the only chometz still in his possession is really and truly nothing more than the chometz that he is unaware of.) 1) If there is still chometz in his home, and he is expecting for it to be sold to a non-Jew several minutes or hours later, but the words of the bittul - "All the chometz in my possession, whether I know about it or not" - are to be taken a face value, doesn't this case aspersion on the sincerity/validity of the bittul? 2) Perhaps even worse: After Pesach, when it is time to re-acquire the chometz, he can no longer rely on "he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" Rather, a determination must be made. If he got rid of it via mechira (despite happening after the bittul), then the chometz may be eaten. But if, in the final analysis, he got rid of it via bitul, then it is assur b'hanaah (Mechaber 448:5, MB 448:25). So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? Akiva Miller From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Apr 16 06:35:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 23:35:36 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: I enjoy reading smatterings from the philosophical musings of the great scientists. But I suspect, that is the very reason they are banned. It is because they are NOT boring. And I suspect that unless it may assist me in my Parnassah even reading about new tech developments etc, is likely to be prohibited, not as a corrosive Hashkafa but simply as a time waster. But as the saying goes, Nobody's Perfect [which is sometimes followed by - I am a Nobody] Furthermore, the loud protests that I can already hear, are voiced by those who live in this world which is influenced by non-Torah energies. If we experience boredom when learning Torah - then is it not true that we are still far from the truth of Torah? Reb Avigdor M said - ever noticed how people yawn during Bentching? And would then wryly observe, They were not yawning a minute earlier during the ice cream. I have a friend, a Sefaradi Satmar Chossid, V Frum V Ehrlich, who asked R A Miller if he should learn ShaAr HaBechicnah in the ChHalevovos, R A asked him if he reads the newspapers, to which he replied, No - to which Reb Avigdor responded You need to learn it anyway because the streets are infiltrated with the HashpaAh of the newspapers. I apologise if I seemed to be dismissive of the scientists and their philosophical musings - and the truths that they may discuss Sure, I agree, truth is truth no matter the source. I was merely reflecting upon the reason for the ban on Alternative Wisdoms A] they are unnecessary - they are not required for Parnassah B] they waste time from Torah C] they may well harbour and cultivate life-concepts that are alien and contrary to Torah, amongst the granules of truth Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 06:51:02 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:51:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: <20EAE8A6498E468ABF14517EBCFFBC8A@hankPC> R' Meir G. Rabi wrote: > Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to > various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. > Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote > extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and > research. Do not ignore the truth of the message because you (and we all) do not like the like the lifestyle of the messenger. Pythagoras' theorem is a central truth to much of mathematics and science, and the truth of Einstein's science has withstood the test of time and been subject to much experimental verification. So what exactly is your point -- ignore the truth because you do not like its source? Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Apr 16 11:33:13 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:33:13 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <100f9bef-3e84-6df0-e91d-87b4c01ee3c7@zahav.net.il> Last year I read the document that one signs with the Rabbinate about the mechira. It was quite clear - you sell everything.? Everything includes things that you may have forgotten about? and even things that you have no idea if you own, like stocks in some company that deals in chameitz (even if your ownership is via your pension fund). Everything? means everything. I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". On 4/16/2018 3:06 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the > chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. > > > > So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? > > Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 16 11:07:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:07:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria In-Reply-To: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> References: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180416180705.GG23200@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:48:58AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical : but rather a spiritual disease. I like calling it spirito-somatic, coining a term to parallel "psychosomatic". Just as it stress can turn the presence of Helicobacter pulori in the stomach into having an ulcer. : The Rabbis comment: b'sorah tovah hee l'Yisroel -- : "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." : Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and : mortar to act as if it were alive... But they also say it's purely theoretical (Sanhedrin 71a). Although that's tied to R' Elazar b"R Shimon's side of a machloqes in the mishnah (Nega'im 12:3). R' Yishmael and R' Aqiva (the other two opinions in the mishnah) would apparently disagree. In any case, as with the rest of the cases in the gemara of laws that exist only for learning (ben soreir umoreh and ir hanidachas) it continues with tannaim saying they saw something local tradition said was evidence of one. Nowadays, house mold is known to be all too common. The actual physical side of tzara'as habayis needn't be miraculous. However, unlike tzara'as of the body, one can't invoke a soul - mind - brain causality. It would be pretty direct evidence of Divine Providence if tzra'as of the sort that would cause tum'ah struck only appropriate homes. Which is how I saw the quote. It requires people living on a level where blatant hashgachah peratis is approrpriate. As opposed to an era where even tzara'as of the body requires far more spirituality than people achieve. : Since in today's world we don't have the warning of leprosy attached to our : houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be : able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. There is a discussion of the role of learning Torah, and whether studying Torah that is non-applicabile is of value. Because of ideas like this one, it is hard to believe there can be Torah that is non-applicable. Even if the case isn't, "derosh vekabel sekhar" could refer to taking home lessons for the general principle. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 16th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Tifferes: What type of discipline Fax: (270) 514-1507 does harmony promote? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Apr 16 06:55:47 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:55:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzorah Message-ID: <672ECAA3-45E8-4B5C-A040-0A47C6B91FE2@cox.net> The second verse of this portion (14:2) states: "This shall be the law of the metzora on the day of his purification..." Since the Torah mentions that his purification takes place during the day, the Sages expound that the Kohen's declaration, which alone permits the metzora to begin his purification ritual, may be made only during the day (Rashi; Sifra). The observance of Taharat Hamishpacha has been a central feature of Jewish life for millennia. One finds Mikvehs in medieval Spain, in ancient Italy and in the famed desert outpost of Masada. This is consonant with Halacha which mandates that even before the town synagogue is built, a Mikveh must first be established. The source of the laws of Mikveh and family purity is found in this week's Torah portion. The Torah commands that when a woman has a menstrual flow, she and her husband must stay apart from one another. During this period she is "tameh," a Hebrew term that has been incorrectly translated as "unclean." In point of fact, the word tameh has nothing to do with uncleanness. When one is tameh it means that a person has had some contact with death. In the instance of a menstruating woman, it is the death of the ovum. Similarly, when a man has had physical relations (which inevitably involve the death of millions of sperm), he too is tameh. Implicit in this Biblical tradition is a great sensitivity and awareness of the natural life cycle. After a week has passed since the cessation of the woman's menstrual flow, the woman goes to the Mikveh where she undergoes a "spiritual rebirth." Various aspects of the Mikveh experience reinforce this notion of rebirth. The Mikveh itself must have 40 seah of water, the number 40 alluding to the 40th day after conception when the soul of a child enters the embryo. The woman must have no ornaments or barriers between herself and the water, for her emerging from the Mikveh is like that of the newborn leaving the waters of the womb with no ornaments or barriers. A child is the mirror of the family, he reflects the moral purity of his parents. Anonymous From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 16 08:34:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:34:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Kriyas HaTorah, Aseres Ha'dibros Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Rambam (Teshuvos HaRambam 60) writes that one who is seated should not stand up for the reading of the Aseres Ha'dibros (Ten Commandments). However, the general custom today is that the entire congregation does stand during this reading. Why is it that this ruling of the Rambam is not followed? A. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt"l pointed out that there are two versions of cantillation for the Aseres Ha'dibros. The first is called ta'am ha'tachton (lower cantillation) which punctuates the Aseres Ha'dibros into sentences in the same manner as the rest of the Torah. The second is called ta'am ha'elyon (higher cantillation), which punctuates following the order of the commandments, reconstructing the manner in which the Ten Commandments were received during matan Torah. There are two reasons why someone would wish to stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros. If one's intent is to show extra honor to this portion of the Torah, this is inappropriate. The entire Torah was given to Moshe on Har Sinai, and therefore all of Torah is equally precious. Standing for the Aseres Ha'dibros might lead some to the erroneous conclusion that only the Ten Commandments were received directly from Hashem. However, there is a second reason why one would stand during the Aseres Ha'dibros and that is to recreate the assembly at Har Sinai. We stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros in the same fashion that all of Israel stood during the original acceptance of the Torah. Today, the general custom is to always read the portion of the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'elyon. This indicates that this is not merely a reading of the Torah, but a recreation of matan Torah. Therefore, it is appropriate to stand. Rav Soloveitchik posits that the Rambam read the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'tachton, equating it to every other Torah reading, in which case, it would indeed be inappropriate to stand. The custom of Rav Chaim Soloveitchik, zt"l was to read the Aseres Ha'dibros both on Shavuos and during the weekly portion with ta'am ha'tachton, following the practice of the Rambam. Some, however, have the custom to read the Aseres Ha'dibros on Shavuos with ta'am ha'elyon, since this reading is a recreation of Sinai, but when parshas Yisro and parshas Va'eschanan are read on a regular Shabbos, the Aseres Ha'dibros are read with ta'am ha'tachton. In such a shul it would be best to stand from the beginning of the aliyah so as not to show more honor to one part of the Torah than another. From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 17:58:57 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 19:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: In my previous post responding R? Marty Bluke I wrote: ?in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics.? Upon reflection I wish to add to my previous thought about ?the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly? can lead to great awe and yiras harommeimus and emuna. I have no doubt that the pasuk jn Iyov (19:26) ?umibesori echezeh eloka? is a direct expression in Nach of this idea that my very tissues (biological systems) are great evidence and testimony to the the existence of the Borei Olam and His careful and intricate design and continuing hashgacha of the very smallest and finest, myriad intricate details of every living thing. It basically is the old argument that the existence of a complex system such as a clock implies that there must be a clock maker ? but ever so much in spades. Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 17 10:59:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:59:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> Message-ID: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a : bdieved. Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. The wave of rabbis coming in when the big drive for day school education started were predominantly a particular kind of Litvak. Look who the big voices were in the Agudas haRabbanim of the first half of the 20th century. RARakeffetR makes a strong case that one of the differences between RSRH and RYBS was just how lekhat-chilah secular studies are. RSRH held that our insulation from general culture and general knowledge was a tragic consequence of ghettoization. And that we never chose that life, it was forced upon us. The Emancipation was seen as a boon, allow the full expression of Judaism again. RYBS, in RARR's opionion (and of course, others vehemently disagree) only saw secular studies as the ideal way to live in a suboptimal situation. Secular knowledge in-and-of-itself as well as its ability to help one live in dignity is lekhat-chilah only within this bedi'eved world. But had we all been able to move back to Brisk, it would be all the better. Which gets us to the eis la'asos discussion. Shas too is lekhat-chilah and a great thing. What is bedi'eved is the reality that forced Rebbe, Rav Ashi, Ravinah to canonize official texts and (according to Tosafos) the geonim to write it down. But since we are still in that reality, we still publish TSBP -- lekhat-chilah. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? : Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, : "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of secular studies. Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. I would stick to discussing financial crimes: Yafeh Talmud Torah im Derekh Eretz sheyegi'as sheneihem mishkachas avon. VeKhol Torah she'ein imahh melakhah, sofahh beteilah vegoreres avon. - R' Gamliel beno shel R' Yehudah haNasi (Avos 2:2) But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the am hanivchar means. I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does not produce people less prone to these things. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 17th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Tifferes: What is the ultimate Fax: (270) 514-1507 state of harmony? From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 17 17:25:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 20:25:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz Message-ID: . I had asked: > On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat > before Biur Chametz? I thank those who responded. I still haven't found any poskim who deal with this exact question, but the Magen Avraham does mention something very close: "All melachos are assur once the time for burning has come, until he burns the chometz, just like above in Siman 431." - Magen Avraham 445:2, at the very end Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Apr 17 22:27:14 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 07:27:14 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Omer and Koolulam Message-ID: A Post by Rabbi Alex Israel. In this essay (originally posted on Facebook for public consumption), Rav Israel talks about his feelings about participating in a Koolulam sing along. If you don't know, Koolulam is an organization which gets hundreds, even thousands of people together to teach to sing one song in unison. They took this idea from the US with the twist of having regular folks and not just stars singing. For an example of what Koolulam does, here is their Yom Atzmaut video (described by many as a tefilla b'tzibbur): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxzR9Z-kG6Q (Al Kol Aleh by Naomi Shemer). Rav Israel's post is an excellent example about how people are dealing with inner conflicts of the Omer (and Three Weeks) mourning period and living in modern Israel. Note: There are rabbanim who wouldn't have allowed participation, during the Omer time or any other time. You can read the comments and discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/alexisrael1/posts/10157199448378942 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ If you have been following me on FB, you will know my obsession with Koolulam, especially their ??70th Yom Haatzmaut event. Prior to the event I was asked by 7 or 8 people, friends or talmidot/im, ?whether they could attend during the Omer. (If you watched the video, about half the participants ?were religious-looking.) ? I am generally halakhically conservative (small "c"!) and I try to keep halakha even if it disrupts my lifestyle. I ?am committed to halakhic practice and I don't knowingly contravene the law. So was it forbidden?? On the one hand this was a live event. So is it a problem? The Shulchan Arukh restricts weddings ?and haircuts as modes of marking the death of Rabbi Akiva?s 24,000 talmidim. Magen Avraham ?adds dancing and revelry to the list and I grew up not even going to movies in the Omer. Koolulam ?isn?t a wedding and did not include dancing, but was very much a public celebratory event. Could I ?go and allow others to go? I went to consult. One authoritative Posek said to me "It's not really assur (not dancing); it's not really muttar (public mass event). Go if it is ?important to you." ... But is that satisfactory?? The fundamental issue is deeper than the technical definition of ?music?, dancing? etc. In truth, ?I was going as part of my Yom Haatzmaut experience, as a celebration of life in Israel, of a people ?revived. This was not simple entertainment. Having participated in Koolulam, it was incredibly ?uplifting. My wife has described the evening as ?tefilla betzibur,? as the song?s words are essentially ?a prayer! - Just watch the "kavanna" in the video of the event! This was not merely a fun night out, although it was great fun. It was for us a Zionist ?expression, it touched a far deeper chord; it reflected faith, national unity, pride, hope, and so much ?more.? On the one hand, I see Halakha as embodying values which we aspire to imbibe. As such, I fully identify with the mourning of the ?Omer. It recalls Rabbi Akiva?s students who did not regard or interact with one another respectfully. In Israel ?today, we desperately need to be reminded annually about the need for a sensitive and respectful ?social environment and public discourse. The Omer contains a critical message. We wouldn't want to be without it. The mourning of the Omer, especially for Askenazi kehillot, also marks ?massacres and Crusades throughout the ages; another important feature, (although they may have tragically been eclipsed by the Shoah.?) But here is the problem. These practices totally fail to absorb the huge historic shift that is Medinat ?Yisrael. There is a gaping dissonance between the traditional Omer rhythm and our Israel lives. The ?traditional Omer rubric doesn't match the modern days of commemoration. For example, one ?does not recite Tachanun on Yom Hashoah because it falls in Nissan. If there is one day to say ?Tachanun, it is Yom Hashoah (I wrote about my struggle with this here ?http://thinkingtorah.blogspot.co.il/?/davening-on-yom-hasho?). And is Yom ?Haatzmaut merely a hiatus in a wider period of mourning? Moreover, in general, on a daily basis, ?as I read the Siddur, I wonder how we can ignore the huge chessed of HKBH in our generation of ?Jewish independence and the restoration of land and nationhood. How can my Siddur be the same ??(excluding the prayer for the State) as my great-grandfather? ? In this period of the year, we should be thanking God, celebrating our good fortune, revelling in ?the gifts that we feel as we move from Yom Haatzmaut to Yom Yerushalayim. Fundamentally, the ?Omer is a happy time; Ramban perceives it as a ?chol hamoed? of sorts between Pesach and ?Shavuot where we mark ?the love of our youth, our marriage with God, how we followed God ?through the wilderness? (Jeremiah 2) as we followed God from Egypt to Matan Torah at Mount ?Sinai. Where is the joy? ? So, I felt that this was a sort of Yom Haatzmaut event which yes, contravened the traditional Omer, ?but in some way lived up to our new reality. I keep the Omer - not shaving; watching how I speak ?to others and how I interact in a positive and respectful way - but we are not in the terrible era of ?Bar Kochba when the Romans massacred Rabbi Akiva's talmidim, and we are not in the period of ?the Crusades. We are in Medinat Yisrael, our thriving sovereign State, and I want to praise Hashem and celebrate my people for ?the ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ????, ?? ???????? ????? ?????? ??????? - and so I went to Kululam. ? I don't know how to square the two systems.? Later I saw a post by an amazing Rav, Rabbi David Menachem, whose post reflected similar sentiments, going even further than my thoughts. See his post here: ?https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=963243270498844&id=276752372481274 ?(h/t Yael Unterman) I?m sharing these thoughts without the ability to articulate a solution. Maybe time will change ?things. Maybe we need to push these questions to halakhic authorities and thinkers greater than ?myself.? From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 17 12:56:42 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 19:56:42 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> There have been many many posting recently about the desirability of secular education, but no one has, so far, mentioned an exceedingly important point. Bammaqom sh'eyn anashim hishtaddel lihyoth ish, so I have to step in and point it out. We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have. `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater". This is preposterous; someone who knows xokhma yvanith knows that "epi" means "above" and "tropos" means to move, or to act. An epitropos is someone who acts above someone else, i.e., a guardian, who acts above, and on behalf of, his ward. `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Posqim, especially, need to have a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages. Any poseq who is not willing to be `oqer a din in the Shulxan `Arukh is no poseq (you may attribute this quote to me). But ordinary Jews also need to know this. It is always dangerous to believe things that are untrue. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 17 15:00:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 18:00:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >: Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a >: bdieved. > >Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up by Shearith Israel in the 18th century taught secular as well as Torah subjects. The day school set up by Rabbi Avraham Rice did the same. While it is true that the level of Torah subjects taught was low, still there were secular subjects almost from the beginning. Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects and so did RJJ that was founded around1902. The high school that Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started in the second decade of the 20th century taught secular subjects as well as Torah subjects. The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. Please see my articles "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 "Bringing Torah Education to Baltimore" The Jewish Press, October 3, 2008, pages 57 & 75. >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? >: Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, >: "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." > >So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of >secular studies. The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. >Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of >secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. He knew in detail how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, he did value mathematics. Once he moved to NY he enrolled his children in yeshivas that gave its students a secular education. He received special permission not to send his eldest son to public school in Chelsea, MA, since there was no other alternative at the time. (His eldest daughter did attend public school in Chelsea, MA.) Lazar Miller, his eldest son, told me when he was sitting shiva for his mother that his mother used to help him with his math. However, she used Hebrew terminology for fraction, numerator, and denominator, since she had studied at two Yavneh schools in Lithuania where everything was learned in Ivrit. >: How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? > >Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat >haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. > >I would stick to discussing financial crimes: ... >But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding >of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the >am hanivchar means. What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal. I will take Erlichkeit with aberrance to mitzva practice over Frumkeit any time. >I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, >have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does >not produce people less prone to these things. I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to those who possess it. Originally, higher education in America was tied to religious education, and there was an attempt to instill morality in the students. Today, there is no such attempt. Indeed, if anything, higher education is in many cases anti-morality from a Torah standpoint. Parents contemplating sending their children to a secular collage should keep this in mind. YL From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 18 13:05:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:05:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:00:38PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: :> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a :> : bdieved. :> Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. : This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up : by Shearith Israel in the 18th century ... : Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects ... : The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. None of which led to the dayschool movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? .... :> So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of :> secular studies. : The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member : behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. But you haven't shown a connection between the lack of limudei chol and the extent by which people are not living according to some derekh's understanding of "true Torah values". :> Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of :> secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how : science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. ... And yet would have felt a student who studied science as a full time endevor to be a cause fo a cheshbon hanefesh. And consequently, due to his own lack of formal study, much of the science he uses in his examples is just plain wrong. (And similarly, someone who knew the then-latest theories of cosmogony, geology and evolution would not have found is arguments for Creationism very convincing. If you don't know what the other side of the debate believes, you end up knocking down strawmen.) : how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is : true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, : he did value mathematics. Leshitakha-- Why aren't you asking how R' Miller could ignore RSRH's paean to Schiller? :> But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding :> of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the :> am hanivchar means. : What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on : externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal... Frumkeit is about ritual and a drive to satisfy one's need to be holy. Ehlichkeit is about wanting to do G-d's Will. A frum "baal chessed" wants his gemach to be the biggest in town. An ehrlicher one is happy those in his town in need have so many sources of help. See Alei Shur vol II pp 152-155 A translation of an excetp by R' Ezra Goldschmiedt My blog post on the topic . And if that's not your definition, it's the one I intended when I said that the main cause of the chilulei hasheim you raised (and the mindset that least to them which is in-and-of-itself un-Jewish) is frumeit. :> I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, :> have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does :> not produce people less prone to these things. : I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to : those who possess it... So then why bring up immoral behavior as proof that there are problems with a lack of secular education? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 18th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 balance? From driceman at optimum.net Wed Apr 18 13:30:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:30:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > RAM: >> On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat >> before Biur Chametz? > Burning hametz is a b?dieved. In an ideal world we would eat all of our hametz before zman issuro. So Hazal gave us time to eat hametz in the morning, and instituted biur hametz soon enough before noon that we wouldn?t violate any issurim, but not much before that. Otherwise why not do the biur right after bedika? David Riceman From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 18 16:25:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:25:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95.6C.08474.004D7DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: None of which led to the day school movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Etz Cahim had secular studies in the late 1880s. see below. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started a high school with secular studies around 1915. . R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? This is not true. > From my article "The Founding of Yeshiva Etz Chaim" The Jewish Press, May 2, 2008, pages 48 - 49. From the amount of time allocated to secular subjects, it is clear that the directors of the yeshiva considered these far less important than the students? limudei kodesh studies. Abraham Cahan, who would eventually become the editor of the Jewish Daily Forward and a prominent figure in the Socialist movement in America, became one of the first teachers in the English department in 1887. Cahan records that the curriculum was loosely drawn to provide for the study of grammar, arithmetic, reading, and spelling ? all within the ?English Department.? But because the directors of the school had no clear idea of what should be taught, the English Department functioned haphazardly, more out of a perfunctory acknowledgement for these subjects than a sincere desire to ?provide the children with a modern education.? The English Department was divided into two classes. The first was taught by a boy about fourteen, who had just graduated from public school and the second was taught by Cahan, who was a little less than twenty-eight years old. The students ranged from the ages of nine or ten to fifteen and many were exposed to the formal study of secular subjects for the first time. One of the native students received his first lessons in the English language when he entered the Yeshiva after passing his thirteenth birthday. The young immigrants presented an immense challenge to their devoted teachers. The students drank up the instruction with a thirst centuries old. Cahan frequently remained long after the prescribed teaching hours to tutor his pupils, who were uniformly poor in reading and mathematics and who regarded grammar as an exquisite form of torture. On these occasions, the directors would ask Cahan why he ?worked so hard,? saying that the students ?already knew enough English.? And from my article "The Founding of the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School" The Jewish Press, September 5, 2008, pages 26 & 66. Setting The Pattern For Future Yeshivas The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was unique in that it was the first elementary parochial school that taught basic Jewish studies as well as Talmud. Yeshiva Etz Chaim, founded in 1886, was an intermediate school that enrolled boys at least nine years old who already were somewhat proficient in Chumash and Rashi. Yeshiva Etz Chaim?s goal was to give its students a thorough grounding in Gemara and Shulchan Aruch. In addition, it provided some limited secular studies in the late afternoon. The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was different in that in addition to providing a first rate religious education, it sought to provide its students with an excellent secular education at least equivalent to that offered by the public schools of the time. Nonetheless, limudei chol (secular or ?English? studies) was considered much less important than limudei kodesh (religious studies), and this attitude was clearly displayed in the constitution of the school. It required that there be two principals, one for each department. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 18 17:35:48 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:35:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> R? Jay F, Shachter wrote: ?We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have.? To this I respond: First, I certainly would not wish to set myself up as one who is capable ?to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us,? despite having some modern math and scientific knowledge. I think such a broad statement goes much too far. Not having any significant knowledge of Greek, I will refrain from commenting on your second example. However the first example you cite regarding Pi and the Rambam is one that I am willing to challenge. You are of course correct about the dating of the formal proof[s] (there are more than one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_%CF%80_is_irrational), date to modern, post Rambam times. However, it is very possible and probably likely that the Rambam intuited this on his own, even if without the benefit of a formal proof, that Pi had to be or was most likely to be irrational. I know I did so and probably most reasonably good students of math do so as well, long before they are aware of any formal proof for that fact. One reason for this is the well known method to approximate the value of Pi to any precision desired (even if very slow to converge) that requires little more than the knowledge of how to analyze a triangle. Simply inscribe a polygon of N equal isosceles triangles in a circle and calculate its perimeter and then divide by twice the length of the long side (= diameter of the circle). then do the same for N+1, and N+2 etc. a process in theory you could do infinitely many times for greater precision. So to intuit irrationality is very plausible even if not proven in our modern sense. Practically, note, that no matter how far you carry this exercise you will not get a repeating decimal that is the mark of the rational number. So I think you are far from ?judging the credibility? of the Rambam based on this example you cited. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 18 15:33:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:33:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . R' Ben Waxman wrote: > I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth > of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real > need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know > about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." > > The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika > anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant was that once you sell your chameitz there is no *d'Oraisa* need to do a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, and that's why we say the bracha. This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the only reason. Mishneh Brurah 431:2 writes: "Also: Because people are used to chometz all year long, if there is still some in his house and his possession, they made a gezera because he might forget and eat it." Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of the chometz that we found. But this is an error, in my opinion, because the concern raised by the MB was that one might happen to come across some chometz, and thoughtlessly eat it. Mechira will NOT prevent this. Mechira will ONLY remove the chometz from one's ownership, but it will not help against forgetfullness. I would like to close by showing that Bedikah and Mechira BOTH have strengths that the other lacks, and that is why people should do both: Mechira removes all chometz from ownership, regardless of where it might be, and (I think) regardless of my sincerity, but if I didn't clean the house well enough I may have left some around. Bedika removes (or greatly reduces) the chance that I might come across some chometz accidentally, but the chometz that I didn't find is still in my ownership. A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had intended to type!) Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 00:09:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 03:09:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> Message-ID: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day. In his day it was considered acceptable to say "Look, pi is obviously an irrational number", and nobody would lift an eyebrow, because it *is* obvious. Only later did mathematicians start to say, well, yes, it is obvious, but let's see if we can actually prove it. And eventually they did so, and guess what, they confirmed what everyone including the Rambam already knew. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 18 23:13:45 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 08:13:45 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Ben On 4/19/2018 12:33 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant > was that once you sell your chameitz there is no*d'Oraisa* need to do > a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, > and that's why we say the bracha. > > This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do > Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 03:27:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:27:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam and Pi In-Reply-To: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180419102714.GA11722@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:09:29AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a : rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state : it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day... I fully agree. But there is an irony here. When it comes to theolgy, the Rambam holds the chiyuv is to know, ie to believe because they had proof -- not tradition, not pur faith, etc... I think the Rambam believed he had a proof that pi was irrational. However, he had a differnt definition of the word proof. Continuing on this tangent... I think the definition of "proof" and therefore of "Rationalism" changed so much since the Rambam's day, the Rambam really wouldn't qualify as a "Rationalist" in our sense of the word. For example, science wasn't invented yet. The things the Rambam believed about Natural Philosophy were not backed by anything comparable to the rigor of scientific process. (Which itself is only rigorous at narrowing down the search space. Actual theories are constructed inductively, patterns found from a number of examples, and only have Bayesian levels of certainty. There can always be a black swan out there that, once found, requires replacing the theory with a new one. But *disproving* theories? That black swan does with certainty. Jumping back to before this parenthetic digression...) Similarly in math. The Rambam didn't have a modern mathemetician's definition of proof in mind. Even though he knew Euclid. But he did and always expected knowledge to be backed by some kind of proof. Archimedes spent a lot of time trying to "square the circle", i.e. come up with a geometric way of constructing a square with the same area as a circle. Numerous people tried since. This is the same thing as failing to find the rational number that is pi. Say the square they were looking for had sides of length s. So, the are of the square would be s^2. To "square the circle" would mean to find a square whose sides, s, are such that the ratio between s^2 and r^2 is pi, so that the areas s^2 (the square) and pi * r^2 (the circle) are equal. Repeatedly failing to find s by geometric construction eventually led people to conclude it was a fool's errand. By the Rambam's day, it was taken as a given that geometric construction could not find an s, and therefore that the ratio between them, pi, was irrational. (Weirdly, there still could have been a "black swan", the geometric construction that hadn't yet been found. The level of confidence the Rambam had would parellel that of a scientist believing the results of repeated experiment, but not that of a modern methematician.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Apr 19 08:04:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:04:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day >schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a >post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied >began, but initially, it didn't have to. I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was never separate from the study of Torah. He emphasized the importance of unifying Judaism and secular studies. Often speaking of the, "harmonious union of culture and spirituality," he believed that knowledge of the liberal arts would broaden one's understanding of Torah. However, Revel's dedication to Orthodox Jewry was undisputed. For instance, he forbade the use of a female vocalist in the 1926 Music Festival, as a female singer is a violation of Orthodox Jewish law. He did not allow Reform Jews to serve on Yeshiva College's national board of directors. He was also staunchly opposed to mixed seating in synagogues. "He wrote: 'Yeshiva aims at unity, at the creation of a synthesis between the Jewish conception of life, our spiritual and moral teaching and ideals, and the present-day humanities, the scientific conscience and spirit to help develop the complete harmonious Jewish personality, once again to enrich and bless our lives, to revitalize the true spirit and genius of historic Judaism.'" From https://goo.gl/hbRw8S "Rabbi Revel's first step as the new head of RIETS was the creation of an affi liated high school. The high school, Talmudical Academy, had its fi rst entering class in September 1916." Regarding Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin please see "Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin, Torah Education Pioneer in America" The Jewish Press, April 4, 2008, pages 42 & 91. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 03:19:45 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:19:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> References: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <81715a05-f9f9-f57e-95b1-03dc5240cb96@sero.name> On 19/04/18 02:13, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there > is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Nor is there an issur in having hefker chametz sitting in your property, but you have to search for it and put it away or get rid of it, for fear that if you come across it during Pesach you may absentmindedly eat it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Apr 19 07:45:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:45:48 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . I just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this permission? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:33:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:33:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180419153325.GA3724@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:04:09AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. : : From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b : : "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was ... Before the wave in question, but not the cause of the day school explosion. I do not know why this is so hard of a point to get across. Being around first but not starting a trend does not make something the source of the eventual trend. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is flawed reasoning. In fact, he didn't run a day school. And for that matter TA wasn't fully seperate from REITS. It wasn't a HS model that caught on anywhere. The model of day school and HS that actually catches on across American O through the middle of the 20th cent was the product of compromises between R ("Mr") SF Mendolovitch and his parent body. When TA evolved into MTA and BTA, it was because other schools have already created different expectations of what a HS was. Being in the same track as the eventual college degree, so that going from TA to any other college but YC was more like a transfer, was not sellable. (Although it did make AP courses moot; just take a college course in your 3rd year, if you were ready to.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Apr 19 04:25:17 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:25:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach Message-ID: The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately precedes the Amidah. I gave the following response: Soncino gives a very poignant explantion. ?O Lord, open Thou my lips; and my mouth shall declare Thy praise.? David?s lips had been sealed by wrongdoing, because praise of God would then have been blasphemy. If, then, God opened his lips and he was again enabled to offer Him praise, it was a sign that he had been granted pardon. What a profound thought before one of the most prominent and central prayers of our entire liturgy. We are all sinners and hope for the same pardon that King David was granted. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:59:45 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:59:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180419155945.GA30717@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:25:17AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately : precedes the Amidah. Technically, it is part of the Amidah. That's why we say it between ge'ulah and tefillah in Shacharis and Maariv. Unlike "Ki sheim H' eqra", which is only said before the Amidah of Minchah and Mussaf, because there is no Birkhas Ge'ulah, and therefore no problem of interruption. This is particularly relevant to a Chazan, as Chazaras haShatz should begin with "H' Sefasai Tiftach", not Birkhas Avos. Tangent, since we're looking at what the pasuq is about. Safah is at the edge. The word is not only used for a lip, but also for the seashore (sefas hayam). The peh is what stands behind the sefasayim. So, when I say this pasuq, and when I have the time and yishuv hadaas to think about what I am saying, my thoughts are about Hashem removing the externalities that block me from expressing my real inner self. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 09:23:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20180419162328.GB30717@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:56:42PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: : We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct : judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. : ... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. : He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although : he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater"... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge to that we know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon am? Mind you, I believe in the value of secular knowledge in-and-of-itself. Not just what you need to increase the likelihood of paying the bills. But I just don't see this particular argument. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 09:25:22 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> On 19/04/18 10:45, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I? just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, > then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no > longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). > > But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I > MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is > no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not > destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this > permission? It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 11:55:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahMusings] The Best Charity Message-ID: <20180419185537.GA11736@aishdas.org> People who both know my own proclivities and read this to the end will understand why I just HAD to share this post by RGS. >From https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/04/the-best-charity/ Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings The Best Charity Apr 19, 18 by R. Gil Student My friend, Rav Shlomo Einhorn, is once again attempting a superhuman feat of Torah teaching. A little over two years ago, he taught Torah for 18 live-streamed hours to raise money for the yeshiva he heads. This year, on Lag Ba-Omer, he will be attempting to break that record by teaching for 19 straight hours. This is a cause worth supporting -- or is it? I. Which Charity? Many people in the Jewish community have achieved varieties of financial success, allowing them the privilege of supporting many charities. This raises questions of communal and philanthropic priorities. Others have limited charity funds but still want to allocate them effectively. The issue is a blessing but also a complex problem, with multiple angles. Rav Hershel Schachter discussed this with me a few years ago in [48]Jewish Action. I would like to explore a specific subject that I have seen discussed in the responsa literature -- what is the best charity if you have to choose only one? In mid-sixteenth century Turkey, a wealthy man passed away without leaving instructions for the disposal of his charity funds. The local rabbis decided that some of that charity money should be given to the deceased's poor brother but the sons of the deceased objected that they should inherit the money and decide what to do with it. The question was brought to the Maharshdam, Rav Shmuel Di Medina of Salonica (Responsa Maharshdam, Yoreh De'ah 158). Maharshdam says that we have to try to determine the deceased's desires for the charity fund. Since in this case we do not know his intentions, we should give the money to the highest level of charity. The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 259) quotes his father, the Rosh, as saying that a town may reallocate to a study hall money that was donated to a synagogue or cemetery. Maharshdam argues that if in a case in which we know with certainty that the donor intended for the money to go to a synagogue we can use it for a study hall, then certainly when we do not know the donor's intention we can use the money to support Torah study. If we give the money to a lesser charity, we risk misusing the donation. II. Higher Torah The question then becomes which Torah study organization receives higher priority. Maharshdam quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 119b) that the world survives because of the Torah study of children, who due to their age are free of responsibility from sin. Additionally, more people doing a mitzvah together has greater merit than fewer people. Therefore, concludes Maharshdam, the money should be given to ththe highest charity -- a large elementary school. Similarly, Rav Ephraim Navon in early eighteenth century Turkey addresses a related question (Machaneh Ephraim (Hilkhos Tzedakah 11). A man donated money to establish in a small town a part-time kollel of ten men studying Torah. However, the town could not find ten men willing to enroll. The donor wished to change the endowment from a kollel to a full-time elementary school teacher. Rav Navon permitted this reallocation for technical reasons but adds that this new purpose is higher than the original because the Torah study of children sustains the world. III. God's Place However, Rav Yosef Eliyahu Chazzan challenges this argument (Ma'arkhei Lev vol. 1 no. 25). He quotes the Gemara (Berakhos 8a) which states that nowadays God only has the four cubits of halakhah. Therefore, He loves the distinguished gates of halakhah more than all the synagogues and other study halls. According to this passage, high-level Torah study merits higher priority than any other study. This seems to contradict the earlier passage, which gives priority to children's Torah study. This question gains greater strength when we note that the priority of high-level Torah has practical implications. Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Tefillah 8:3) rules, based on the above Gemara, that it is better to pray in a study hall than a synagogue. Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 90:18) rules likewise. Since the two passages seem to contradict and the latter is quoted authoritatively, it would seem that an elementary school should not be given priority over adult Torah study. Rav Chaim Palaggi (Chaim Be-Yad nos. 64-65) favors the interpretation of Rav Chazzan. However, he struggles with the many authorities who side with the Maharshdam. Rather than taking a minority view against the majority, in an impressive act of intellectual humility Rav Palaggi adopts a middle position that gives due weight to the majority with which he disagrees. IV. Jewish Behavior Perhaps a reconciliation of the two passages lies in the Rambam's interpretation. Rav Chazzan and Rav Palaggi follow Maharsha's interpretation that the Gemara is praising high-level study of halakhah. In the introduction to his commentary to the Mishnah (ed. Kafach, vol. 1, p. 21), Rambam sees the passage about the four cubits of halakhah as a general declaration about the uniqueness of true loyalty to the letter and spirit of halakhah. Synagogues and study halls may be full of people studying Torah but not enough of those students apply these teachings properly to develop a faithful Torah personality. Only someone who internalizes the messages of halakhah can reach out fully to God. If so, the distinguished gates of halakhah may overlap with elementary schools. Schools that teach proper character traits seem to qualify as remaining within the four cubits of halakhah, whether for adults or children. An elementary school that trains its students to follow the law, to embrace and internalize the messages of Judaism regarding behavior and thought, serves in the same capacity as a high-level kollel. Both types of institutions are distinguished gates of halakhah. Elementary schools have the additional benefit of purity, discussed above. If this is correct, the highest charity would be an elementary school that emphasizes proper behavior and attitudes, a mussar-focused cheder that directs pure children on the proper path. About Gil Student Rabbi Gil Student is the founder, publisher and editor-in-chief of Torah Musings. From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Thu Apr 19 18:08:35 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 01:08:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> ?When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah?? One thing I learned in my years as an attorney is that a rhetorical question is not an argument. I, of course, do not know what Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue to be observant in a work environment. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Fri Apr 20 11:40:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:40:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> References: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20180420184026.GA7707@aishdas.org> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 01:08:35AM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : I, of course, do not know what : Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very : proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates : and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue : to be observant in a work environment. Historical (and hagiographical) accounts portray the request for secular education that would make college and professions possible options came from the target audience, a majority of the parents of Brooklyn, not R "Mr." Mendlowitz. His launching of the HS was by convincing 8th grade parents to keep their sons in TvD "just one more year", as the parents wanted their boys to go to Public HS. That was the importance of getting a real American education had to his customer base. Then, it was another "just one more year" into 10th grade, until he had his first graduating class. There wasn't an issue for him of getting secular education into TvD, it was an issue of getting parents to agree to commit time to limudei qodesh! So of course TvD made a big deal about the quality of their secular studies. The whole point their marketing had to make was that the son can learn Torah without parents feeling afraid their boys would be held back. Getting back to the main conversation: What R-"Mr"-SFM thought is more of a historical issue. My point was that the push for limudei chol in day schools at the time the movement (not the first day school!) was getting started came from the parents, not the idealogues. There is no indication the decision was lechat-khilah, as this wasn't a lechat-khilah situation. Limudei qodesh without a guarantee of pre-college quality education wasn't a vaiable option in most communities, not a choice on the table. Meanwhile, the big voice in American O Rabbinate of the time was the East European Rabbi, and not an ideological immigrant who had a pull to America, but someone who came fleeing either progroms or Nazism. We know the majority of them considered limudei chol an assimilationist force. Or is that too under question? (I used the name "R 'Mr.' SF Mendlowitz" [or misspelled as per the usual pronounciation "-olovitch"] because he asked people to call him "Mr." and therefore I thought it respectful to acknowledge it. Even though here, "R" is the default title for men. Then I was afraid people who didn't know the history would think insult was intended, so I am adding this parenthetic explanation.) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 20th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Tifferes: What role does harmony Fax: (270) 514-1507 play in maintaining relationships? From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:54:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:54:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Some thoughts on the passing of a teacher and friend Message-ID: <5f552137ab7f4015af43f057f925c5ae@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> With the greatest trepidation I will share a few thoughts. I knew (to the extent one can know someone) R'Ozer Yeshaya Glickman Hacohain Z"L for 40 years. In the early years we learned together. He certainly was far more able than I but we did discuss many tum issues over the years. I don't think he would be happy being held up as a unicorn even though his blending of both worlds was the reason he felt he was asked by the Yeshiva to be "on the road" so much. I believe he felt that anyone could do what he did at their own level. When the hurley burleys done the question the yeshiva needs to ask itself imho is have they encouraged (or perhaps should they-my uninformed sense is that RIETS looks at the separate mountain approach as a vision -a la r'ybs) broad lives( a la r'hutner) in any of their best and brightest? do they seek out role models of that nature or only exceptional examples in specific accomplishments (e.g big TC or big $ but not a balancer)? Balancing priorities is a big challenge in life, if one wants to honor R'OYG Z"L imho one might start with some cheshbon hanefesh looking at his balance and its message for us (no two of us will likely reach the same conclusions but that's what is to be expected-it's the process not the results) yhi zichro baruch KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:53:20 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:53:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?R=92YBS-Feminist/Talit_Story?= Message-ID: <9fc9dd88e16649d48fc183b298bbfe74@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I believe this version of the story told by R? S Mandel in Jewish Action-not the ?gotcha? version I?ve heard. When a group of feminists visited him and demanded that he permit them to wear tallitot, he listened to them, showed he understood their reasoning, and proposed that there first be a trial period during which they would wear colored cloaks as tallitot, but without tzitzit and without reciting a berachah. He asked them to note how they feel wearing them and to come back after two weeks and confer with them again. After two weeks, they reconvened, and when the Rav asked these women how they felt, they told him how inspired they felt when wearing the cloaks. The Rav replied that that was excellent, that they should definitely continue wearing the cloaks and praying with kavannah, and that there was no need to wear the tallitot with tzitzit that men wore. Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 22 11:27:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:27:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah is Not Religion Message-ID: We are counting towards Shevuous which commemorates the giving of the Torah. The question is "What is Torah?' The following is from RSRH's essay Sivan I that I have posted at Sivan I (Collected Writings I) The Torah, however, did not spring from the breast of mortal man; it is the message of the God of Heaven and Earth to Man; and it was from the very beginning so high above the cultural level of the people to which it was given, that during the three thousand years of its existence there was never a time yet during which Israel was quite abreast of the Torah, when the Torah could be said to have been completely translated into practice. The Torah is rather the highest aim, the ultimate goal towards which the Jewish nation was to be guided through all its fated wanderings among the nations of the world. This imperfection of the Jewish people and its need of education is presupposed and clearly expressed in the Torah from the very beginning. There is, therefore, no stronger evidence for the Divine origin and uniqueness of the Torah than the continuous backsliding, the continuous rebellion against it on the part of the Jewish people, whose first generation perished because of this very rebellion. But the Torah has outlived all the generations of Israel and is still awaiting that coming age which "at the end of days" will be fully ripe for it. Thus, the Torah manifests from the very beginning its superhuman origin. It has no development and no history; it is rather the people of the Torah which has a history. And this history is nothing else but its continuous training and striving to rise to the unchangeable, eternal height on which the Torah is set, this Torah that has nothing in common with what is commonly called "religion." How hopelessly false is it, therefore, to call this Torah "religion," and thus drag it by this name into the circle of other phenomena in the history of human civilization, to which it does not belong. This is a fundamentally wrong starting point, and it is small wonder that it gives rise to questions such as the following, which have no meaning so far as the Torah is concerned: "You want Judaism to remain the same for ever?" "All religions rejuvenate themselves and advance with the progress of the nations, and only the Jewish 'Religion' wants to remain rigid, always the same, and refuses to yield to the views of an enlightened age?" See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 22 04:12:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 07:12:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav Message-ID: . Tumas meis and sheretz, for example, are supernatural phenomena. If someone has been in contact with tumah, and is infected with that tumah, there is no physical evidence of this infection. We are aware of the tumah if and only if we know about the events that took place, and the status of the things in those events. Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses. But they are spiritual illnesses, not medical ones. And in fact, Torah Sheb'al Peh is chock full of spiritual reasons why a person would become a metzora - Lashon Hara being the most famous of these, miserliness and others being mentioned less frequently. My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve myself in general." (Please note: This post is NOT an attempt to categorize all the many kinds of tumah. The first two paragraphs are designed only to show a similarity between tzaraas and zav, and then to highlight a difference.) Akiva Miller From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:02:03 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:02:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Re: R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 RYL quoted R? Yonasan Eybeshutz: --quote-- For all the sciences are condiments and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impure and how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. ?end quote-- >>>>> ? Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual, or even for every member of the Sanhedrin, to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry.? It is not necessary for all these subjects to be part of the standard yeshiva high school curriculum.? It is only necessary that there be in the world mathematicians, zoologists, chemists, doctors, astronomers and so on.? It is not even necessary that they be Jewish.? It is only necessary that their expertise be accessible when needed.? It is not uncommon that poskim confer with physicians, for example, when they need certain medical information in order to posken shailos in specific situations.? The poskim don?t first have to go to medical school.? ? Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. ?It is necessary that they exist in the world. ?It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies. ? If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:55:19 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:55:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> ? In a message dated 4/9/2018 RYL wrote: ? >> ?There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf --quote-- R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. Hayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, ?through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash?. By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy?. R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): ?. It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. ?.He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. ?. ? --end quote-- To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw from this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL ? >>>>? ? ? To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn: ? [1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ? [2] If you can master the ?seven branches of secular wisdom? before your bar mitzvah, that?s fabulous!? Because after your bar mitzvah you have to be mindful of ?vehagisa bo yomam velayla.???But before your bar mitzvah, you can play ball, roller-skate, and memorize the encyclopedia to your heart?s content. ? [3] Funny you should quote R? Chaim of Volozhin.? The famous Yeshiva of Volozhin did not include any of these seven branches of wisdom in its curriculum.? Anyone happen to remember why and when the Yeshiva of Volozhin closed its doors? ? Let me add a passage written by Rabbi Dr. David Berger (who, BTW, was my Jewish history professor for four wonderful semesters in Brooklyn College): ? --quote? ? Although various Geonim were favorably inclined toward the study of philosophy, it is clear that the curriculum of the advanced yeshivot was devoted to the study of Torah alone?.The private nature of philosophical instruction in the society at large [early medieval intellectual Islamic society] made it perfectly natural for Jews to follow the same course; more important, the curriculum of these venerable institutions [the yeshivot] went back to pre-Islamic days, and any effort to introduce? a curricular revolution into their hallowed halls would surely have elicited vigorous opposition.? ? --end quote? ? [Above is from R? Berger?s essay ?Judaism and General Culture in Medieval Times,? in the book *Judaism?s Encounter with Other Cultures* edited by Jacob J. Schachter.] ? Please note these words:? ?the private nature of philosophical instruction.?? The Vilna Gaon studied secular subjects on his own, as many yeshiva students have done over the years. ? Elsewhere RYL has indicated his desire that the NY govt require chassidishe schools to provide a good secular education to their students. ? You don?t have to impose your preferences on others, or get the government involved to force changes in school curricula. ? I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 01:06:16 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:06:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <6b2084c852a745458c68c6f7836e4477@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn:[1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ================================== IIUC, the Gaon?s theory of limud torah was that there was no such thing as spare time (any time one does not have to be doing something else must be spent learning) Thus assumedly he felt time spent on secular studies was required. Unless one posits that he had a need for ?recreation? which was study of secular studies or that he really only studied them when Torah learning of any sort was forbidden. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 23 05:39:50 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:39:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halacha Yomis - Hafrashas Challah, At Large Factories Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. How does the OU separate Challah at Jewish owned factories that manufacture bread and related items that require Challah separation? Is there a mashgiach separating a piece of dough from every batch? Isn?t that impractical? A. For OU-certified restaurants and caterers, the mashgiach separates Challah from every batch of dough. However, in factories it is not practical to have a mashgiach present each time a batch of dough is made. Instead the OU uses what we call the ?Tevel Matzah system.? Open boxes of matzah that did not have Challah separated from them (i.e. tevel) are placed in these factories next to the mixers. The mashgiach declares that each time a batch of dough is made, a designated piece of the matzah should become Challah and exempt that batch of dough. Even though the matzos have already been baked and the mixer contains unbaked dough, we have already seen that one can separate from baked matzah on raw dough when both are obligated in Challah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Mon Apr 23 06:34:22 2018 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 13:34:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. On Sunday, April 22, 2018, 11:29:56 PM CDT, Toby Katz wrote: > Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. It is necessary that they > exist in the world. It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student > take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. > I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female > physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. How > fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn > Torah day and night that men have! ... > If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") > are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and > potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. Not that this is optimal, Those that have the ability, and desire should spend as much time as they want/need to achieve the Torah knowledge we all rely on to live our lives. We all need Gedolim that these kinds of people become to naser the difficult Shaylos that constantly arise as we progress through time. For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah. This that misdirect those strengths - being urged to use their strengths to learn Torah are in my view shortchanging them. They are discouraging Jews from serving God and his people in the best way they can. Where their strengths where they really lie. More to say - no time. HM Want Emes and Emunah in your life? Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/ From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Mon Apr 23 01:26:05 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:26:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 From: Micha Berger > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us > they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon > am? What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, and what they are teaching us, whilst simultaneously utilising our understanding of the era's terms and sciences to better probe the intentions of the original statements. Dovid Rubin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 08:15:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 11:15:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423151544.GD1065@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 08:26:05AM +0000, D Rubin wrote: : > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, ... : > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon : > am? : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) ... Just to clear up the word, I meant non-posqim. I needed something that meant someone who wasn't "from LOR on up", and therefore shouldn't be pasqening for themselves. : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper : understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, : and what they are teaching us... Yes, as I said, I too believe in a role for limudei chol beyond the utilitarian study of things that will eventually help you pay the bills. I was addressing what I thought was a flaw in a particular argument. There is enough Torah to keep one busy for a lifetime without topics that require a formal secular education. The question is what to do when "Mah shelibo chafeitz" is something like hil' qidush hachodesh. Which brings me to a totally new aspect of this discussion: formal vs informal education. Secular study in one's spare time was the norm in places like Volozhin and Slabodka. (Although Slabodka students were more likely to be reading Freud...) To the extent that RSRH thought Volozhin were "fellow travelers on the path of Torah im Derekh Eretz" and described them as such to his followers when fundraisers for the yeshiva approched Frankfurt aM. And yet the same Litvisher rabbanim and RY would campaign against university and formal education. Perhaps their primary concern was leaving the bubble prematurely leading to assimilation, rather than expecting their talmidim to define away the concept of "free time" or afraid of which ideas their students might be exposed to. Although the Alter of Slabodka would make a case-by-case diagnosis and give each student different guidelines, at least we could say there were stduents for whom he thought secular study on one's own was appropriate. And apparently the norm. Remember, these are the same bachurim for whom the leading pass-time when not learnig was chess. Yeshiva wasn't for everyone; the guys who went were a bunch of intellecturals. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From t613k at aol.com Mon Apr 23 09:33:07 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:33:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <162f35a0504-c8b-11ca6@webjas-vab001.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Mon Apr 23 12:43:36 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:43:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: << I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies.>> And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of science the women should pasken the question -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:00:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:00:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423210037.GA8959@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:43:36PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of : science the women should pasken the question Except that it's arguable that pro forma women can't pasqen. It means a poseiq needs to know enough to ask intelligent questions of the expert. Even if the experts would end up being women, BTs who studied the subject before accepting ol mitzvos, unobservant Jews or non-Jews. Which is a good deal of knowledge, but doesn't require years of formal education. When I brought this thread over from Areivim to Avodah, my intent was not to have a bunch of pro-secular education posts. Rather, my focus was on the eilu va'eilu of saying that even though I believe in the value of secular education, I cannot say it's the One True Derekh. For example, the gemara only says that many tried to follow Rashbi's Torah-only derekh and failed. Not that R Yishmael was right. But that pragmatically, one worked for the masses and the didn't. And if the context changes, so that the welfare state makes it possible for more to succeed toing things Rashbi's way? The gemara says nothing against it. Assuming they don't bankrupt the state that way or other Modern Israeli political, governmental and economic issues, but again, that's the balebatishe problem of the system failing. Even if it were chilul hasheim issues (just to pre-empt that line of reasoning), that's not about eschewing secular studies. I would say the gemara leaves both options open. And for today... For every kid who leaves chareidi life going OTD because they feel hobbled by the lack of secular education, or the lack of worldliness in general, or just plain constricted by the paucity of their choices of how to live as adults there is a Mod-O kid who leaves because of too much opennees, a lack of structure, an attraction to the other lifestyles they're exposed to, a feeling that their parents are fooling themselves with compromise... To survive, we need all our options. That said, I find it interesting that none of the arguments in favor of limudei chol actually involved what I consider their real value: There is too much we can't learn from Torah. Not that it's not there, just that we don't know how to extract it. Like when RALichtenstein saw the Chevra Qadisha try to rush the aveilim at one levayah through so that they could begin another, he commented that had they read Hamlet they never could have acted that way. Not that such middos aren't in Torah sources, but they're more accessible sometimes in literature. And for all the awe one may get from the Wisdom of the Author when learning Torah, it hits harder when you see Chokhmas haBorei in the physical world, outside the context of "religious studies". Also, by studying other topics one learns other modes of thought, and becomes more able to think in other ways, reach other conclusions. Mathemeticians, programmers and lawyers all learn a precision of thought and attention to detail that helps in real-life problem solving as well as learning. Vekhulu for other displines. In short... The value I find in limudei chol only starts with knowing more and having more data to put into the Torah and the parnasah mills. They change how one thinks in ways that improve both Torah and life skills. Simply by having more tools in the toolbox. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 11:08:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. When I was a kid, it was a big deal that we couldn't buy chameitz from Walbaum's, including the supermarket whose parking lot was directly across the street. It means that for a couple of months, I couldn't be sent to the store on Fri for many of those last-minute purchases. I presume (given who my parents would have asked in that era) that was R' Fabian Schoenfeld's pesaq. But as the broohaha over beer this year indicates, there is a machloqes. We could view the sale as valid, and the Jew wrongfully selling merchandise that belongs to someone else. Theft, rather than chameitz she'avar alav es haPesach. Which would imply that in our case, where bi'ur chameitz is done later than the rav's mechirah, we would view it as wrongfully destroying someone else's chameitz. Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? I would think the latter. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 14:07:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:07:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> On 23/04/18 14:08, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. > > With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim > who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) > that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to > treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But here your actions show that you were completely serious about the mechira, but you didn't intend this to be included in it. The shtar you signed doesn't specifically say this *is* included. Its description of what's included very much depends on your intentions as revealed by your actions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend to include ANY item? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 23 14:51:13 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:51:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <07.CD.29097.DC55EDA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:31 AM 4/23/2018, RN Toby Katz wrote: >I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a >reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I >never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would >never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the >option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? >? >? >? >--Toby Katz I find your terminology "normal Orthodox schools" somewhat surprising in the context of Chassidic yeshivas. What exactly do you mean by this terminology when contrasted with Chassidic schools? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 21:57:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:57:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/04/18 17:49, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be > : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from > : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a > : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. > > But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when > the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions > showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or > burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend > to include ANY item? Again, you are conflating two questions, one of which depends on your intentions and one which does not: 1) Is the mechira valid? Yes, regardless of your intentions. 2) What is included in the mechira. Certainly anything explicitly included in the shtar. But the shtar's language is vague; does it apply to *this* piece of bread? Only if you meant it to. That which you've set aside for breakfast is clearly not included, even if the mechira happened early in the morning. Ditto for that which you set aside to burn. Did it include an item on your store shelves, which you ended up selling just 20 minutes later? We can approach this two ways: a) It did, because you intended it to. Your intention was that your inventory should not become treif; this is inventory, you don't want it to be treif, therefore it's included. b) I bo'is eima, fine, let it be as you say, and the act of selling an item -- whether 20 minutes after the zman or 20 minutes before the end of Achron Shel Pesach -- shows that it was not included. Even if we were to accept this proposition (which I do not), whatever remains on the shelves that you did *not* sell remains included. Not only did you do nothing to indicate an intention to exclude it, you clearly did intend to include it, since your whole purpose was that it should not become treif. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 22:18:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:18:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name>, <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore > guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is > still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between > chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or > moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? > > I would think the latter. > ?????- Iiuc they sold the whole business, not just the stock Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 24 04:53:01 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 07:53:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira. There have been conjectures that the person's actions might reveal his intentions, or maybe not. But it seems to me that the starting point should be that which has been mentioned in writing. And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser degree of detail. In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this thread. But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other details. It seems to me that the "stam daas" of this person would be that he is selling only what is on the list, and the bittul is on everything else. Akiva Miller From hankman at bell.net Tue Apr 24 06:15:47 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:15:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: <0401042908D24434A2102FDD03A26A7A@hankPC> R?n T. Katz wrote: In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz I would go well beyond that and possibly suggest that when done ?the right way? that certain limudei chol? (read math and natural sciences) could be a better and more efficient way of attaining emunah including drosh vachakor and yiras harommeimus and the goal of understanding ?beHai? boro osom, or the gevuros of masseh bereishis, the intricacies of the olam koton and the actual vast olom not to mention the numerous sugios in shas and halacha that require knowledge of the real world and it science (its understanding). I propose a thought for consideration, that while for some yechidim their level of Torah learning is sufficiently high that Torah is the best and most efficient path to attain these goals. Unfortunately for many (most) of us, our level of Torah havanah is not even close to that level and as a practical fact a more direct path to getting a start on these Torah goals is through studying the briah and its science put there by G-d in the maseh beraishis. Someone like the GRA whose level of Torah study most of us can not even begin to imagine would relegate his study of science to only when it was not in opposition to his limud of Torah (such as the B?HK etc) as the best manner (for him) of achieving this goal was through his limud of Torah. But for most of us to take this as also applying to our situation is wishful thinking. As many times as I learn parshs Bereishis, my havana of ?beHai? boro osom has not really grown very much nor my level derosh vachakor. For us it may be a lekatchila outside the B?HK to set times for scientific study if done with the appropriate approach in support of our Torah understanding and growth in yira and emunah even when not just for parnasa. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 24 08:12:26 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:12:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Some_FAQs_about_the_OU=92s_=93Tevel_Mat?= =?windows-1252?q?zah_system=94?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Here are some FAQs about the OU?s ?Tevel Matzah system? that were described in yesterday?s Halacha Yomis. Q1. What would happen if the box of tevel matzos that was left in the factory was accidentally discarded? A1. If the matzo is discarded, the Tevel Matzah system becomes in-operative. Because of the concern that the tevel matzos might be lost, the OU also arranges a backup Hafrashas Challah each day in the OU offices to cover any factory that did not have a proper Hafrashas Challah done on premises. Q2. Is there any special reason that the OU chooses to use matzos for their tevel system? Couldn?t plain dough or bread be used instead for this purpose? A2. The main advantage of using matzos for Hafrashas Challah is that they have a very long shelf-life. A matzah can easily last from one year to the next and still be edible. Another obvious advantage of using matzah is that it can remain in the factories on Pesach. Q3. From how many batches of dough can one separate Challah using one box of tevel matzos? A3. When the mashgiach places the box of matzos in the factory, he declares that 1/5 of a gram of matzah should become Challah for each subsequent batter that will be produced. Considering that a box of matzos contains approximately one pound of matzos (454 grams), this means that a box of matzos will cover the Challah for more than 2,200 batches of dough. Even if a factory makes ten batches a day, a single box of matzos will last for over 6 months! Q4. Given that a box of matzah can be used to separate Challah for over 2,000 batches of dough, if a factory only makes one or two batches of dough a day, could a single box of matzos be used for several years? A4. No. One cannot take Challah from dough made from wheat that grew in one year on a batch of dough made from wheat that grew in a different year. The cutoff for determining which year the wheat grew is Rosh Hashanah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 24 08:24:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:33pm EDT, R Akiva Miller wrote: : This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do : Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer : to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the : only reason. I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? The MB's other reason (gezeira) and discussion thereof, elided. : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of : the chometz that we found... "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? ... : A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my : chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already : removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for : me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had : intended to type!) Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? A shade over 6 days later, on Tue, Apr 24 at 7:53am EDT, RAM wrote: : I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone : referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira... : And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two : major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person : who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller : must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser : degree of detail. I thought there are so many versions, referencing "the text" or even "a text" is meaningless. I therefore viewed the issue when you raised it last week (?) morein terms of: Does your LOR address this issue, and if so, how? : In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, : I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must : take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual : intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this : thread. Bitul and "all my chameitz" are mutually exclusive sets. It it's hefqeir, it's not mine. (BTW, in Israeli Aramaic the word was "hevqer", which I kept on reading as though it was "the cattle.") Espectially is we allow later actions as evidence of what was intent at the time of the sale. : But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that : he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", : and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other : details... Without "and any other chameitz which may be"? That version would solve all your problems, but affords less protection against issur. Since all the mechirah is belt-n-suspenders with bitul anyway, no big deal. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony? From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 24 09:03:23 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:03:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> References: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1df6ecc6-8417-7966-0620-412e6633fa66@sero.name> On 24/04/18 11:24, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of > hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? Yes, I think it is. Hefker, especially when the item is still in your property, depends on your willing renunciation. If you still regard it as yours then it's not hefker, regardless of your declaration. Either because the insincere declaration is defective, or because the moment you think of it as yours you regain it through kinyan chatzer. > : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point > : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) > : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of > : the chometz that we found... > > "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? Bedika != Bittul. By definition Bedika cannot get rid of what is not found. > Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? I don't see why not. If you inherited an unspecified estate you can surely sell it as a lot, sight unseen, and leave it to the buyer to discover what exactly is included in it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Tue Apr 24 23:26:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 06:26:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hand washing Message-ID: The gemara (Shabbat 62b) states that being derogatory (mzalzel) concerning ntilat yadaim(hand washing) causes poverty. Rava then clarifies that this is only talking about the case where one doesn't wash at all. The gemara then rejects Rava's interpretation based on R' Chisda saying that he had washed his hands with a lot of water and got a lot of good (in return?). As part of a broader shiur, I was wondering : 1. Is it possible that water was not as readily available then and so this focus on the amount of water might not be applicable today? 2. Why would the gemara accept a rejection of Rava without a more specific refutation source? 3. How is R' Chisda's statement a source of rejection? (Rava could well agree that using more than the minimum is praiseworthy but still hold poverty only comes for those who don't wash at all) That's enough to start :) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Tue Apr 24 10:57:13 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:57:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed during the Rav?s lifetime. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 24 05:30:39 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Apr 22, 2018 09:28:10 pm Message-ID: <15245910390.9bBE36.37982@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge [s]o that we > know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto > explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we > question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with > emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? > > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the > metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) > that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such > things. But the hamon am? > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- correction. At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that requires supernatural explanation. Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass them. There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 06:05:39 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:05:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <23688d43-325f-1109-9d85-fcb94a75b7e7@aishdas.org> On 4/24/2018 1:57 PM, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit > and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav's talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav's lifetime. The one that Rabbi Mayer Twersky quotes is in the name of an impeccable source, Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, who was personally involved. KT, YGB From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 07:25:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:25:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425142550.GB15047@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:57:13PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit : and others tell a different version. He believes one... Actually, you can go see RSM's version for yourself. No need to mix RJR into this. From the current Jewish Action: https://jewishaction.com/the-rav/observing-the-rav > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav?s lifetime. Actually, the "a woman" version was. I remember the discussion in shul, because I thought that the story as told belittled the woman too much. (Unlike RSM's impression, "Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances.") Tamar Ross (2004) records R' Meiselman and the Frimer Brothers telling the story https://books.google.com/books?id=vkvNNioH--4C&lpg=PA91&pg=PA91#v=onepage I found R' Meiselman (published Fall 1998) here (near the bottom of pg 9 [5th page of the PDF]): http://bit.ly/2HQBwHm And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 They say they were told the story by Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, former rabbi of the YI of Brokline, and that it happened in the mid-70s. Remember (unlike RSM) your "several of the Rav's talmidim knew the NY RY, not the Rabbi of Boston. There is really enough detail in R' Meiselman and R's Frimer version to rule out the story being legend. I would attribute RSM's version to memory drift; it has been some 40 years since the events, after all. 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? From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Apr 25 07:37:22 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:37:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Translation of Makkos / Binfol oyivcha al tismach In-Reply-To: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> References: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> Message-ID: Revisiting an issue that comes up repeatedly--do classical sources support the approach that we should feel sorrow for / not rejoice over, the suffering of our persecuting enemies. Yeshayahu (15:5) declares, ?My heart cries out? over the destruction of Israel?s wicked enemy, Moab. TargumYonason (and Radak and Metsudos) take this as the prophet quoting the enemy. But Rashi takes it as the prophet expressing his own heart?s thoughts, and he writes, ?The prophets of Israel are unlike the prophets of the umos ha-olom. Bilaam sought to uproot Israel for no reason. But the prophets of Israel [who had good cause to wish for their persecutors? destruction, nevertheless] mourn over the punishments coming upon the nations (miss-o-ninnim al pur-annos ha-ba-ah al ha-umos).?? (Artscroll cites both explanations, but adds a commentary by ''Sod Yesharim (I could not find it on HebrewBooks.org) who, like Rashi, takes the prophet to be referring to his own grief, but contra Rashi declares, ''The prophet had no cause to grieve over the downfall of the wicked nation of Moab, or of other unworthy nations. However, every nation had its own type of impurity that tempted the righteous and was a challenge that they had to overcome. When they did so successfully, they grew in stature. Now, with the demise of Moab, that particular challenge disappeared, and with it the potential for growth.) Also, I did have occasion to directly ask Rav Dovid Feinstein what he meant in the Kol Dodi Hagadah by ''shofchim l'eebud ha-makos and we don't drink them.'' Did he mean we pour out the wine out of sympathy for the Egyptians' suffering the makkos (as I had translated it), or did he mean that after taking the drops of wine out of the cups, we throw them (the drops of wine representing the makkos) out as waste, rather than drinking them (as R. Zev Sero insisted). And how that relates to the issue of ''al tismach.'' Sorry, but he did not commit to either way, comfortable with both approaches towards rejoicing over the downfall of Israel's enemies. Nevertheless, by my request, the next printing of the Kol Dodi Haggadah should have the translation changed to R. Zev's. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 08:32:13 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:32:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". Does _anybody_ here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? Perhaps a bar mitzvah boy the first time his tefillin "counts", or, perhaps the first time one dons a tallis at shul after marriage, or the first time one does birchas hachama? (As a baal teshuva, I have had a plethora of opportunities to do a mitzvah for the first time, and sometimes I get a spiritual high. And it's quite possible that I didn't do all of them correctly the first time, and that sometimes I wasn't even yotzie b'deived. No, I don't check my tzitzis every time I put on my tallis). Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce inappropriate? The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an inappropriate thought? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 25 13:03:11 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 16:03:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages Message-ID: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:26 AM 4/25/2018, Jay F. Shachter wrote: Let me begin with Daas Torah. Some years ago Rav Zelig Epstein, ZT"L was describing how the Mir Yeshiva left Vilna and got to Japan. He pointed out that almost all of the yeshivas were at this time located in Vilna and that almost all of the hanhalla of the yeshivas were opposed to leaving Vilna, because they feared that the Russians would arrest the yeshiva boys for trying to leave the "Communist paradise." However, several yeshivas boys were strongly in favor of leaving. The following is from my article Rabbi Aryeh Leib Malin And The Mir Yeshiva Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 154 The Jewish Press, February 2, 2018. "Rabbi Malin [a top Mir student] felt it was a matter of life and death that the Mir Yeshiva students leave Vilna. He is reported to have said, "I will get a gun and shoot anybody who tries to stop us from leaving!" (This was verified for me by Reb Zalman Alpert, who served as a librarian at Yeshiva University for many years and told me he heard it from two former Mir Yeshiva students.) " When one of the boys heard that the yeshiva students went against what the hanhalla said, he asked, "But what about Daas Torah?" Reb Zelig replied (and I do not know if he was serious or kidding), "This was before Daas Torah was invented." I was told that Reb Chaim Shmuelevitz, who was against the yeshiva leaving, later apologized to Reb Leib with tears in his eyes. The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. Regarding asking and following what a rov tells you, I am convinced that when they ask in the World to Come "Why did you do this or that?" and someone replies, "I asked a Rov and he told me to do this." the response will be, "You were given free will and expected to exercise it." Certainly one needs to ask a rov difficult halachic questions, but need one ask about most things in daily life? A friend of mine who is a therapist told me that some of his patients are afraid to do almost anything on their own. How sad. Even the Avos were not perfect and RSRH points this out. See his essay Lessons From Jacob and Esau (Collected Writings VII) where he points out that Yitzchok and Rivka made errors in educating Eisav. See also his commentary on what Avraham did when he said that Sarah was his sister. He follows the RAMBAN who says Avraham made a "big" mistake when he did this. Sadly there are some who do believe that whatever scientific assertions Chazal made must be valid. Rabbi Moshe Meiselman is one such person. His book Torah, Chazal and Science takes this position. It is hard for me to understand how a nephew of RYBS can hold this view. Regarding believing things that are not true, see my article "My Mind Is Made Up. Do Not Confuse Me With The Facts!" The Jewish Press, August 25, 2004 pages 7 & 77. YL >It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > >Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what >you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when >you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages >have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same >moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- >correction. > >At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the >moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the >dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on >yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, >the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and >advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly >caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). > >Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this >mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still >we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on >our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in >matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, >even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in >Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit >when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must >rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. >If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will >increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where >the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same >reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. > >That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know >already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, >and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, >and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take >literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and >you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that >requires supernatural explanation. > >Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, >and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes >you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like >them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a >Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your >abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is >a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some >of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. > >You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different >species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that >every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid >Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all >scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a >vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us >closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different >species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you >will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are >different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do >is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass >them. > >There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original >topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than >bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, >that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education >inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for >all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and >progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some >people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the >Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded >innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There >is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he >is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will >never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that >he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. > > > Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter > 6424 N Whipple St > Chicago IL 60645-4111 > (1-773)7613784 landline > (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice > jay at m5.chicago.il.us -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 14:03:32 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish Message-ID: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> >From The Jewish Press , by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev [literally, "the fish of the sword"] is kasher. Why is it widely considered to be not kosher, then? Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different consistency - or something like that - from those of other fish. So he decided it was a treife fish. But that's absolutely not correct. The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag hacherev is kasher. Professor [Shlomo] Sternberg, a big genius in learning and math, published an essay maybe 20 years ago in which he writes that Rabbi Soloveitchik asked him to conduct research on the status of swordfish. He did. He showed Rabbi Soloveitchik the scales of a swordfish and Rav Soloveitchik said, "It's a kashere fish!" Professsor Sternberg writes that he still has the envelope with the scales he showed Rav Soloveitchik in his Gemara Chullin. If the commentaries on the Shuchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev is kosher, how can Rabbi Tendler claim it isn't? Rabbi Tendler claims "dag hacherev" is a different fish. It's not true. But Rabbi Tendler did a service to the Orthodox Jewish community because at the time there were Conservative rabbis who were giving hashgachas, so he laughed them out of existence and said they don't know what they're talking because [they were giving swordfish a hechsher when] swordfish is really treif. So the Orthodox realized you can't rely on the Conservatives. L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue, but Rabbi Tendler accomplished his goal. Well, that's a lot of egg (roe?) on my face after what I said repeatedly in the 1990s in soc.culture.jewish[.moderated] O/C/R Wars... But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. "L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! There is a tie in here to what R JFSchachter posted here yesterday (? no time zone) at 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) under the subject line "Judging The Credibility Of The Sages": > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what > you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when > you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages > have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same > moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- > correction. I was okay attributing ignorance to Chazal, but not violating epstemic virtue like "making up an answer". I would think that by the end of the period, subconsious biases wouldn't have made it into the final result. > At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the > moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the > dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah... Except that daas Torah only requires belief that one is obligated to listen to halachic leadership on social and personal issues where the unknowns are not halachic (or even aggadic). Not that they are necessarily right, nor even that they are more likely to be right. (Infallibility was never Agudah doctrine; but you do find it among the population.) And I am not sure that when it comes to halakhah Chazal *can* be wrong. It's like saying that the house john built is inconsistent with the house John built. Pesaq is constitutive, not truth finding; expecially when you are the nation's authoritative halachic source (eg the Sanhedrin or shas as keSanhedrin, depending on when you think the Sanhedrin actually closed its doors). A pesaq made by CHazal based on incorrect science may still be correct halakhah because they define correctness. We would need to revisit our recurring tereifos discussion. But in any case: 1- I refuse to believe Chazal "made up answers" of had other epistemic moral failings (as a group, including peer review, what made it into shas, etc...) And I wonder how emunas chakhamim would work without that kind of assertion. 2- And yet, that may have happened here, among our contemporary posqim. No one is interested in fixing the science error (among those who believe it is in error) because C loses this way. 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? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 12:49:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 15:49:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425194944.GC6722@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:32:13AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 : > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 : : Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav : concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of : 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" : and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". ... : The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is : *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is : doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an : inappropriate thought? I think it's more that the high isn't from the halachic aspect of what they're doing. Rather than it having to be halkhah qua halakhah. I am not sure that "one is doing ratzon H'" is different than "being mequyam a mitzvah" anyway. As for "getting closer to H'", Litvaks would talk more about sheleimus than deveiqus. IMHO this is part of RYBS being, fundamentally, a Brisker. Here's a quote I feel is on a similar theme, from "The Rav: The World of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik", starting on pg 54: Judaism must be explained and expounded on a proper level. I have read many pamphlets that have been published in the United States with the purpose of bringing people closer to Judaism. There is much foolishness and narrishkeit in some of these publications. For instance, a recent booklet on the Sabbath stressed the importance of a white tablecloth. A woman recently told me that the Sabbath is wonderful, and that it enhances her spiritual joy when she places a snow-white tablecloth on her table. Such pamphlets also speak about a sparkling candelabra. Is this true Judaism? You cannot imbue real and basic Judaism by utilizing cheap sentimentalism and stressing empty ceremonies. Whoever attempts such an approach underestimates the intelligence of the American Jew. If you reduce Judaism to religious sentiments and ceremonies, then there is no role for rabbis to discharge. Religious sentiments and ceremonies are not solely posessed by Orthodox Jewry. All the branches of Judaism have ceremonies and rituals. This is not the only reason why we must negate such a superficial approach. Today in the United States, American Jewish laymen are achieving intellectual and metaphysical maturity. They wish to discover their roots in depth. We will soon reach a point in time where the majority of our congregants will have academic degrees. Through the mediums of white tablecloths and polished candelabras, you will not bring these people back to Judaism. It is forbidden to publish pamphlets of this nature, which emphasize the emotional and ceremonial approaches. There is another reason why ceremony will not influence the American Jew. In the Unitesd States today, the greatest master of ceremony is Hollywood. If a Jew wants ceremony, all he has to do is turn on the television set. If our approach stresses the ceremonial side of Judaism rather than its moral, ethical, and religious teachings, then our viewpoint will soon become bankrupt. The only proper course is that of Ezekiel's program for the priests: "And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and the common, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean" [Ezekiel 44:23] The rabbi must teach his congregants. He must deepen their appreciation of Judaism and not water it down. If we neutralize and compromise our teachings, then we are no different than the other branches of Judaism. By RYBS's standards, being moved by music at a kumzitz is "ceremony". Meanwhile, Chassidus, Mussar, RSRH, Qabbalah-influenced Sepharadim (following the Chida and Ben Ish Hai) and numerous other derakhim have no problem with ceremony. For that matter, before it became minhag, specifying specific patterns of hand washing (RLRLRL or RRLL) was also ritual once. And many of those Academics that RYBS foresaw want their Nesivos Shalom, Tish, kumzitz.... Neochassidus is a big thing in YU. This idea that ceremonies that aren't defined by halakhah are inherently empty and its sentimentalism is cheap rather than reinforcing the cognitive and halachic, is, as I said, only something a Brisker would write. Even within Brisk... RYBS went further in this direction than did the Brisker Rav (R Velvel, his uncle). The BR holds that one makes berakhos on minhagim that have a cheftzah shel mitzvah (eg lighting a Chanukah menorah in shul), and that the Rambam and Rabbeinu Tam don't argue about that. What they do argue about is whether Chatzi Hallel is close enough to Hallel to qualify for a berakhah. This is a non-started for RYBS, who requires minhagim have a cheftzah shel mitzvah or else they're ceremoial. RYBS even fit the minhagim of the 3 Weeks and 9 Days to fit this shitah by insisting they must follow what was already established aveilus and sheloshim, respectively. Oops. I just notied I'm repeating something I worte a decade ago. See . At least the berkhah-in-minhag part was posted in 2011, so that this post had the value of combining the two earlier ones. Beqitzur, I don't know of two many people (aside from our mutual rebbe-chaver) who would agree with RYBS on this one. 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? From zev at sero.name Wed Apr 25 14:37:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:37:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish In-Reply-To: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 25/04/18 17:03, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish > because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with > scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is > young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are > elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) > So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question > seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify > as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. There can be no question that a fish does *not* have to keep its scales to remain kosher. The posuk says fish only have to have their scales in the water, not when they leave the water. A fish that sheds its scales when caught is kosher, and no rabbi has the right to say otherwise. And I don't see a difference between shedding when caught and shedding on reaching adulthood. As I understand R Tendler's claim, it was that swordfish never have true scales, that even the ones they have as juveniles are not kaskasim. And this seems not to be true. BTW R Ari G and R Ari Z dispute the claim that adults swordfish (or landed swordfish) lose all their scales. They claim that this is the result of not examining adult landed fish closely enough, and that if one does one finds kosher scales still attached to the skin. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Apr 25 16:33:33 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 23:33:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: <06705270-E689-4937-BAAF-0C7AE035E469@tenzerlunin.com> I simply note that (a) all the stories were published after the Rav died and (b) all appear to be least first degree if not more hearsay. (It?s unclear how R. Mandel knows the story. His article doesn?t say if he saw it, heard it from the Rav, or heard it from someone else.) But the difference between the two ways the story is told is striking and, I believe, calls it into question. But I guess we?ll never know. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 26 05:25:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:25:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sifrei torah Message-ID: <6fef9ae673744a11a2ede85a210fb782@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Can anyone point me to information concerning the history of the difference between the physical element of Ashkenazi (atzei chaim) and Eidot Hamizrach (containers) Sifrei Torah? The differences in the timing and physics of hagba and glila ? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Apr 26 10:06:01 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 17:06:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Unknown Days of the Jewish Calender Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NZ9BN1 This coming week, an unsuspecting person wishing to catch a minyan, who walks into a random shul in many places around the world, might be in for a surprise. After the Shemoneh Esrei prayer on Sunday there will be no Tachanun. On Monday there will be Selichos; and on Thursday there again won?t be Tachanun! Why would this be? No Tachanun generally signifies that it is a festive day[1]; yet, no other observances are readily noticeable. As for the reciting of Selichos on Monday, they are usually reserved for a fast day; yet no one seems to be fasting! What is going on? See the above URL for more about this. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 19:43:43 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 22:43:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> On 4/25/2018 11:32 AM, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: >> And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at >> (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav > concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense > of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something > else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". > Does anybody here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? ... > Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah > was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce > inappropriate? > The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he > is thinking that he is being mekayum a mitzvah?... For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a problem. KT, YGB From meirabi at gmail.com Thu Apr 26 15:58:32 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 08:58:32 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach Message-ID: Yeshayahu (15:5) My heart cries out over the destruction of Israels wicked enemy, Moab. Rashi understands, the prophet is expressing his own agony - The prophets of Israel, unlike the prophets of the world, like Bilaam, seek to destroy us without provocation. Our prophets however, mourn for our persecutors when they suffer Divine punishments. As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness, that is certainly more of an intense and personal loss than the millions of Egyptians who perished - but we mourn them all from the perspective of lost potential, lost opportunity to be loyal to HKBH, and HKBH's failure to successfully persuade them to open their eyes and do what is right. That is why we spill wine from the cup we use for Hallel - HKBH's praise is incomplete, He was not fully successful - the gift He gave humanity, free choice, can, and was, used against Him. Obviously the cup should not be topped up. Each plague was a lesson and a plea from HKBH to all who witnessed these astonishing events - do the right thing, reconise that I am the King of all kings, The Master of the universe. Every Yid deserves 600,000 to attend his funeral. The Gemara explains - As it was given So it is taken away. Every Y, even the most Poshut or unlearned, is a potential recipient of the entire Torah and we must visualise their departure as the loss of that tremendous potential. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 26 18:35:26 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:35:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2499630f-df1d-04ef-9897-ef18103da093@sero.name> On 26/04/18 18:58, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of > descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness Where is this written? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri Apr 27 01:04:10 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 10:04:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> References: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> Message-ID: When I was in yeshiva, one of my rabbanim told us that we should dance when we "get" a Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Ben On 4/26/2018 4:43 AM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: > For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a > problem. > > KT, > YGB From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 29 07:49:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 17:49:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: A while ago we had a discussion about farfetched ukimtas. In yesterday's daf (Zevachim 15) the Gemara made a very startling statement about farfetched ukimtas. The Gemara has a question about whether Holachah without walking is Pasul or not. The Gemara brought a proof from a braisa If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher (even though when it spills, some if it spreads out towards the Mizbeach, i.e. Holachah without walking). The Gemara answered that none of the blood spread towards the Mizbeach.The Gemara then asked, surely, it spreads in all directions! The Gemara gave 3 answers 1: It fell on an incline. 2: It fell in a crevice. 3: The blood was very thick, and almost congealed. It did not spread at all. Then the Gemara made the following startling statement to reject these answers: It is UNREASONABLE to say that the Tana taught about such unusual cases The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? I brought an example from Bava Basra 19-20 which had at least as farfetched ukimtas and yet the Gemara didn't think they were unreasonable. Here is the example that I quoted from Bava Basra A Baraisa states that the following block Tumah, grass that was detached and placed in a window, or grew there by itself; rags smaller than three fingers by three fingers; a dangling limb or flesh of an animal; a bird that rested there; a Nochri who sat there, a (i.e. stillborn) baby born in the eighth month; salt; earthenware Kelim; and a Sefer Torah. The Gemara then proceeds to ask questions on each one that it is only there temporarily and the Gemara gives ukimtas, qualifications, for each thing to explain why it is not there temporarily. 1. Grass The grass is poisonous. The wall is ruined (so the grass will not destory it) The grass is 3 tefachim from the wall and does not harm the wall but bends into the window 2. Rags The material is too thick to be used for a patch It's sackcloth which is rough and would scratch the skin. It's not sackcloth, it's just rough like sacklocth 3. Dangling limb of an animal The animal is tied up and can't move. It's a non-kosher animal. It's a weak animal. 3. Bird The bird is tied down. It's a non-kosher bird. It's a Kalanisa (a very lean bird). It's not really a kalanisa, it's just lean like a kalanisa. 4. A non-Jew He is tied up. He is a ?????. He is a prisoner of the king 5. Salt The salt is bitter. There are thorns in it. It's resting on earthernware so it does not harm the wall. 5. Sefer Torah It's worn out. It's burial will be in the window. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 29 22:24:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 05:24:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? -/////---- One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the already known outcome. Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon Apr 30 01:22:56 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:22:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched >> ukimtas? ...` > One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition > as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the > already known outcome. It doesn't sound that way from the Gemara, The Gemara goes as follows: 1. Ula makes a statement that Holachah without walking is Pasul. 2. The Gemara brings a proof against him from a Mishna (where the blood spills, etc.) 3. The Gemara answers for Ula with an ukimta for the Mishna which doesn't contradict his din 4. The gemara says the ukimta is unreasonable Nowehere does it sound like we are reconciling sources with a known outcome. It sounds like a typical give and take found all over shas where ukimtas are simply accepted. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 29 18:59:29 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 21:59:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Question from the Book of Yechezqeil Message-ID: In Yechezqeil, 44:31, he writes that a Kohen shall not eat nevayla (or T?refah). Nobody can eat it so why is there a prohibition for just the Kohen? I?m aware of what Kimchi and Rashi say, but it seems to be a weak explanation. To say the Kohen needed a special warning is stretching it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:55:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:55:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:24:19AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition : as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with : the already known outcome. I don't know if that works here. I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and there are no counterveiling issues involved. Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish case. Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the floor of the azarah and not spread. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:51:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:51:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215105.GB12997@aishdas.org> My first thought was somewhat off topic but feel like it should be related... R' Yirmiyah's banishment from Bavel was over his habit of checking shiurim by posing implausible edge cases. He ends up in EY, and succeeds in the Y-mi. The final question (BB 23b) before his expulsion was whether we assume owned a bird that had one leg within 50 amos of the dovecote (ie within the shiur for the chazaqah for assuming that's its origin) and one leg outside? But there is also when he questions tevu'ah growing at least 1/3 before RH if harvested on Sukkos. Veqim lehu lerabbanan? How can you measure such a thing? (RH 13a) And his question on hashavas aveidah of 1/2 qav in 2 amos, or 2 qav in 8 amos? We assume yi'ush if we find less than 1 qas scattered across 3 amos. Is that a ratio? (BM 2a) How can you say that a revi'is is the amount of mayim chayim that the blood of a metzorah's birds would be niqar within? Wouldn't it depend on the size of the bird? (Sotah 16b) What if a kohein becomes a baal mum while the dam is in the air between his hazayah and it landing on the mizveiach? (Zevachim 15a) According to R' Meir, a miscarriage that was developed enough to have the shape of a beheimah causes tum'as leidah. (As opposed to saying it must be human shaped.) So, R Yirmiyah asked R Zeira, according to R Meir, what if a woman gives birth to such a baby, a girl and the father was meqadeish her to a man? R' Zeira points out that the child wouldn't live 3 years anyway, so bi'ah isn't an issue. R Meir asks: but what about marrying her sister? This one may or may not count, as R' Acha bar Yaaqov says that R Yirmiyah's point was to get R Zeira to laugh. (Niddar 23a) But it does reflect what kind of thing would come to his mind. (Tangent: There are a number of stories that indicate R Zeira needed chearing up. Like the golam Rava sent him. RMMS tied this to "Rav shachat lei leR Zeira".) But when he gets to EY, the Y-mi accepts his question. (Not that the Y-mi ever answers questions that involve guessing what the tanna / amora would have said...) A picker can eat a snack (quantity discussed) before tu"m was taken from the crop. As long as he is holing them. R Yirmiyah asked whether a picker can eat an olive he was juggling -- and thus didn't put down but also isn't just picked. (Maaseros 3:4, vilna daf 17b) Maybe the issue in the OP is about this time rejecting an absurd -- R Yirmiyahu-like -- oqimta is just the difference in styles in different batei medrash? Too haskala-ish to be satisfying? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Mon Apr 30 20:47:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:47:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tuesday, May 1, 2018, Micha Berger wrote: > > > I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is > the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and > there are no counterveiling issues involved. > > Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish > cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish > case. > > Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's > that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the > floor of the azarah and not spread. And it?s easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn?t seem more unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 06:47:36AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is :> the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and :> there are no counterveiling issues involved. :> Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish :> cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish :> case. : And it's easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a : prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn't seem more : unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. I suggest exploring if the distinction is between a din that could only apply in the farfetched case and dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from the distcussion. This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See . (He offered to send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. In a different post, I suggested another line to explore, if you prefer it. Diffierent batei medrash had different tolerances for R Yirmiyahu's questions, and those too also used farfetched cases. And if so, maybe there was one beis medrash during the course of the ccenturies of amoraim that simply had no patience for odd oqimtos; even though they were atypical that way. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 31st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Hod: What level of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 results in harmony and balance? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 1 03:34:33 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 13:34:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > > But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. > > I suggest exploring if the distinction is between > a din that could only apply in the farfetched case > and > dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated > in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from > the distcussion. > > This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought > in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See > . (He offered to > send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta > serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in > this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. > The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without walking from the equation. It would seem to be a perfect example to apply R' Michel Avraham's thesis and yet the Gemara rejects the ukimta as being unreasonable -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue May 1 04:40:42 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 11:40:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: Please see https://goo.gl/ESJERH for two links to a talk given by Rabbi Dr. Shnyer Leiman titled The Strange History of Lag B'Omer. Please see https://goo.gl/s2KHAVfor [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] The Spreading Fires Of Lag Baomer: Tempting Quick & Easy ?Spirituality? vs. Enduring Ruchnius goo.gl In the past we have discussed at length (5771, 5772, 5773A, 5773B, and 5773C) how Lag Baomer is marked in minhag Ashkenaz, and contrasted it with other, more recent customs, that have become popula? See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) No less an authority than Chasam Sofer was strongly opposed to Lag B'Omer celebrations. He argued that one should not make a new Yom Tov that is not based on a miraculous event, that has no basis in Shas and Poskim, and that is based on the death of someone. (See here for links.) See https://goo.gl/Zma8pS [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] No ? No ? No ? No ? No ? Minhag Ashkenaz & Recent Lag Ba?omer Innovations ? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ?????, ??? ?????, ??????, ?????, ??? ???? goo.gl Yes, it is that time of the year again. Lag ba?omer is almost here. And with it, all the hype and solicitations for trips to Meron, Chai Rotel Mashkeh donations, upsherin, bonfires, and the l? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:54:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:54:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:34:33PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter : (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that : blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The : ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without : walking from the equation... I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Tue May 1 04:25:47 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 14:25:47 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the > stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. > And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's > not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. The Gemara starts with Ula stating a din that holacha without walikng is pasul. The Gemara then brings down the following statment from a Mishna If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher. The Gemara then asks on Ula from this Mishna, namely that the blood must have moved towards the Mizbeach, e.g. holacha without walking and it is kosher. The Gemara then answers with the implausible ukimtos to explain the Mishna. In other words, it seems that the ukimtos are there to explain the Mishna namely that the Mishna provides a principle that blood that falls on the floor is kosher and the ukimtas are there to remove any extraneous factors such as holacha without walking. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 1 15:57:50 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 18:57:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ahava Eternal Message-ID: <2060439B-6A01-4D14-AC06-6D6675AC6381@cox.net> I heard a beautiful d?rash by Rabbi Yosef Shusterman (Chabad of Beverly Hills). He said the following: If you ask 20 people the definition of ?LOVE,? you will get 20 different responses. However, the best definition of love is the Jewish definition. He uses gematria. The gematria of Ahava is 13 and the gematria of Echod is 13. ?Love" is when you are at ?one? with whomever or whatever. Theologically, the love of God is when you are at one with God. Sometimes it takes an entire lifetime to reach that madreiga. I am in you and you in me, mutual in divine love. William Blake (18th c. poet, painter and printmaker) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 2 01:33:44 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 08:33:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of?= =?windows-1252?q?_Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/W49XHX Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. See the above URL for more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 07:10:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 10:10:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <64a22eb4-af1e-fab5-373f-889b1083cd08@sero.name> On 02/05/18 04:33, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From https://goo.gl/W49XHX > > > Toras Aba ?just put up an interesting post > discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to > similarity with ancient practice of idolators. > > See the above URL for more. And yet your precious Minhag Ashkenaz was to (have a nochri) make a bonfire and dance before it (or around it) on Simchas Torah. R Wosner was asked about doing so in camp, stam on a Wednesday, not on Lag Bo'omer when it is, at least in Meron, Chevron, and a few other places in Eretz Yisroel, a long-established minhog practiced by tzadikim and chachomim who were much greater than R Wosner or anyone else you can cite. I don't believe it occurred to him that someone might apply this teshuvah to those fires, and it's dishonest to do so. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 09:04:58 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:04:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:33:44AM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : From https://goo.gl/W49XHX : Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. Most of us have little problem with Israel's Moment of Silence on Yom haZikaron and Yom haSho'ah, at least not Derekh Emori problems. And we wear ties. There are limits to invoking Derekh Emori. To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last days too. And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah kekhol hayom". At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled later than the norm, this evening.) I don't know the origin. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 09:45:50 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:45:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> On 02/05/18 12:04, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag > baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) > and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas > simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo > velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than > waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the > Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last > days too. > > And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo > you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I > have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah > kekhol hayom". > > At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I > know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled > later than the norm, this evening.) > > I don't know the origin. The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. A cessation of mourning, such as the last day of shiva, obviously begins in the morning. Nor is it an occasion for joy; when one gets up from shiva one doesn't go dancing and singing. Thus the restrictions are lifted only after daybreak, and tachanun is said at mincha on the previous day, just as it is on the other three days whose observance begins in the morning, viz Pesach Sheni, Erev Rosh Hashana, and Erev Yom Kippur. But the celebration of Rashbi is a positively happy occasion, so it starts immediately at nightfall, and no tachanun is said at the previous mincha. The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and relies heavily on the Magen Avraham. (He later expressed regret over his over-reliance on the MA, which is one reason why he wrote a second edition, only a few chapters of which are extant.) So it's not surprising that this is the psak found there, however it is not the psak that was followed in Chabad, which means in practice he paskened differently. (Sometimes it means he changed his mind, but sometimes he never paskened in practice as he wrote in the SA, for the reasons I mentioned above.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 10:53:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 13:53:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : >I don't know the origin. : : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain how or when the older minhag was changed. And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. ... : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 11:25:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 14:25:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> On 02/05/18 13:53, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : >I don't know the origin. > : > : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the > : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of > : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the > : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. > > That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain > how or when the older minhag was changed. It follows that the minhag changed when the significance of the day changed. In other words, the minhogim of the day when R Akiva's talmidim stopped dying did not change, but on top of them came a whole new layer of minhogim for the new holiday that occupies the same day on the calendar. For a similar example, the significance of 3 Tammuz in Lubavitch changed dramatically in 5754. The earlier significance of that day and whatever practices it had did not go away, e.g. those who did not say tachanun on 3 Tammuz before 5754 still don't say it, while those who did still do, but the new significance, and the host of practices that came with it, overwhelmed the earlier significance and observance. > And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" > is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. Doesn't the Idra Zuta say that Rashbi asked for his hilula to be celebrated rather than mourned? > You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, > after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, > in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) > that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, > Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. Whether it's the correct explanation of the Pri Etz Chaim or not, it is the one held by the people actually doing the celebrating, and thus fully explains their practices. > ... > : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which > : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and > : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... > > I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to suppose they didn't exist in his day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 15:57:53 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 18:57:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> Message-ID: <4b464085-efab-7164-2d33-7726eba6a069@sero.name> On 02/05/18 14:25, Zev Sero wrote: >> >> : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which >> : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and >> : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... >> I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. > They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to > suppose they didn't exist in his day. PS: Indirect evidence that in the AR's day the night of Lag Baomer was already considered part of the simcha is that in his siddur (as opposed to his SA) he wrote that tachanun is not said at mincha of erev Lag Baomer. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 3 07:01:56 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 03 May 2018 10:01:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?iso-8859-1?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= References: Message-ID: At 12:04 PM 5/2/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag >baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) >and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas >simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo >velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than >waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the >Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last >days too. > >And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo >you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I >have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah >kekhol hayom". > >At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of Aveilus on the 34th day? If so, how can Sefardim go to Meron on the night of the 33rd? I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at Tzeis and who started it. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 3 06:04:34 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:04:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tzedaka priorities Message-ID: The S"A in O"C 152:1 codifies a prohibition against tearing down a synagogue before building a new one (one must build the new one first). The M"B (4) gives the reason for this prohibition as a concern that if one had not built the new one first, a case of pidyon shvuyim(captive's redemption) might arise requiring funds to be diverted from the new construction. 1. Why couldn't the chachamim make a takana in that case? 2. Why would the chachamim work around required priorities? 3. Doesn't 152:6 says you would sell a synagogue anyway in a case of pidyon shvuyim? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 09:03:10 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 12:03:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on the > night of the 33rd? The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve either of those things. (There is no issur on music during sefirah; that seems to be a modern invention, presumably because in modern times we've become lenient on the prohibition against music at any time, so we need to impose a restriction during sefirah, whereas earlier generations who were strict with the general prohibition didn't feel a need to strengthen it now.) > I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at > Tzeis and who started it. As I wrote earlier, it seems associated with the adoption of the Rashbi's celebration on top of the earlier marking of the end of the plague among R Akiva's students. Thus it would probably have started in Tzfas in the late 16th century and spread into Europe in the 18th century together with the AriZal's kabbalah. (Note that according to the AriZal, not cutting hair is not connected to avelus, and applies on Lag Ba`omer as well, except for upsherenishen. But not having weddings is because of avelus, so if we're celebrating Yom Simchas Rashbi they should be permitted.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 10:13:07 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:13:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on : >the night of the 33rd? : : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve : either of those things... An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 10:17:41 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:17:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> On 03/05/18 13:13, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on > : >the night of the 33rd? > : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are > : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve > : either of those things... > An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. For children, who are not obligated in aveilus anyway. But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and the answer is the same way they go by day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 11:56:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 14:56:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and : the answer is the same way they go by day. The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both Ashk and Seph? Yes, if the party happened to be during the day, I would have the same question WRT Sepharadim (only). So how does pointing out that fact help me any in answering it? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 33rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total Fax: (270) 514-1507 submission to truth, and what results? From simon.montagu at gmail.com Thu May 3 16:36:11 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 02:36:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 > > > Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is > > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did that before the 16th century. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 12:08:37 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 15:08:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> On 03/05/18 14:56, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and > : the answer is the same way they go by day. > > The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > Ashk and Seph? And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do so from nightfall. (b) The Meron celebrations, which the question was about, don't violate the sefira observances anyway. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 05:04:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 08:04:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer Message-ID: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:24 AM 5/4/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > > > >I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings >Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did >that before the 16th century. In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to show that it was not really part of the davening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 05:14:32 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:14:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Bow_and_Arrow_on_Lag_B=92Omer?= Message-ID: >From http://www.collive.com/show_news.rtx?id=50532 A 4-year-old son of a Shliach in Florida was hit in his eye by an arrow on Lag BaOmer. Please pray for Baruch Shmuel ben Chana. I do hope he has a refuah shleima. This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. >From https://goo.gl/kumYeX One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn?t even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a break from their Torah studies. It is also surprising that they should pass the time with such a martial activity, seemingly out of character with the day devoted to the man of peace. Rav Menachem Mendel of Rimanov, one of the early Hasidic Rebbes, explained that the custom is based on the Midrash which states that all the days of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, the rainbow didn?t appear in the sky. (Ketubot 77b the same is said there of Rebbe Yehoshua ben Levi.) Rashi explains that the rainbow is the sign of the covenant that the world will not be destroyed, and if there is a perfect tzaddik in the world there is no need of such a sign. (Cited by B?nei Yissachar on Lag BaOmer.) See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 07:58:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:58:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both :> Ashk and Seph? : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do : so from nightfall... You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something aggadic. But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from what I was raised to believe on that. I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and rishonim couldn't have known about? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 07:05:58 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:05:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Mysterious Origin of Lag Ba-Omer Message-ID: Please see http://www.hakirah.org/Vol20First.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 4 09:57:47 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 18:57:47 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Bottom line: They do it or they don't? Ben On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time,? and I > was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to > show that it was not really part of the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:41:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:41:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Let me begin with Daas Torah. ... : The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a : result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this : was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. So what are those formulations? Here are 3 I know of: 1- Given how the gadol's mind is shapeds by his learning, he is a useful resource for advice. He could be wrong, but aren't your odds better by asking? 2- Asking a gadol will get you the answer Hashem wants you to act on, whether it is the truth or not. E.g. the error of advising agaisnt fleeing the Nazis was because that was what Hashem wanted of us. But it was still pragmatically in error. I also see hints of this model in RALichtenstein's "Im Ein Daas, Manhigut Minayin?" but with the added caveat that RAL didn't expect to find daas Torah in practice. (Not since RSZA.) Again, just implications; I could be reading too much into the essay. 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, they are supposed to lead. RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like the same model. Notice that all advocate listening to gedolim even on non-halachic matters, but not because of any guarantees about accuracy. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:52:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:52:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180504165212.GC13247@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 07:12:36AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They : have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye : (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so : much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses.... The relationship to a kohein is trickier than that, as their is no tum'ah until after the declaration. He is more parallel to an eid qiyum than an eid birur. For example, Vayiqra 14:36 tells a person to remove all the items from his home before the kohein comes to inspect a potential nega in it. Even even if the kohein sees the same unchanged splotch and declares it a nega, those itsems are not tamei. It wasn't a nega until the declaration. ... : My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would : become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate : some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just : another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve : myself in general." Tum'as leidah isn't because something is spiritually awry with the mother. So I am not sure we have to assume that zivah is like tzara'as. Lefi RSRH, tum'ah comes from things that could make us overly identify with our bodies -- death, birth, the kinds of sheratzim that share our homes (in EY), niddah... Zivah and leidah would fit that pattern. So would tzara'as, because it too feels like the body is rebelling against the will. The difference is that chazal is saying the body really is rebelling (or made to show rebellion) against a tainted will. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From zev at sero.name Fri May 4 11:15:17 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:15:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 04/05/18 10:58, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > :> Ashk and Seph? > > : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in > : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus > : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't > : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do > : so from nightfall... > > You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, > nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new > information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. Nothing is being uprooted. Something new has come. Just as when a local "Purim" or lehavdil a fast is declared. > If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a > comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something > aggadic. > > But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind > the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous > revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from > what I was raised to believe on that. > > I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence > of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation > anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take > over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in > this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and > rishonim couldn't have known about? They didn't know about the Zohar, let alone the Idra Zuta and R Shimon's request that people rejoice at his "hilula". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 11:51:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 14:51:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:57 PM 5/4/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >Bottom line: They do it or they don't? > >Ben >On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >>Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and >>I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it >>to show that it was not really part of the davening. > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the beginning are said responsively. The Shatz stands at the table where leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 12:06:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 15:06:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <7E.8C.04381.0DFACEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:41 PM 5/4/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Let me begin with Daas Torah. >... >: The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a >: result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this >: was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. > >It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the >popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues >speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are >infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. Please see the article To Flee Or To Stay? at http://www.hakirah.org/vol%209%20bobker.pdf At the end of the article it says, "This article is excerpted from Joe Bobker's "The Rabbis and the Holocaust," to be published by Geffen Books in the summer of 2010." However, to the best of my knowledge this book was never published, and I have always wondered why. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 5 11:45:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 05 May 2018 20:45:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1ed3f3d3-7cb6-927c-da0f-e22d19aa3a4e@zahav.net.il> Bseder. We are all agreed that even Frankfurt changed their seider Tefilla sometime in the last few hundred years. Many shuls have someone, even a child, say (sing) the tehillim from the bimah. Ben On 5/4/2018 8:51 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the > beginning are said responsively.? The Shatz stands at the table where > leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over > he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun May 6 01:53:37 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 11:53:37 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: Yesterday's daf (Zevachim 22) has another wild ukimta that seems to just be there to answer a question on an amora and not provide a sterile environment to learn out a new principle. Here is the gist of the Gemara: R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina states if the Kiyor does not contain enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim, it is invalid - "v'Rachatzu Mimenu Moshe v'Aharon u'Vanav." The Gemara asks a question from the following Baraisa: One may be Mekadesh from any Keli Shares, whether or not it contains a Revi'is of water (this is much less then the water needed for 4 people) Rav Ada bar Acha answers: The case is, the Keli Shares was carved into the Kiyor (so the water comes from the Kiyor, which contains enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim). I don't see any way that you can say here that the ukimta is to remove extraneous dinim etc. The ukimta here seems to serve one and only one purpose, explain the Barisa that it is not a question on an Amora. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From saul.mashbaum at gmail.com Sun May 6 06:41:09 2018 From: saul.mashbaum at gmail.com (Saul Mashbaum) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 16:41:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: RYL >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. Saul Mashbaum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 05:28:41 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 15:28:41 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire Message-ID: << And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. >> Fore details about the printing error to give rise to the idead that Lag Baomer is Rashbi's yahrzeit see http://seforim.blogspot.co.il/2011/05/ changing subjects one of the weirdest experiences I had was a bunch of black coated Chevra kadisha dancing about a grave in Bet Shemesh at 12 midnight with just a flashlight for light -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 07:21:11 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 17:21:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: <> OTOH there is the gemara that when there was the dispute in Yavneh between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. This story took place many years before talmidim of R. Akiva (who was junior at that time) died. If so Rashbi was a known talmid many years before R. Akiva revived Torah . As an aside other taananim survived the bar kochba wars including talmidim of R, Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at mail.aol.com Sun May 6 11:22:13 2018 From: t613k at mail.aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 14:22:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bow and Arrow on Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16336b09884-c88-1c19@webjas-vaa039.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 5/6/2018 7:51:35 AM EST, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org writes: From: "Professor L. Levine" > This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. > From https://goo.gl/kumYeX >> One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is >> less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows >> and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe >> Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn't >> even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a >> break from their Torah studies..... Torah sages and their students learned Torah secretly in the woods, hiding from the Roman soldiers. They took bows and arrows with them and if they were found in the woods, they would say they were out hunting. That's what I was told when I was a little girl. I don't know if this is associated with R' Akiva and his talmidim, or with R' ShBY. As a child I thought the story was about young children and didn't realize until later that it must have been adult students with bows and arrows in the woods. (Yes I know Jews don't hunt for food or for sport, but maybe the Romans didn't know that. Or the Jews could plausibly say they hunted for hides and fur.) PS All my Areivims and Avodahs lately are deformed by great quantities of question marks. If anyone knows how to stop this from happening, please let me know. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com -- From driceman at optimum.net Sun May 6 17:58:21 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 19:58:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> RMB: > 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus > stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the > Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act > as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make > gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on > personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, > they are supposed to lead. > > RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before > RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who > carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the > names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked > questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like > the same model. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? David Riceman From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sat May 5 12:17:25 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 5 May 2018 22:17:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Sacrificies Message-ID: Question: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat had to bring the animal to as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result in hundreds -- Eli Turkel From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 7 04:19:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 14:19:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices Message-ID: R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he was permanently a Kohen; From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:37:00 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:37:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 06/05/18 10:21, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > This story took place many years before talmidim?of R. Akiva (who was > junior at that time) died. On the contrary, R Akiva was very senior at the time of these disputes. In the mishna in Rosh Hashana he was one of the two who counseled R Yehoshua to obey R Gamliel's order, and in Berachos when R Gamliel was deposed he was one of only three candidates considered to replace him. > If so Rashbi was a known talmid?many years before R. Akiva revived Torah > .?As an aside other taananim?survived the bar kochba?wars including > talmidim?of R, Yishmael What have Bar Kochva or his wars got to do with any of this? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:45:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:45:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> References: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> Message-ID: <44c411ba-2fee-9ae7-82d6-de3850c6417a@sero.name> On 06/05/18 20:58, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus >> stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the >> Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act >> as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make >> gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on >> personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, >> they are supposed to lead. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim who are to guide them. There need to be askanim because the chachamim have no time for klal work; they're busy learning and will neglect it. So those who lack either the head or the bottom for full-time learning can be the administrators, and when they need guidance they will consult the chachamim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Wed Apr 25 14:17:16 2018 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:17:16 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5AEFEEE1.1030601@biu.ac.il> Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: >>From The Jewish Press >, >by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): ... > Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if > he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi > Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called > up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different... ... >"L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! The attached has lots of relevant information. [Attachment stored at -micha] From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 08:00:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 11:00:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 07/05/18 07:19, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen > even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes > in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was > considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen > only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); > others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he > was permanently a Kohen; Thank you. Note the context: Rav stated outright that Moshe was a cohen gadol, and the gemara cites this braisa to show his source, that he was ruling like the Yesh Omrim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 8 12:40:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 15:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 3000 Year Old Mansion Implies a Sizable Malkhus Beis David Message-ID: <20180508194052.GA19392@aishdas.org> >From . What struck me is what appears to be the weakness of the objection -- some of the results are from a poor source, and even though they converge with other results, we'll question the whole thing? Does This 3,000-Year-Old House Confirm King David's Lost Biblical Kingdom? By Owen Jarus, Live Science Contributor | May 3, 2018 02:50pm ET Archaeologists have discovered a sprawling, possibly 3,000-year-old house that suggests a biblical kingdom called the United Monarchy, ruled by King David and later Solomon according to the Hebrew Bible, actually existed. The archaeologists who excavated the house, at a site now called Tel Eton, in Israel, said in an article published online March 13 in the journal Radiocarbon that the date, design and size of the house indicates that a strong organized government existed at Tel Eton around 3,000 years ago. They added that this government may be the United Monarchy. The site is located in the central part of Israel in a region called the Shephalah. ... In their paper, Faust and Sapir argue that evidence supporting the existence of the United Monarchy is often not studied because of a problem they call the "old house effect." The site of Tel Eton, including the massive house, was destroyed by the Assyrians during the eighth century B.C. As such, the house held a vast amount of remains dating to that century, but relatively few remains that date to 3,000 years ago when the house was first built. This "old house effect" is a problem commonly seen in Israel and at archaeological sites in other countries, the archaeologists said. "Buildings and strata can exist for a few centuries, until they are destroyed, but almost all the finds will reflect this latter event," wrote Faust and Sapir, noting that archaeologists need to be careful to dig down and find the oldest remains of the structures they are excavating so they don't miss remains that could provide clues to the United Monarchy. Israel Finkelstein, a professor at Tel Aviv University who has written extensively about the United Monarchy debate, expressed skepticism about the results. Two of the four samples used for radiocarbon dating are olive pits, which pose a problem, he said. "The single olive pits come from fills [material that accumulated on the surface of the floor before the floor broke apart]. They have no importance whatsoever [for] dating the building. At Megiddo, my dig, samples like this, single items/fills, are not being sent to the lab to be dated, because they enter bias into the dating system," Finkelstein said. "There is no connection whatsoever between the finds at Tel Eton and the biblical description of the United Monarchy." Faust told Live Science he expects that some archaeologists would be critical of the use of material found in the remains of the floors for radiocarbon dating. He noted that all the radiocarbon dates, those from the olive pits and from the charcoal, converge around 3,000 years. "The convergence of the dates suggest that we are on safe grounds," Faust said. He also noted that one of the charcoal samples is not from the floor but from the foundation deposit (the chalice), strengthening the conclusion that the house was built around 3,000 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 38th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Yesod: How does reliability Fax: (270) 514-1507 promote harmony in life and relationships? From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue May 8 13:05:25 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 23:05:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer Message-ID: >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag in the places I have seen -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Tue May 8 15:31:28 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 01:31:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 11:05 PM, Eli Turkel via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > >>> > In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some > places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is > leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. > This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. > >>>> > > This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> > > Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. > In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag > in the places I have seen > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Tue May 8 17:28:19 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 20:28:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Me > >> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? RZS: > > Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those > doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim > who are to guide them. Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. David Riceman From eliturkel at gmail.com Wed May 9 00:33:02 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:33:02 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: A while ago there was a debate about gebrochs while some condemned the minhag others defended it. I suggest reading an article by Brown https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 (4th on the list) It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those practices that can be traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a select few don't count. He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of elitism that only gedolim count. OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at most) His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in terms of protecting their communities from modernism. I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. Again see the above article for more details -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Tue May 8 21:46:46 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 14:46:46 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer & Rashbi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2700442c-cb3b-4267-b4bc-7e47e0d3efc8@yypwn-sl-yzhq-hkhn-blbyn> See also From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 02:53:57 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 05:53:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 01:31:28AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but : parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or : by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and : acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only : at Kaddish before Barechu At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night (in the US, mostly Syrian), everyone chants everything together. No shatz, and no one taking the lead even section by section. As per the first clause above. Somoene takes the lead for Bameh Madliqin from their seat. Chazan starts at pre-Qaddish material for Arbit. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:12:47 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:12:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 18:31, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: > > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but > parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together > or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing > up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame > Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu In other words, the same as pesukei dezimra, or the ashre and uva letzion before mincha. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed May 9 10:59:33 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 19:59:33 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> References: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At the Yemenite place I go to Friday night, everyone chants Kabbalat Shabbat together (same tune, every week, for the whole thing). An elderly person will get the kavod of saying the first line of Lecha Dodi out loud, but the rest is sung together. After Lecha Dodi, they say four lines from Shir HaShirim and then one person leads them in a "Bar Yochai" song (this kavod is auctioned off). After that, all together for BeMah Madlilin and Mizmor L'yom Hashabbat. On 5/9/2018 11:53 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night . . . From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:21:40 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:21:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 20:28, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: >> Me >> >>> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? > > RZS: >> >> Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those >> doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim >> who are to guide them. > > Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not the rav who guided him. Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. But at any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to do their job properly they can't be learning all day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:27:09 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 03:33, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 9 12:54:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 19:54:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation Message-ID: Many years ago when my two oldest grandsons were in elementary school in yeshiva, they began to speak in a derogatory manner abut non-Jews. They had heard these things from their fellow students. Their father, my oldest son, and I made it clear to them that this was not the appropriate way to speak about human beings who were created by Ha Shem with a neshama. Fortunately, they listened to us and changed their attitude. No one is saying that one must be "buddy buddy" with gentiles, but they are to be treated with proper respect. I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/letter_11.pdf While I suggest that everyone read the entire letter, below are some excerpts from it. MISHPATIM. All these insights, however, are of value only if you truly live your life according to what you, as man and Yisraelite in God's world, with your God-given powers, have recognized. The first requirement is, therefore, that you practice justice: -Respect every being in your surroundings, as well as everything within yourself, as a creation of your God, -Respect whatever is theirs as given to them by God or as having been acquired according to Divinely sanctioned law. Let them keep, or have, whatever they are entitled by right to call their own; do not be a source of harm to -others! -Respect every human being as your equal. Respect him, his inner self as well as his outer garment-his body-and his life) Respect his property, too, as a legal extension of his body. Respect his claim to property or services that you have to render to him, 1 properly measured or counted, as well as his claim to compensation for harm done to his body or property. -Respect his right to know the truth and his right to freedom, happiness, peace of mind,P honor and a peaceful existence. -Never abuse the frailty of his body, mind or heart/ and never misuse your legal power over him. The Chukkim require of you: -respect for all that exists, as God's property: do not destroy anything! do not misuse it! do not waste! use everything wisely -respect for all the species: their order was established by God-do not intermingle them;u respect for all creatures: they are servants in the household of Creation; v respect for the feelings and instincts of animals;w respect for the human body, even after the soul has departed;x respect for your own body: maintain it, as it is the repository, messenger and instrument of the spirit; -limitation of your own instincts and animal-like actions: subordinate them to God's Law, so that, truly human and sanctified, they can help you attain the holy goal of mankind and will not turn you into a mere animal; -respect for your soul, when you nourish its tool, the body: supply the body only with such nourishment that will enable it to act as a pure and willing messenger of the world to the spirit, and of the spirit to the world, rather than giving it food that will induce sluggishness and sensuality; -concealment and sublimation of the animal in you, rather than according it too much respect and attention: only thus will the conflict within you ultimately be resolved, and the animal in you will also aspire only to the truly human; -lastly, respect for your own person in its purest expression-your power of speech. In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources can express a derogatory view of gentiles. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 19:50:36 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 22:50:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 15:54, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters [...] > [...] > In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources > can express a [contrary view] How about because they are Torah sources, and are therefore not required to agree with your favorite 19th-century writer. On the contrary, you should ask how he could contradict Torah sources. (The answer being that he found some contrary sources which appealed more to him, so he adopted their view; that was his right, but nobody else is required to do the same.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From sholom at aishdas.org Wed May 9 08:15:51 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:15:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 20:09:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 23:09:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180510030910.GB2931@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 11:15:51AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : We know Rashi's famous question and answer: that shmita eitzel har sinai : here is to show us that this, too, and all the details, were also given at : har sinai. See my vertl at . That's the Sifra that Rashi is quoting. : My question, however, is: why davka _this_ mitzvah (shmita/yovel)? Other : mitzvos could have been used to demonstrate the point that Rashi mentions. Rashi mentions that shemittah isn't taught in Devarim. The Malbim explains that this is unexpected, since shemittah didn't apply until entering EY, and such mitzvos tend to be the ones introduced in Devarim. : Thoughts? I ran with it... Suggesting that the whole point is that the reductionist approach doesn't work to understanding Torah. This was brought to light bedavqa with a mitzvah that isn't needed to be known yet for its own sake. But the whole picture was given at Sinai, even shemittah, so that we can understand any of the picture. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 39th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliable person? From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 01:57:15 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:57:15 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? >> My apologies. See https://www.academia.edu/36530833/A_translated_chapter_from_The_Hazon_Ish_Halakhist_Believer_and_Leader_of_the_Haredi_Revolution_The_Gaon_of_Vilna_the_Hatam_Sofer_and_the_Hazon_Ish_-_Minhag_and_the_Crisis_of_Modernity_English_?auto=download&campaign=weekly_digest which has several articles besides the one by Brown, Alternatively, send an email to eliturkel at gmail.com and I can send the article -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 02:43:30 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:43:30 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya 3rd line in the widest lines near the bottom and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about 130-135 CE. Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died about 20 years earlier (see eg wikipedia on Gamliel II) It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 07:51:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 10:51:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Me: >> >> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. RZS: > > Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every > Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not > the rav who guided him. No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. > Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a > yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. Again the Reish Galusa determined public policy, the hachamim determined halacha. > But at > any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the > full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to > do their job properly they can't be learning all day. The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his role? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 10 09:08:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:08:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:51:16AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : The claim that "da'as Torah" is derived from din melech is precisely the : claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise : in other fields... That's NOT the way I understood R' Dovid [haLevi] Cohen at all. We want a melekh, separate from the beis din hagadol. Although one person can be in both roles, like when Chazal refer to "Shelomo uveis dino." However, ba'avoseinu harabbim we lost the melukhah. The obligation of obeying the melekh devolved into obeyind the Sanhedrin. (This would have to have been some time between Gedaliah and Ezra, inclusive.) Obeying the melekh wasn't based on the melekh's comptenecy, but the need for order in running a society. (And, I guess some reason(s) why HQBH advised monarchy in particular as the means of getting that order, except according to some readings of RAYK. But RAYK didn't hold of the shitah we're looking at, so ein kan hamaqom leha'rikh.) Then, we lost the Sanhedrin. Today's rabbanim fill in -- either as their shelichim, or . The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. And just as the melekh might not be the expert across all of society, the Sanhedrin or today's rabbanim might not be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 40th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Yesod: When does Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliability/self-control mean submitting to others? From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 10 06:30:06 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93normal_practice=94?= Message-ID: <4ee8a413f67f49da89acceed596b8f72@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I was bothered by the gemara-Megilla 26a where it says Jerusalem apartment ?owners? took ?gifts? by force as ?rental? from olei regal. The Beit Mordechai (2:16), who lived in the early 20th century, raises the same question and says since the normal practice in Israel was for renters to leave something for the innkeeper in addition to the rental payment, so innkeepers in Jerusalem would take it by force since they could not charge rent. He admits that it?s possible that this would be considered stealing but because of this ?normal practice? of leaving something, it?s almost like they had a legal claim and therefore they felt they could take the items. Interesting that I couldn?t find earlier authorities bothered by this but maybe I missed something. Any thoughts appreciated. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 08:15:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:15:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6f2cda5f-ce57-a7a3-36af-3cc0b767dc9f@sero.name> On 10/05/18 05:43, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh >> between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it wasRashbithat was involved. > > I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, > and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > > > Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya?3rd line in the widest > lines near the bottom > and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Thank you. > Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about > 130-135 CE. Why do you suppose he was killed around that time rather than much later? If he was killed then, then he would have been born around 10-15 CE, have started learning Torah around 15-20 years before the churban, and have come back home with all those talmidim 4-9 years after it. Doesn't it seem more likely that his Torah learning started after the churban, and after Kalba Savua had resettled somewhere and reestablished himself, which would mean his death was also several decades after Bar Kochva? > Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died?about 20 years earlier (see eg > wikipedia?on Gamliel II) > > It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the > story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. Why is this at all difficult to believe? What makes it difficult? > So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of > the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant If you assume both that the students died then and that he himself died then, then when did he have time to teach his five new students? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 10 05:57:21 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 08:57:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim Message-ID: At 10:44 PM 5/9/2018, R Eli Turkel wrote: >I suggest reading an article by Brown >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2Fu%2F0%2F%23search%2Fhillel%2F1633fd7c1ed2a4a7&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce7f2ed89c0b04a153b9008d5b61fe896%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C1%7C636615170523842613&sdata=KHDvBEGhAvUsiq8oxUjnwZDX%2Bt0hzpo7D25XR2o0CPA%3D&reserved=0 > > >It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish > >Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent >past >basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those >practices that can be >traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a >select few don't count. >He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that >the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even >communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of >elitism that only gedolim count. > >OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of >the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In >fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their >unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at >most) > >His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in >terms of protecting their communities from modernism. >I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between >litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. I believe you are referring to an article that recently appeared in Hakirah that is at https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjyg6mKmfvaAhVCuVkKHeutBeYQFggtMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hakirah.org%2FVol24Shandelman.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3XZQch0OGem-hvrLpivEHB (I cannot access the link you give above, because I do not have a google account.) I found this article most disappointing and sent the email below to the Editors of Hakirah Subject: The Gaon of Vilna, the Hatam Sofer, and the Hazon Ish: Minhag and the Crisis of Modernity To the Editor: I must admit that the title of this article truly attracted my attention. However, after reading it I was sorely disappointed. The author writes at the beginning of the article, "We have seen that from the 1930's to the 1950's at least, the position of the Hazon Ish remained consistent and unyielding: A minhag has no normative status of its own, and at best can only be adduced as evidence for an actual halakhic ruling, which in turn derives its authority strictly from corroboration by qualified halakhists." He then goes on to point out that both the GRA and the Hazon Ish did not observe many minhagim that most people do observe. However, he does not give us a list of the minhagim they did not observe nor does he give us a list of the minhagim that they did observe. Surely these should have been included in detail in this article. Later in the article the author writes, "These two Orthodox groups [the Hungarian Orthodox and the latter-day hasidic] turned minhag into an endless opportunity for the creation of new humrot. And this only goes to show that it is not always a broken connection with the 'living tradition' that facilitates the creation of a dynamic of humrot. Again, I think that the article should have included a detailed list of these Chumras. In my opinion, this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much substance. What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about nothing." Dr. Yitzchok Levine -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 10 06:58:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:58:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Wild Wild State of Kashrus Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/2bPRtq It was an innovative way of saving money. The municipality worked it out that they would outsource the financial cost of the Department of Health inspectors. From now on, it would be the restaurants themselves that would hire the health inspectors. The restaurants would pay them, they would take out the FICA taxes, the worker?s comp ?? the restaurant would handle it all. The move ?worked wonders? for the state of health in the restaurants. Eateries that were previously designated with a C minus rating were now rated A plus and health violation write ups were down too. The astute reader will detect an obvious problem here. This is what is called a classic conflict of interest. The upgraded rating and lowered violations are probably due to the unique financial arrangement. When an inspector is paid by the people he supervises there is a risk that his judgment and actions will be unduly influenced. The safety of the restaurant consumers has been placed at risk. Indeed, the general public has also been placed in danger. SAME FOR KASHRUS The same should be true in the field of Kashrus. The mashgiach is there to protect the public from eating non-kosher or questionable items just as the health inspector is there to protect the public from anything that can compromise their health and safety. RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN ZT?L Indeed, last generation?s Gadol haDor, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, in his Igros Moshe (YD Vol. IV #1:8) writes that the Mashgiach should not be paid by the facility receiving the hashgacha, but rather should only be paid by the Vaad HaKashrus itself. Indeed, he should have no direct monetary business dealings with the company. See the above URL for more. Keep in mind that when it comes to private hashgachos the person giving the supervision is always paid by the person or organization being supervised. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 09:28:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:28:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <2dd3576d-2d8e-762e-5afc-570ef2dbaa9c@sero.name> On 10/05/18 10:51, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Me: >>> >>> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. > > RZS: > >> >> Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every >> Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not >> the rav who guided him. > > No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert > on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted > on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. But if the rav paskened that they were wrong they had to obey him. >> But at >> any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the >> full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to >> do their job properly they can't be learning all day. > The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the > claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. And indeed it does; how do you see a contradiction from R Akiva? He didn't say TCh don't have the knowledge to run the town, but that they don't have the time. > Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at > all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his > role? Same story: He is qualified, but he has no time, so he will neglect the work and the town will suffer. That's why we need and have askanim to run things, but they have to know that they are not in charge but must defer to the chachamim. Note that not even the biggest haredi calls for the gedolei hatorah to sit in the knesset themselves, let alone to be mayors and city councillors. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 12:43:38 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 15:43:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: RMB: > > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. I already raised the objection of R Akiva?s advice to his son; RZS?s response is conceptually clean, but (a) it doesn?t fit the words of the text, and (b) according to you it is internally contradictory - - if the rabbis who run the city have a din melech how can they be supervised by others? There?s also the sugya of b'nei ha'ir kofin zeh et zeh ?. Naively the authority of the kehilla comes from din melech, but then why b'nei ha'ir, why not the town rabbi? David Riceman From saulguberman at gmail.com Thu May 10 11:51:40 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 14:51:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > RMWillig has a kezayis of 22.5cc, and writes that Middos veShiurei > haTorah pg 277 reports matzah has half the weight of an equivalent > volume of water. So, RMW says a kezayi matzah weighs 11.25gm. (1cc of > water weighs 1gm, by definition. So, the weight of 2cc of matzah is 1gm.) > We buy matzah by the pound, so you can estimate a kazayis pretty > accurately if you know how many matzos are in a 1lb box. (2lb boxes, > divide by 2, naturally.) There are 40.3 or so kezeisim in a pound. > > matzos / lb -> kezayis matzah > 6 -> 2/13 of a matzah > 7 -> 1/6 > 8 -> 1/5 > 9 -> 2/9 > 10 -> 1/4 > > :-)BBii! > -Micha I wish I had remembered to use this at the seder. My rabbi tells me that he got an electric scale this year and had the grandkids make shiurim bags for the sedorim on erev pesach. Has the benefit of having something for the kids to do and moves the seder along. When I mentioned to my Rabbi that I was looking into smaller shiurim,that are smaller than the plastic sheet that is so popular, he was not interested in continuing the conversation. My daughter informed me that one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in the base of their calculation. Saul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:13:50 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:13:50 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1be6e645-8a41-f71b-3d11-7c7d0823c398@zahav.net.il> IIRC the Ramban writes that David took a census because he made a mistake, he thought that the issur didn't apply anymore. I found that Ramban to be shocking. How is it that no one, no rav, no navi, came to David and said "No, you can't do that"?? Answer - David never bothered to ask and no one had the job of being his poseik. Similarly, there are certain acts that the chachamim praised Hezkiyahu for doing and others that they disagreed with him. I read that as meaning "after he made the decisions, the rabbanim weighed in". I don't get the feeling from any navi that they stood by the sides of the kings and told them "yes you? can do this, no, you can't do that". They only weighed in when society or the melucha was totally out of sync. or when they were specifically consulted or when God told them "Go to the king". I admit that there is an incredible tension between even the good kings, the ones trying to rule according to the Torah, and the prophets (forget the evil kings). The former? were not able to live up to the expectations of the latter. From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 11 03:50:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180511105019.GA17192@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:43:38PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : RMB: : > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took : > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. : : The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give : commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us : what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. Not "implies", we are talking about R Dovid [haLevi] Cohen's explanation of Da'as Torah -- it's the thesis he is trying to justify! However, unlike some other versions of DT, it only speaks of rabbis as communal leadership. Not as advisors on personal matters (whose open questions are not halachic in nature). It has this in common with [pre-Mizrachi] RYBS's version of DT, "hatzitz vehachoshen". : I already raised the objection of R Akiva's advice to his son... There is also the historical precedent of the leadership of the Vaad Dalet Aratzos. There is no record of rabbinic leadership on civil issues. They dealt with halachic matters, eg shochetim, batei din, a law to require haskamos on all published sefarim... :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 41st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Yesod: What is the ultimate measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 of self-control and reliability? From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:02:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:02:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The article is one chapter from an entire book. You walked into the middle of a movie, that's all. Ben On 5/10/2018 2:57 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > In my opinion,? this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much > substance.? What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about > nothing." From isaac at balb.in Thu May 10 21:23:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 14:23:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Eli Turkel asked: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, > from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult > for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat > had to bring the animal as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the > cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of > whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result > in hundreds I suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim. [The Ramban in the 3rd Shoresh there isn't happy with this] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 11 01:40:10 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 08:40:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Shiluach Hakein, Performance of Message-ID: >From yesterday's OU Halacha Yomis Q. How is the mitzvah of Shiluach Hakein performed? A. Before sending away the mother, one should have the intent to fulfill a mitzvah. There is a difference of opinion as to how one should send away the mother. According to the Rambam (Hilchos Shechita 13:5), one should grab the mother bird by the wings and send her away. Though the Torah prohibits capturing the mother-bird when she sits on the nest, when the intention of grabbing the mother is to send her away, this is not considered an act of capturing. However, Shulchan Aruch (YD 292:4) rules in accordance with the Rosh and the Tur that one need not grab the mother bird. Rather, one may use a stick or the back of one?s hand to send away the mother. According to these Rishonim, the important factor is not that you grab the mother but that you cause her to fly away. The Binyan Tziyon (Chadashos 14) writes that some Rishonim disagree with the Rambam on two points. They maintain that if one grabs the mother and sends her away, a) the mitzvah is not fulfilled, and b) one transgresses the prohibition of taking the mother-bird (even though the intent is to send the bird away). It is therefore best to use a stick or, as Rav Belsky, zt?l advised, to push the mother bird off the nest with an open hand, the palm facing upwards so that the mother bird is not accidentally caught. Once the mother bird is chased away, one should pick up the eggs or chicks and take possession of them. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Fri May 11 02:25:19 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 12:25:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: Instead of answering Zev's questions directly let me try and describe how I see the events. I fully admit that the sources of dates for Taananim seem very sparse and I welcome any more information >From the chabad site R Yochanan be Zakai dies in 74 The Sanhedrin under Rabban Gamliel moved about 86 Bat Kochba Rebbelion ended in 133 R Akiva put in prison 134 Mishna completed 189 ------------------------------------------ First most historians take the story that R Akiva (along with several others) lived for 120 years as an exaggeration. Typical dates given are 50-135. This also implies that magic split into 3 sections of 40 years each is also an exaggeration This would give his learning under Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua as after the death of R Yochanan ben zakai about the year 75 when he would be 25 years old I again stress that all dates are speculation. It seems unlikely that R Akiva would have 24000 students when so many older teachers were around. Hence, extremely unlikely that this happened while the yeshiva was in Yavne under Rabban Gamliel. The one date I saw for the death of Rashbi was 150. What seems to be clear is that Rebbe compiled the Mishna after the death of all 5 talmidim of R Akiva (of course we know that the compilation was done over a period of time beginning at least with R. Meir and probably R. Akiva and earlier). Pushing off the death of R. Akiva decades later would give little time for the activities of his talmildim after his death before the time of Rebbe who is the next generation. One date I have seen for Rebbe is 135-220 (again approximately) R Sherira Gaon lists the year 219 as the year Rav moved to Bavel The gemara (Kiddushin 72b) states that Rebbe was born when R Akiva died which gives the birth of Rebba as about 135 assuming he died as part of the Bar Kochba revolt (which the Chabad site seems to also assume) As an aside the dates of Rebbe would seem to be connected with the debate over who was Antoninus see Hebrew Wikipedia on Reeb Yehuda HaNasi This post started with my claim that Rashbi was a student in Yavneh years before the plague that kille3d the 24000 students and so he became a student of R Akiva later in life. I note that the other talmidim also had other teachers. Thus, the gemara notes that R Meir also learned with R. Yishmael and certainly with R. Elisha ben Avuyah though R. Akivah was his main teacher 'The students were given semicha by R Yehudah be Buba R Benny Lau claims that R. Yehuda bar Ilai was mainly a talmid of his father and R Tarfon and only secondary by R. Akiva. R Yisi ben Chalfta also learned mainly from his father and then R. Yochanan ben Nuri both of whom stressed the traditions if the Galil. We have no statements of R. Elazar ben Shanua in the name of R. Akiva. R Benny Lau concludes that the two "talmidim muvhakim" of R. Akiva are R. Meir and Rashbi but both of these also had other teachers besides R. Akiva. Hence, we cannot take the story literally that R. Akiva went to the south and found 5 youngsters who became his students. Rather all 5 were already serious talmidei chachamim before R. Akiva. In addition even later many kept up relations with R. Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 14 09:54:07 2018 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 12:54:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel Message-ID: I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential chillul shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:19:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 02:51:40PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : My daughter informed me that : one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even : smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook : It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in : the base of their calculation. But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be invalid anyway? We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more binding than historical reality? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 44th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Malchus: What type of justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 does unity demand? From saulguberman at gmail.com Mon May 14 12:28:24 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:28:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, > the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis > is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does > that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual > olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be > invalid anyway? > > We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai > and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people > causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more > binding than historical reality? > I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:06:21 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:06:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514190620.GC7492@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:33:02AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent : past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those : practices that can be : traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable... So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 15 04:05:47 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 07:05:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . Shemos 12:39 teaches us: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. Various meforshim deal with halachic problems of this pasuk. For example, they were commanded to eat matzah, and being rushed out had nothing to do with it. Or, chometz was forbidden, and being rushed had nothing to do with it. This thread WILL NOT discuss those issues. If you want to discuss those issues, please start a new thread. My questions have nothing to do with halacha. They relate to the sequence and timing of the events of that night. They relate to "lir'os es atzmo" - I try to imagine myself in Mitzrayim that night, and certain parts of the story don't make sense to me. I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: 1) When was that dough made? 2) When was that dough baked? We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for the trip. I find it difficult to imagine that the flour and water were not mixed until the last 17 minutes before morning. Another problem: Given that they DID take unbaked dough out of Mitzrayim, what happened when they finally decided to bake it? Obviously, if they were able to bake it, it must be that they were not hurrying out of Egypt any more. So why didn't they just wait a little longer, and allow the dough to rise? (Someone might suggest that it was only in Egypt that "it did not become chametz", and that they did let it rise after getting out, but the pasuk disproves that, by telling us that "they baked it into matzah", i.e. that the dough never rose at all, at any point.) There are other questions that could ask, in addition to those, but I'll stop here for now. advTHANKSance Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 15 05:11:46 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:11:46 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Issac Balbin wrote: " suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim." There is a fundamental difference between carrying the aron and the avoda in the mishkan. The Rambam writes explicitly there in the sefer hamitzvos that the mitzva of carrying the aron, was given to the leviim in the midbar "v'af al pi shezeh hatzivuy ba laleviim baet hahe". We do not find any such commandment in the Torah regarding avoda in the mishkan. The Torah ONLY commands/allows Aharon and his sons to do Avoda in the mishkan. Therefore there is no room to say that leviim did avoda in the mishkan in the midbar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at yahoo.com Tue May 15 09:53:47 2018 From: gershonseif at yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 16:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know.TIA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 12:31:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:31:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas In-Reply-To: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20180515193110.GB20847@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 04:53:47PM +0000, Gershon Seif via Avodah wrote: : Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked : many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know. The oldest usage Bar Ilan and I could find was the one I had initially thought of -- the AhS. In OC 494:7, RYME gives 3 reasons for not fasting on that day. #2: And more: On that day, Moshe told them to becom qadosh. Uregilin liqroso "Yom haMyuchas" because of this. Which makes me think the AhS was saying it's just mimetic. Otherwise, I would have expected "uregilin le-" to have been replaced by a source. More than that, his vanilla "uregilin" is more typical of his description of accepted Litvisher practice. He tends to report others' practices by saying whom, even if it's a recent import to Litta. For example, se'if 3 mentions that the Chassidim haQadmonim were up all night on Shavuos, as per the Zohar, "vegam agah harbeih osin kein" and in the morning they go to miqvah, all as a zeikher leMatan Torah. Staying up all night gets a "they", not a "we", and is labeled as lower-case-c chassidic / Zoharic custom. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 15 12:39:06 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:39:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bamidbar Message-ID: <24722D2C-AAFF-48C2-A4B0-144A6165528A@cox.net> THEY DID; SO DID THEY DO According to the Sages, not a single letter is superfluous in the Torah. Anything repeated is repeated for a definite reason and with additional meaning. We may not always comprehend the reason or meaning but that doesn't detract from its significance. Also, there may be various interpretations and reasons given by commentators but that is what makes the Torah so profound. This Shabbos we begin the fourth Book of the Torah, Bamidbar. This portion is read the Shabbat before Shavuot, with rare exception. This year it is read immediately before Shavuot. The reason it usually is read the Shabbat prior to Shavuot is because there is a connection between the subject matter of this portion and the theme of Shavuot. There is a verse in Bamidbar in which appears a seeming redundancy. I grappled with it for a while and came up with an interesting chiddush. The verse states (1:54) "The Children of Israel did everything that God commanded Moses, so did they do." The first part of the verse already says "they did everything," etc. Then at the end it again says: "so did they do." Why is it repeated? First, the Children of Israel did "everything that God commanded Moses" because that was what God commanded and they did it as it was a mitzvah. But then, when it states at the end of the pasuk "so did they do," it already had become part of them. In other words, the initial motivation for performing a mitzvah is because God has commanded it, but then after doing it, one does it automatically and out of love and joy (as opposed to being mandatory). It becomes part of the person -- ("so did they do)." Similarly, when the Jewish people accepted the Torah they said "Naaseh v'nishma" (Exodus 24:7) which means "We will DO and (then) we will understand." In other words, we first will do out of duty and obligation since we are accepting the commandments of the Almighty, and afterwards, we will be doing (observing the mitzvot) out of love and joy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 15:45:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 18:45:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos Message-ID: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> R' Mordechai Torczyner (CC-ed) gave 3 shiurim (chaburos?) on koseiv and mocheiq this past march. Including #2, available here . He raises an interesting (to me, at least) question: Catan, formerly The Settlers of Catan, is a game with a board that changes with each play. The board is tiled from hexagons (and played on the edges and corners between them), where each hexagon has a picture on it denoting a kind of terrain, and by implication the reasources one can get from that terrain. This honeycomb is then held in place by a hexagonal frame, which is assembled from 6 pieces, each of which has jigsaw-puzzle-like edges at the join to hold the whole thing together. See RMT cited in shiur SSJ 16:23 (source #5 on the resource page attached to the YUTorah recording). He says you can play a game with letters or pictures IFF one is placing letters or pieces of letters or pictures or their pieces next to eachother. But not if they are made qeva or put in a frame. And only if they do not attach or stick to one another. So, here is RMT's question... Catan's hexagons do not combine to make one picture, but they do combine to make one "message" -- a usable game board. Is assembling a Catan board mutar on Shabbos? And if not, I wish to add: What if the game is played on a pillow, making it hard to keep the pieces interlocked, and the players agree to end the game before Shabbos? If the assembly is neither made to last nor is there intent for it to last, would it then be mutar? Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:11:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:11:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos In-Reply-To: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> References: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> Message-ID: The frame that comes with the newer editions of Settlers is quite flimsy so I don't believe it can be regarded as "fixing" the hexes together in a way that could even raise this shayla. But leravcha demilsa one can simply lay out the board without the frame, as one does with the older editions (my set is close to 20 years old and therefore doesn't have this problem. From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:30:27 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:30:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Further to your question, we've discussed the time of yetzias mitzrayim before, and some have asserted that it was early in the morning, but the Torah says "be'etzem hayom", and Rashi explicitly says this means high noon. At the time of the discussion I couldn't find this Rashi, but it's in Devarim 32:48. So not only did they have all night to prepare food for the journey, they also had all morning. And yet we're to believe they didn't get around to it until just before noon. However, leaving aside the improbability of this timing, my understanding of the actual event is that they started making dough to bake bread, and would have left it to rise but immediately they got the announcement that they were leaving, so they shoved it straight into the oven and baked it there and then, as matzos. Alternatively, given that they had already been commanded not to bake chametz, we can say that because of this commandment they always intended to bake it immediately, but as it happened the command became irrelevant because the announcement came just as they finished kneading it and were about to put it in the oven, so even had they *not* been commanded they would still have had to bake it as matzos. Which of course is why the commandment was given in the first place. Either way, though, my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the perspective of before it was baked. From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 05:55:56 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 12:55:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? A. The Gemara (Avoda Zara 30a) discusses the laws of giluy (beverages left uncovered). Chazal forbade drinking certain beverages that were left uncovered, due to concerns that venomous creatures, such as snakes or scorpions, might drink from the beverage and leave behind some of their venom. Tosfos (Avoda Zara 35a: Chada) writes that in the countries where we live, this concern does not exist, and beverages left uncovered may be drunk. Ordinarily, once Chazal issue a gezeira (decree), the gezeira remains in force even if the reasoning no longer applies. This case is different since the original gezeira was only enacted for places where snakes were common. Accordingly, Shulchan Aruch (YD 116:1) rules that one may drink a beverage that was left uncovered. However, the Pischei Teshuva (116:1) writes that the position of the Vilna Gaon and the Shelah Hakadosh is not to leave drinks unattended. The commentaries to the Maaseh Rav explain that the Vilna Gaon held that there are secondary reasons for Rabbinic decrees that apply even when the primary reason is no longer relevant. Common practice is to follow the position of the Shulchan Aruch, though some adhere to the more stringent opinion -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:26:24 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:26:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me - perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:27:40 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:27:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Designer Babies? Message-ID: Assume that gene editing technology reaches the point that "designer babies" are possible to an extent. Assume that "intellectual acuity" genes can be identified and screened for. Would a Desslerian philosophy allow (require?) mass screening and eventual genetic tinkering to provide a gadol hador material baby? What if there was a clear tradeoff that this gene also resulted in a materially shorter life expectancy? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Thu May 17 08:29:01 2018 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (M Cohen) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 11:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <09af01d3edf3$c8a0bed0$59e23c70$@com> I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul Shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential Chillul Shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before Shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on Shabbos. ..at least 2 major differences between the two. A. the electricity you use is generated in real time, as you demand it (by turning on the switch) B. but the water you use was made and treated in the past, and now simply stored in water towers until you demand it (by opening your tap) (as the water is used, new water is pumped into the tower at intervals. only a gramma). No melacha is done when you use your water C. electricity production in EY typically involves d'orisa issurim of burning fossil fuels, boiling water to create steam etc D. but water production may only be an rabbinic prohibition (electric pumps and filters, adding chemicals, etc) ======= Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2894, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.22240) http://free.pctools.com/ ======= From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Thu May 17 09:00:40 2018 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:00:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: RMB wrote: 'So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here.' I think the point was there was a tendency not to value or keep minhagim, not an absolute rule. And they possibly gave different status to minhagim which clearly originated with gedolim not un-named masses, eg kabalas shabbos. As for the yamulka example, that's got a makor in shas and is mentioned by rishonim, no? Perhaps another example would be Shir hamaalos before bentching which was innovated by the Chida I think. You'd need a whole range of example and a list of who kept what in order to be more certain, I haven't read the rest of Dr Brown's book to know if he does that. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 12:48:18 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 19:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? Message-ID: The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of externalities at all. YL Unfortunately, the term "chasid," meaning a pious person, has become misunderstood because of misconceptions foisted upon us from without. A "chasid" is a person who totally gives himself in love, does not look out for himself but relinquishes his own claims on the world in order to live only for others, through acts of loving kindness. Far from retiring from the world, he lives in it, with it and for it. For himself, the chasid wants nothing; but for the world around him, everything. Thus we find the term applied to David, a man who, from his earliest youth, labored ceaselessly for the spiritual and material welfare of his people and left the shaping of his own destiny, including redress of the wrong done to him by Sha'ul, entirely to God. No doubt you are familiar with the saying shelach shelach v'sheli shelach - -"He who says 'That which is yours is yours and that which is mine also is yours' is called a chasid." Again, a life of seclusion, of only meditation and prayer, is not Judaism. Torah and Avodah (study and worship) are but pathways meant to lead to deeds. Our Sages say, Talmud Torah gadol she'mavi l'y'day maaseh- "Great is study, for it leads to action" - the practical fulfillment of the precepts. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com Thu May 17 13:03:16 2018 From: gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 20:03:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <306356533.2453717.1526587396833@mail.yahoo.com> On Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:48 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that > there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, > speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of > externalities at all. YL Indeed! See Hirsch's commentary to Beraishis 5:24 where he writes very strong words about this. He says that Chanoch lived a life of seclusion after giving up on his generation. Hashem removed him from the earth because "what use is he here" (or something to that effect). From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 17 20:24:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 05:24:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. At one time calling a child a girl did not mean that you were assuming the child's gender? (girl meant a young person of either sex). Ben On 5/17/2018 9:48 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters? I note > that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of > dress,? speaking a particular language,? etc.? Indeed,? there is no > mention of externalities at all. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu May 17 20:51:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 23:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . I had cited Shemos 12:39: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. R' Zev Sero suggested: > ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked > dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. > I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it > has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the > perspective of before it was baked. It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words to have that meaning, that's okay. But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, > their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Fri May 18 14:41:25 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:41:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: See Malbim, who suggests that according to R Yose Haglili, who says that the issur chometz that year was only for one day, that one day was the 14th, not the 15th, but since with kodshim the night follows the day it was from the morning of the 14th till the morning of the 15th. Therefore they started baking bread at daybreak, intending to let it rise, but they were immediately ordered to leave and had no time. Alternatively, since most meforshim understand the one day to be the 15th, he suggests that they mixed the dough intending to bake matzos, but they didn't even have time to do that and had to take the unbaked dough, which would naturally have become chometz during their journey, but miraculously it did not rise and when they got where they were going they baked it as matzos (or, according to pseudo-Yonasan, the sun baked it, which presents halachic problems of its own, since sun-baked bread doesn't have the status of bread). On 17 May 2018 at 23:51, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I had cited Shemos 12:39: > >> They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves >> of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were >> driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare >> any provisions for themselves. > > R' Zev Sero suggested: > >> ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked >> dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. >> I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it >> has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the >> perspective of before it was baked. > > It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the > pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words > to have that meaning, that's okay. > > But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > >> They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, >> their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. > > This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of > Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is > unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff > they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that > the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. > > Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS > for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why > didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. > > The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not > make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then > they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just > before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to > departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water > together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. > > Akiva Miller > _______________________________________________ > Avodah mailing list > Avodah at lists.aishdas.org > http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org -- Zev Sero zev at sero.name From doniels at gmail.com Mon May 21 03:55:24 2018 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 13:55:24 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Generators_on_Shabbos_in_Israel?= Message-ID: R' Ben Rothke wrote: > I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, > AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. Also, apparently, as a form of protest. > With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is > automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the > potential chillul shabbos? R' Israel Meir Morgenstern put out an entire Sefer on this - http://www.virtualgeula.com/Stock/Books/Show/11160 - and regular updates as booklets. According to him, it's not nearly as automated as they pretend. IIRC he did on-site research, not relying on what the Electric Company wants people to believe. > Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before > shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. There are those who do that too. Check the roofs in Charedi neighborhoods - those with huge black reservoirs are doing just that. That said, I asked his father, R' D. A. Morgenstern shlita about getting one of those water reservoirs and he said it wasn't necessary. (I didn't ask him about electricity.) - Danny From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 20 14:10:28 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 00:10:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance Message-ID: <> What effect does this have on shabbat -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon May 21 23:19:20 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 02:19:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 17/05/18 09:26, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) > one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? > What is the source of this practice? (Me ? perhaps the original practice > of only one person saying Kaddish). I assume you mean in a shul where most of the kadeishim are said by multiple people. If so, I have never seen or heard of such a practise until you described it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 03:52:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:52:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Please see Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part I at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FCT8ohf&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=CAO%2FIULzGszY4Io1E7bD7BDzBnrECxpPQX6SlNtHF%2BU%3D&reserved=0 and Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part II at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FKVjQ16&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=RY%2FzL7M3vLMiFdh1MlJcdiMfMVPVPkRXx%2FtVGOhRiWk%3D&reserved=0 If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 05:04:49 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 08:04:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on > a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking > their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me ? > perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). In all the shuls in Elizabeth NJ, the practice is as follows: If no one has yahrzeit, then there are no restrictions on Kaddish. If someone does have a yahrzeit that day, then the Kaddish after Aleinu is said only by him/them (including anyone still in shloshim). As RJR guessed, this is in deference to the original minhag (still practiced in German shuls) that no Kaddish is ever said by more than one person. [A gabbai usually calls out "Yahrzeit!" in addition to the table-banging.] In Shacharis, the other kaddishes (such as after Shir Shel Yom) are said by all kaddish-sayers. After mincha, an additional Tehillim (usually #24) is recited, so that the other kaddish-sayers will have the opportunity to say kaddish. This is done at maariv too, except for situations (such as in Elul) when there's another Tehillim anyway. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:12:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:12:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 06:52:26AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly : going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. But it could still not be worth the learning missed. There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more "nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. micha at aishdas.org Thus excellence is not an event, http://www.aishdas.org but a habit. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aristotle From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 04:01:35 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:01:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Birkat Kohanim Message-ID: 1) The Priestly Threefold Benediction had the following: The first blessing has three words, the second five, the third seven. They remind us of the foundation for all blessings: The tree Patriarchs, the five books of the Torah, and the seven Heavens. Bachya 2) Israel said to God: "Why do you tell the priests to bless us? We desire Your blessing alone!" Said the Holy One: "Although I have told the priests to bless you, I shall stand in their company to give effect to the benediction." Therefore, at the end of the section it states explicitly (verse 27): "I will bless them." Midrash Numbers R. (11:2, 8, end). 3) Why do we ask God first to bless us and then keep or guard us? Because, if He does give us material blessings, we need to be protected from the evil results such prosperity may bring. The Hasidic Anthology P.359 quoting the Tzechiver Rebbe. 4) There is an interesting connection between Parshat Naso, which is the longest parsha in the Torah, comprising 176 verses, and the 119th Psalm (of Tehillim), which also contains 176 verses and is the longest in the book of Psalms. This psalm carries the distinct title, "Torah, the Way of Life." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 03:57:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:57:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Who Sings In This World Will Sing Also In The Next." Joshua b. Levi, Sanhedrin, 91b Message-ID: <37067FE1-055D-4504-A143-8FB433E508DE@cox.net> LA'AVOD AVODAT AVODA VA'AVODAT MASA 4:47... Note the four words in a row with the same root. (Probably the only place in the Torah with four words in a row with the same root). Rashi says the Avodat Avoda (kind of a strange phrase) refers to playing musical instruments. As far as Avodat Masa (Work of burden) is concerned ? the Gemara in Chulin comments that only when there is heavy manual labor involved, then there is an age limit for the Leviyim (as with the others). And it seems that the age limit of 50 was only for the carrying. In other words, a Levi was able to continue serving in the Mishkan after 50, but only for SHIRA and SH'MIRA. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 04:29:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:29:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor Message-ID: We are told that Hashem spoke the words Shamor and Zachor together, and I have presumed that we heard them together as well. But the Ramban (Devarim 5:12) suggests that "He (Moshe) is the one who heard Zachor, and they (heard) Shamor." The ArtScroll Chumash (page 969) quotes Rav Gedalya Shorr as explaining: <<< At the highest spiritual level - the one occupied by Moses - the awesome holiness of the Sabbath is such a totally positive phenomenon that one who understands its significance could not desecrate it. Thus, the positive remembrance of the Sabbath contains within itself the impossibility of violating it, just as one who loves another person need not be warned not to harm that person. This was the commandment that Moses "heard." Lesser people, however, do not grasp this exalted nature of the Sabbath. They had to be told that it is forbidden to desecrate the sacred day; when they absorbed the Ten Commandments, they "heard" primarily the negative commandment *safeguard*. >>> Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue May 22 08:19:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 11:19:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 22/05/18 06:52, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going > there and seeing the falls is not nothing. Not at all. One says a bracha on many things that one would much rather *not* see, and that one would certainly not go out of ones way to see. Also consider the rainbow. If one happens to see it one says a bracha, and quite a positive one, but one still should not tell others to go outside and see it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:27:43 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:27:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet : he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. But AGAIN, no one obligated RAMiller to hold like RSRH. Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim around, etc... : R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or : taken a plane and learned on the plane. : Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the : world as it is, namely, mostly gray. But this isn't about how RAMiller lived now about life in general. It's advice to a school, an institution dedicated to learning. What I am actually taken by is the importance RAM is giving girls' education. Contrast that to the number of seminaries today that are so exclusively focused on inspiring that textual education is limited. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When we are no longer able to change a situation micha at aishdas.org -- just think of an incurable disease such as http://www.aishdas.org inoperable cancer -- we are challenged to change Fax: (270) 514-1507 ourselves. - Victor Frankl (MSfM) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:54:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:54:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522135452.GC14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 07:29:51AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be : understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so : supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", : I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Except that the Rambam believes the Qol had nothing to do with accoustics or physical sound to begin with. That the term is just being used as a metaphor to help those of us who never experienced such things. (Moreh 2:48) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 06:52:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:52:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:12 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >But it could still not be worth the learning missed. > >There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples >of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at >the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. >And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more >"nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. I know that Rav Schwab also went to Switzerland. Many gedolim in Europe went in the summer to vacation resorts, and there are pictures of Mir students at summer camp. See http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rkimble/Mirweb/YeshivaStudents2.html R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or taken a plane and learned on the plane. Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the world as it is, namely, mostly gray. I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:08:39 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:08:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522140839.GD14915@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 05:24:24AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. ... With that in mind as a caveat, let's look at Chazal's chassidim harishonim. Aside from famously spending 9 hours a day (12 on days when Mussaf is said?) on tefillah, Our sages repeated [in a beraisa]: The early Chassidim would hide their thorns and broken pieces of glass in the middle of their fields 3 tefachim [roughly one foot] deep, so that it would not [even] stop the plowing. Rav Sheishes would put them to the fire, Ravan would place them in the Tigres [the large river alongside which his home city of Pumbedisa was built]. Rav Yehudah said: The person who wants to be a chassid [he should take care] to follow the words of [the tractates on] damages. Ravina said: The words of [Pirqei] Avos. Others say in response [that Ravina said]: the words of [the tractate] Berakhos [blessings]. - Bava Qama 30a "Amrei leih" as the end is most ocnsistent with what we normally discuss about them. However, notice everyone else assumes a BALC definition of chassidus. They come up in Seifer Hakabiim I as among the bravest of warriors, and among the last to accept the permissibility of fighting on Shabbos. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:22:35 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:22:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522142235.GE14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:05:47AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about : the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: : 1) When was that dough made? : 2) When was that dough baked? We are talking about 600,000 or so homes. I assume there are a range of answers. And when the Torah says they didn't have time for it to become chameitz, it means that in many or most of those homes... enough that the haste came to characterize how we left. Just trying to aid the imagination by three-dimensionalizing the peopl involved. : We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally : irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as : Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the : Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to : leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for : the trip... Already in this discussion it was raised that in Shemos we're told we left "be'etzem hayom". And yet, in yesterday's leining, we're told "hotziakha H' E-lokekha loylah" (Devarim 16:1) Rashi ad loc (based on Sifrei Devarim 128:5, Barakhos 9a) says that we got permission from Par'oh at night (Shemos 12:31). So there was, as you write, PLENTY of warning. But they also had get their neighbors' valutables, pack, get the animals in hand, find Yanky's favorite bottle, figure out who was getting custody of those kids wandering around that neighborhood that choshekh obliterated... So, little things like what to pack for lunch was rushed, and in most cases, that meant they were left with matzah. (Despite likely promising themselves that if they ever got out of Egypt, they would never eat lechem oni again!) Your 1 mil assumption, BTW, might come from the matzah of the seder they were commanded to make, and that this matzah was not necessarily KLP. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 11:02:42 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:02:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <24.27.04381.9FB540B5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:27 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls >will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. >It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim >around, etc... The question was asked about girls' high schools, not yeshiva boys! Do you really think he was concerned about the reduction in learning for the girls! I think not! He held that Niagara is "nothing" something that makes no sense to me in light of the fact the Falls are one of Hashem's wonders. [Email #2.] Here is what R. Miller actually said in response to a question about going to Niagara Falls. the question was asked about high schools taking girls to the Falls. As you can see, his statement about Niagara Falls being "nothing " had nothing to do with bitul Torah. I find his response baffling to say the least. YL Rav Avigdor Miller on Niagara Falls Q: What is your opinion of the importance of a high school taking their students on a trip to Niagara Falls? A: My opinion is that it's nothing at all. You have to travel so far, and spend so much money to see Niagara Falls?! Let's say, here's a frum girls' school. So they have the day off, or the week off, whatever it is. And where do they go? To Niagara Falls. What's in Niagara Falls?! A lot of water falling off a cliff. Nothing at all. Nothing at all! It's the yetzer harah. The yetzer harah makes everyone dissatisfied. People who are really happy with what they have are almost impossible to find. They may say, "We're happy," but they're not. And therefore, they're always seeking something else. And so, they travel to Niagara Falls. You might say differently, but I'm telling you, that's the reason why people travel to Niagara Falls. It's the yetzer harah that is making you dissatisfied. So you have to go to see water falling off a cliff. But really it's nothing at all. Of course, you yield a little bit to the yetzer harah in order that more girls should come to your school. You have an outing every year to get new talmidos, new students. But really it's nothing at all. TAPE # E-193 (June 1999) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:41:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522184112.GC16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 03:28:24PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to : be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to : area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume : measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they : were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. >From what I posted in the past from the AhS (OC 373:34), is seems the definitions themselves were not constants. A person is supposed to be using their own thumb, fist or forearm when the din is only about them. And standardized numbers are only invoked for things like eiruv where one has to serve many people and "ameru chakhamim denimdod lechumerah" -- use an ammah that covers a very high percentile of the people relying on it. And I tried to discuss what this would mean for shiurim like kezayis, where a person isn't using his own body or something he could only own one of, as a measure. But the discussion went in its own direction. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, micha at aishdas.org if only because it offers us the opportunity of http://www.aishdas.org self-fulfilling prophecy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:33:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:33:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:10:28AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : > By 2025, 10,000 satellites will provide constant Israeli video : > surveillance of the Middle East sufficient to carry out targeted killings ... : What effect does this have on shabbat How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space that has security camteras? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue May 22 16:41:12 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 19:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> References: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 22, 2018, 2:33 PM Micha Berger wrote: > How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space > that has security camteras? No major difference except that some people still avoid security cameras. As they become more common it will be harder to do. It is already difficult to go to many hotels over shabbat. As these devices appear everywhere some argue that poskim will be forced to accept some minority opinions or else we all stay home From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 23 07:53:38 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 14:53:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: From today's Hakhel email bulletin. THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 23 10:12:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:12:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:53:38PM +0000, Professor L. Levine forwarded (from Hakhel, who were forwarding as well): :> THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted :> at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. :> http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg It's very al-menas-leqabel-peras collecting a list of havtachos and segulos.. There is the stretch from the Rambam onward talking about how davening haneitz is better, or how one should daven as soon after as possible. (Which implies kevasiqin is superior, but not actually saying that.) But the general tenor of the list is about mystical rewards; even the references to the gemara. I didn't think it would be your speed. Also, Hakhel pushed my button on a pet peeve. Whomever at Hakhel writes titles knows diqduq better than whomever sent in about the poster. (Compare the subject line of this thread'S "K'Vosikin" with the quoted text's "VASIKIN".) "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. The words are "kevasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. No "the" there to remove; omitting the "ha-" is just wrong. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The meaning of life is to find your gift. micha at aishdas.org The purpose of life http://www.aishdas.org is to give it away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Pablo Picasso From zev at sero.name Wed May 23 10:21:31 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:21:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2f7061f4-8f98-52f7-67af-3204e6dd8b76@sero.name> On 23/05/18 13:12, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. That would be davening *laneitz*. I'm not sure what "davening neitz" might mean, but whatever it is, it's not AZ. I wonder about those who, on a plane going directly to or from EY, daven out the side windows. Are they davening to the Great Penguin Spirit at the South Pole? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed May 23 10:23:14 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 17:23:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <0A36D278-B7B9-4326-9245-B993DE48CB97@tenzerlunin.com> ?I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you?? I am certainly no chassid if Rav Miller. But criticizing anyone, and certainty not criticizing a Talmid chacham, for personal feelings about a family matter, seems to me to be in poor taste. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed May 23 12:42:02 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:42:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin References: Message-ID: At 01:12 PM 5/23/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >The words are "KEvasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, >and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. I use the terminology K'Vosikin, but Hakhel used Vasikin so I left it. I have often quipped that the only people who know Dikduk are maskilim! >:-} (Note the wicked grin.) Regrading segulos, I found the following of interest. From a footnote to letter 15 of the 19 Letters of RSRH "Segulah" denotes a property belonging permanently to an owner, to which no one else has any right or claim (cf. Bava Kamma 87b). YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 05:59:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 12:59:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? Message-ID: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 06:01:44 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 13:01:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life by a community. Do you agree? It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit and then no more rain falls. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 24 10:39:09 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 17:39:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Does_Ru=92ach_Ra=92ah_=28negative_spiri?= =?windows-1252?q?ts=29_still_exist_today=3F?= Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru?ach Ra?ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra?ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra?ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye. Scientists have revealed the presence of numerous invisible forces in the universe, such as gravity and electromagnetic waves. In fact, scientists today theorize that dark matter, which no one has ever seen, accounts for 80% of the matter in the universe. Just as G-d created indiscernible physical forces in the universe which physicists have shown to exist, Chazal identified invisible spiritual forces that potentially impact negatively on both the body and soul (see Teshuvos Vihanhogos 1:8). The Gemara (Shabbos 109a) states that when awakening in the morning, a person must wash his or her hands (three times) to remove Ru?ach Ra?ah. Until one does so, one must be careful not to touch the mouth, nose, eyes or ears so as not to allow the Ru?ach Ra?ah to enter into the body. Also, one may not touch food, since the Ru?ach Ra?ah will spread to the food. Although the Maharshal (Chulin 8:12) questions whether any form of Ru?ach Ra?ah still exists today, the consensus of most poskim is that this is still a concern. The Halachos of removing Ru?ach Ra?ah from one?s hands are codified in Shulchan Aruch (OC 4:2-5). If one touched food before washing in the morning, the Mishnah Berurah (4:14) writes that bedieved (after the fact) the food may be eaten, but if possible the food should be rinsed three times. The Gemara warns us about other forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah (damaging spirits). However, the Magen Avrohom (173:1) writes that there are some forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah that no longer pose a danger. For example, the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru?ach Ra?ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru?ach ra?ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one?s hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Fri May 25 00:10:22 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:10:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were > all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, > a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype > (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and I cringe every time I go past. But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 04:51:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 07:51:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 03:10 AM 5/25/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: >This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards >went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing >towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and >I cringe every time I go past. > >But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" >from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun >"netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There >certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 >in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not found in TANACH, so why not this one? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 06:49:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 09:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 07:51:45AM EDT, Prof. Levine wrote: : Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not : found in TANACH, so why not this one? Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different topic. People are trying to "do halakhah" without understanding the language the categories they're trying to implements are labeled in. Without understanding the language of Chazal, we are missing a lot of subtlety about what they meant. With bigger problems (if less about din) if you don't know the workings of the language of Tefillah, Tehillim or Chumash. Judaism without diqduq is a paler, less nuanced, thing. I expect you have a LOT from RSRH in your cut-n-paste library on this. Earlier, at 10:10:22AM IDT, Simon Montagu wrote the post that Prof Levine was replying to: : But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from : the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the : root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word : meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's : description of his dream and in Hazal. Nitzotz. Yeshaiah 1:31 uses it to refer to a spark, as it's something that starts a fire. Comes up a number of times in Chazal. Most famously to people who daven Ashkenaz, Shabbos 3:6: nosenin keli sachas haneir leqabeil nitzotzos. There is a beis hanitzotz in the BHMQ. Libun requires nitzotzos coming out of the keli. "Nitzotzos ein bahen mamash". (Shabbos 47b) BUT... getting back to that nuance theme... Haneitz is when there is enough light to make things like that sparkle. It's before alos, which is when the first spark of the sun is visible. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, micha at aishdas.org Our greatest fear is that we're powerful http://www.aishdas.org beyond measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anonymous From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 07:38:32 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:38:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:49 AM 5/25/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This >is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. >There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh >and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from >English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different >topic. Sadly, with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and texting, the English language is, IMO, going down the drain. People do not spell properly, write things that are not words, etc. This is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 08:22:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:22:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525152241.GC9702@aishdas.org> This isn't an MO issue, even if the subject line mentions the affiliation of the mechaneikh. For many people in yeshivish minyanim I attend, davening with a tzibbur is something one does between gaps in looking at a seifer. And among the yeshivish-lite (Shababnikim?), minyan is an excuse to get together for the qiddush. We really don't know how to daven. And all the time we spend teaching how to learn contributes to that. Defining religious inspiration in terms of learning, new knowledge, makes it hard to find what the point is in saying the same words yet again. When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. We define it those terms, tefillah won't get anywhere. On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:01:44PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have : the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community : and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that : did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their : prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life : by a community. Do you agree? I think so, because gap year subtlely teaches the message that true spirituality is incompatible with "reeal life". And that's why they need to go to a 1 year religious experience, with no job, no secular studies, no other concerns, not even the usual setting, in order to get inspiration that is supposed to last year the rest of your life. I believe it's an underdiscussed factor (among the many others) as to why so many MO youth go yeshivish during gap year or upon return. That implied message is not fully compatible with TuM or TiDE. That said... There are other factors. Telecom means you can hear from a famous rosh yeshiva regularly, and don't need to "settle" for someone local as a role model. Never mind that you can regularly connect with the LOR, so that he is actually in a position to better model the role. Also, the whole universal post-HS yeshiva thing feeds the RY-centric view (outside of chassidishe admorim) of religious leadership now prevalent, rather than the rabbinate. The shift from Agudas haRabbanim to the Agudah's (or in Israel, Degel's) Mo'etzes haRabbanim. Secondary effects: There is less tie and sense of belonging to a particular qehillah. More and more people daven in a handful of places, because this one is more convenient Fri night, another Shabbos morning, a third for Shabbos afternoon, Sunday, weekdays... Qehillah could be a source of positive peer pressure when inspiration is running low. But only if you feel attached to one. (An LOR mentioned to me this effect as a factor in OTD rates...) As per the famous machgich line: It's chazaras hasha"tz, not chazaras haSha"s! : It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately : go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit : and then no more rain falls. Although it's less that no more rain falls as much as the crops no longer accept irrigation water. Okay, the metaphor doesn't really work. A good rav who one can interact with regularly may be more useful :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals micha at aishdas.org is not as important as http://www.aishdas.org what you become by achieving your goals. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Henry David Thoreau From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 25 08:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos Message-ID: Halacha L'kovod Shabbos - "Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos" According to some Poskim it is prohibited to intentionally tan in the sun on Shabbos. Nevertheless it is permitted to walk or sit outdoors on a sunny day even if there is the probability of becoming tanned (even if one would be pleased that this happened - so long as one is not intentionally tanning) because the tanning is not intentional. One may also apply a thin and pourable suntan lotion for protection against sunburn when walking or sitting outdoors. However, one may not use a cream. S'U Minchas Yitzchok 5:32, Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchasa 18:70, Sefer 39 Melochos YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri May 25 08:56:20 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:56:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Questions on Theologically Motivated Message-ID: <3CB5DF8F-56E4-482D-BA72-9328800F007E@cox.net> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. 1) What is the difference between ?The religious person? and ?the truly religious person?? 2) What exactly do you mean by "cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:11:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:11:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: In this case, the problem pre-dated the smart? (or cell) phone. On 5/25/2018 4:38 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Sadly,? with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and > texting,? the English language is, IMO,? going down the drain.? People > do not spell properly,? write things that are not words,? etc.? This > is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:05:52 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:05:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular Message-ID: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Ever wonder what is the nafka mina of deciding if secular people are tinok sh'nishba or not? Here is a biggy. There is (apparently) a machloket between Rav Kanyevski and Rav Edelstein if it is permitted to donate a kidney if it may end up in someone secular. RK believes it shouldn't be done because he paskens like Rav Elyashiv that no one today has the din of tinok sh'nishba and therefore they shouldn't get this type of help from the religious. RE paskens like the classic Chazon Ish psak that today's secular people do have the tinok din? and therefore it is permitted to donate a kidney to a secular person. See the article (Hebrew) for more details. http://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/558795 From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 09:31:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:31:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? In-Reply-To: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525163124.GF9702@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:59:56PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious : person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are : theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic : inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral : creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a : Supreme Law?" : Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would : be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a : judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? I think it's self-evident. If the gov't is "of the people and by the people" (regardless of "for the people", appologies Pres Lincoln), then the only way to really seperate church and state would be to separate church and people. And "church" here includes not only all religion, but all religious stances. Including atheism, agnosticism, apathy and Sherleyism. A person's vote should be informed by their values. And a person's values by their religious stance -- whether religious, "truly religious", or an atheist. After all, an atheist cannot phrase abortion or end-of-life issues in terms of souls and therefore their etheism will inform their vote when Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice is a key issue. (Looking at you, Ireland!) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man micha at aishdas.org is how he treats someone http://www.aishdas.org who can do him absolutely no good. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Samuel Johnson From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:11:20 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:11:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Professor L. Levine" T >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra'ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra'ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye....? .....the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru'ach Ra'ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru'ach ra'ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one's hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL ? >>>>> ? It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children.? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:05:24 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:05:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398431932-c8d-935e@webjas-vaa194.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Rich, Joel" >From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" ? Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich ? ? >>>>> ? There is no constitutional requirement, no legal requirement, no ethical requirement and no logical requirement for each individual to erect a wall of separation between church and state in his own heart and mind.? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:52:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:52:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> >>>>> It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ============= IIRC R? A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 12:26:01 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:26:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525192601.GC25353@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 05:52:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : IIRC R' A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. It was ruach ra'ah, as per our discussion. Thus, neigl vasr. I think RAS's understanding was that Chazal were using evidence-based reasoning. People were getting sick, and since bad vapors were believed to be the cause of disease, Chazal presumed there was a ru'ach ra'ah. Which means that given that we today attibute disease to microbes, we would transvalue ruach ra'ah to refer to germs. I don't think too many others understand ru'ach ra'ah as a physical threat. Rashi (Taanis 22b "mipenei ruach ra'ah") understands ru'ach ra'ah to be a sheid entering the person -- "mipenei ruach ra'ah: shenichnas bo ruach sheidah..." and then he might drown or fall and die. Perhaps psychiatric illness? In which case, there is no clear transvaluation to today's science, as minds kind of straddle the physica - metaphysical fence. Sheidim /are/ intellects; so how do we map sheidim talk to rationalist psychology talk? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. micha at aishdas.org If you want time, you must make it. http://www.aishdas.org - Charles Buxton Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 09:30:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:30:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2 Message-ID: It is often confusing when trying to determine whether an item is subject to bishul akum or not. This article should help. YL Click here to download "Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2" From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:50:45 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:50:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular In-Reply-To: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> References: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <8849942693d54a55aab7bd43e07dddc7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/901388/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/from-the-rabbis-desk-choosing-a-recipient,-diverting-tzedakah/ Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz-From The Rabbi's Desk - Choosing a Recipient, Diverting Tzedakah Listen to the 1st part-lots to discuss KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 26 12:17:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:17:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Ben On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Toby Katz via Avodah wrote: > >>>>> > > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? > So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their > children. From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 14:07:40 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:07:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? Message-ID: <1639920e25b-c96-3738@webjas-vaa110.srv.aolmail.net> From:?"Prof. Levine" Date:?Wed, 22 Aug 2012 Subject:?Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? One may download this article that appeared in Tradition at http://www.mesora.org/mezuza-gordon.pdf Towards the end of this article the author writes To claim, then, that the Divine inscription, which directs the attention of the Jew to God, is possessed of its own potency, generating protective benefits, perverts a spiritual instrumentality into a cultic charm.... YL >>>> ? I hope I will be forgiven for resurrecting an old, old thread -- from 2012.? But I recently came across something when I was preparing for my Pirkei Avos shiur, and it made me think of this old thread. ? This is from _Ethics From Sinai_?by Irving Bunim.? On Pirkei Avos 5:22 he talks about the difference between the disciples of Avraham and the disciples of Bilaam.? The former have a sense of security; the latter have no sense of security in the world.?? ? ---quote-- Today we have all sorts of insurance policies: fire insurance, flood insurance, life insurance. On one level they represent a wise precaution [but mainly] the man of piety places his trust in the Almighty. When he closes his place of business at night, he knows there is a mezuzah on the door, to betoken His protection. At bedtime he recites the Shema, to invoke His protection. This is his basic insurance policy.... . The Sages tell of Artaban IV, the last King of Parthia, who sent his friend Rav a priceless jewel, with the message, << Send me something equally precious>>; and Rav sent him a mezuzah.? The king replied, <> Answered Rav < >> --end quote-- ? In a footnote, Bunim explains that that last sentence is a pasuk, Mishlei 6:22, and it applies to the mezuzah. This doesn't make the mezuzah an but does say that the mezuzah is protective. . (I am using << and >> instead of quotation marks in the hope of minimizing the number of random question marks AOL strews in my path.? If anyone can help me solve this problem please let me know.) . --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri May 25 13:29:34 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 16:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: . R' Simon Montagu wrote: > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards > went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing > towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", > and I cringe every time I go past. > > But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. ... I used to cringe too. But then I thought of a different limud zechus, and it's not just an excuse. I really believe this: They are not speaking the language that you'd like to think they are speaking. We are in the process of developing a new dialect, or creole, ... I don't know or care what the technical term might be, but consider the following phrases: making kiddush will be davening had paskened was mekadesh Technically speaking, I do concede that "davening k'vasikin" is meaningful, while "davening vasikin" is bizarre. But the truth, whether you like it or not, is that when someone says "davening vasikin", EVERYONE knows what the speaker meant. In this new language, there's nothing wrong with saying "davening vasikin". It is (I think) EXACTLY like the phrase "Good Shabbos", when the first word is pronounced "good" (and not "goot") and the second word is pronounced "SHABbos" (and not "shabBOS"). What language is that???? It's not Hebrew. It's not Yiddish. It's not English. It's something new. (Where "new" can have values of 50 to 100 years. Maybe more.) I am reminded of going to the bakery when I was twelve years old, and the sign by the brownies said that the price was: .10? each (If your computer messed that up, it is a decimal point, followed by a one, and a zero, and a "cents" sign. You know, a "c" with a line through it.) Twelve-year old me looked at the decimal point, and noted that the sign had a cents sign, and not a dollar sign. So I concluded that the price for the brownies was one-tenth of a cent each. I tried to buy ten of them for a penny. It didn't work. And I was pretty upset about it too. I knew I was right. Plenty of people tried to console me, but no one could explain my error. I was right, and everyone seemed to agree. It took about 40 years, but I finally figured out the lesson of that incident: What people SAY is not nearly as important as what they MEAN. Focus on the ikar, not the tafel. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sat May 26 19:46:16 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 22:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <68109a23-b784-405e-60d5-b1c30853273a@sero.name> Think of saying "netz" instead of "honetz" the same way you do about saying "bus" instead of "autobus", "phone" instead of "telephone", or "flu" instead of "influenza". I recently saw "'bus" written with an apostrophe, but that's very unusual. Most people have no idea that these are abbreviations of longer words. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Sun May 27 05:00:54 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 12:00:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is the meaning of Cholov Yisroel? Message-ID: Please see the video at https://goo.gl/S5mPTn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat May 26 18:36:57 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:36:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Behaaloscha YOU CAN'T WIN 'EM ALL Message-ID: <89C443B9-BCD6-4E3D-A485-59F3CF2C7515@cox.net> Both dedications, the dedication of the Mishkan by the Nesiim and the dedication of the Menorah by Aharon were required. The Midrash mentions that Aharon was depressed that neither he nor his tribe was included in the dedication of the Mishkan. This brings to mind the time when I gave a student of mine a part in the family service that he considered inferior and unimportant. Convinced I had the perfect answer, I confindently and proudly informed him about the dedications of the Mishkan and of the Menorah and how God comforted Aharon by saying that his part of the dedication ceremony was the greatest of all, in that he was charged with the kindling of the Menora. I was sure that would make my pupil feel much better but without batting an eyelash, my student immediately retorted: "Yeah, but you're not God!" I ended up being more depressed than Aharon! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:25:32 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:25:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? Message-ID: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and Reuvain claims insolvency. Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an ongoing business for Pesach? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:27:43 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:27:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? Message-ID: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose. (The gemara in b"b is worth looking at-what exactly is the halachic force of "people don't sell their homes"). Two items: 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? 2. What if the other fundraising fails-would the community sell the Beit Knesset? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 31 11:22:30 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:22:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns > beer over pesach), one source quoted is S?A C?M 99:7, which deals with a > case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows > money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din > is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and > Reuvain claims insolvency. > Do you think it?s a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an > ongoing business for Pesach? Not at all, for two separate reasons. First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. So in this case where the Jew sold not the chametz but the entire business, there's nothing to indicate that the sale was anything but serious and effective. Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to "pierce" it in the name of equity. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 1 03:28:46 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 06:28:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra Message-ID: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> With discussed "Higher" Bible Criticism before, we've discussed the IE on the topic before, RGS went the next step -- the Ramban on the IE on Bible Criticism. I am includng the comment, and I would have written something similar. :-)BBii! -Micha Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student R. Avraham Ibn Ezra has long been a controversial figure. R. Shlomo Luria (Yam Shel Shlomo, intro to Bava Kamma) respectfully but strongly rejects his entire approach to Torah commentary. What does the Ramban, one of the classical commentaries whose work serves as a foundation for modern Jewish thought, think of his predecessor, Ibn Ezra? He certainly disagrees often with Ibn Ezra, sometimes sharply. But there may be a more fundamental reason for opposition. At the end of Ramban's commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim, he writes that anyone who says that Ezra the scribe added to the Torah -- such as Gen. 13:6 or Deut. 3:11 -- is a heretic (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 p. 548). Ibn Ezra famously suggests that four verses imply post-Mosaic interpolations -- Gen. 12:6, 22:14, Deut. 3:11, 31:22. Ramban, who shows clear expertise in Ibn Ezra's Torah commentaryn quotes two of these four verses in describing the heretic! Coincidence? R. Betzalel Naor, in his annotated edition of Rashba's Ma'amar Al Yishma'el (Orot: Spring Valley, NY, 2008, pp. 25-27) finds this correspondence convincing. The author of the commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim must have been condemning Ibn Ezra as a heretic. Even though some supercommentaries and scholars dispute the claim that Ibn Ezra ever intended anything other than that Moshe wrote those verses prophetically, many believe he made the more radical claim.[1] If so, this passage from the Shir Ha-Shirim commentary condemns him as a heretic. However, R. Naor points out that Ramban did not write that commentary. R. Chaim Dov Chavel argues cogently in his introduction to that work that it was written by the earlier, kabbalist R. Ezra of Gerona (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 pp. 473-475). If so, we can ask whether Ramban agreed with R. Ezra's evaluation. R. Naor (ibid., pp. 136-143) makes the following points and suggestions: 1- Even in his introduction to his Torah commentary, Ramban expresses his mixed attitude toward Ibn Ezra, which he calls "a public rebuke and private affection." This might be used to describe a commentary that is both brilliant but occasionally sacrilegious. However, Ramban calls him "Rabbi" Ezra, a term of respect. 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him about Ibn Ezra. 3- Ramban unquestionably rejected any post-Mosaic interpolations into the Torah, as seen in his general introduction to his commentary. While hiss attitude toward the level of prophecy of the Torah varies (commentary to Num. 16:5), that is nowhere near the claim that any verse postdates Moshe. 4- Rabbeinu Tam wrote a poem in praise of Ibn Ezra. Perhaps this influenced Ramban to judge him favorably as an inadvertent heretic, which was a status that, according to the Ra'avad (Hilkhos Teshuvah 3:7), even great scholars fell into. 5- The Chida (Shem Ha-Gedolim, part 1, alef 89) quotes R. Binyamin Spinoza, a late eighteenth century rabbi, who deduces from Ramban's failure to argue against Ibn Ezra's radical suggestions that those comments must be late forgeries (interpolations?). Had Ramban seen them, he would surely have objected. In the end, once we determine that the commentary to Shir Ha-Shirim is misattributed, we can only speculate about Ramban's attitude toward Ibn Ezra. Maybe he agreed with R. Ezra of Gerona's condemnation or maybe he felt the belief was wrong but not heretical. Or maybe, as R. Naor suggested, he rejected the belief as heretical but not the person. (Republished from May '13) [1] On this disagreement, see R. Yonatan Kolatch, Masters of the Word, vol. 2 pp. 310-318. ------------------ J. C. Salomon May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late addition to the text. I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 1 08:03:13 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:03:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <70c7cc6f-c870-c610-b592-25a81940172f@sero.name> I find the entire idea that RABE's "secret of twelve" was a secret heresy to be without foundation, and think it more likely that this is wishful thinking by heretics who would like to find "a great tree" on which to hang their heresy. We don't know what the secret was, because it was a secret, but his comment on Vayishlach makes it unlikely to be what the "bible critics" claim it is. On Bereshis 12:6, he simply says: "If it is not so, then there is a secret here, and the intelligent person should be silent". On Bereshis 22:14, and Devarim 3:11 and 31:22 he makes no comment at all, and indeed there's nothing unusual to hint at, no reason to even suppose these pesukim might not have been written at the same time as what surrounds them. The "secret of the twelve" is in Devarim 1:1, on the words "Eleven days out of Chorev", which makes me think whatever this secret is relates to that, and perhaps to a mystical "twelfth day". It's there that he cryptically mentions these four pesukim, with no context or explanation; the theory that he was hinting at a deep secret heresy in his heart is therefore pure speculation and should be rejected. The Ramban's (or whoever wrote it) comment in Shir Hashirim only means that there existed such heretics in his day; there is not even the hint of a hint that RABE might have been among them. These are the same heretics who claimed him; there's no reason to suppose the Ramban agreed with that claim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sat Jun 2 20:49:06 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2018 23:49:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: >From R'Micha (Avodah V36n64): > When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? > We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. < If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; and "vaya'as kein Aharon." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 00:42:20 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 10:42:20 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua Message-ID: In last weeks parsha we have the Torah stating that Moshe's nevua was unique that Hashem spoke to him directly (see Rambam Yesodei Torah for the list of differences). However, I was bothered by the following question. A number of times the Torah writes Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe v'Aharon leimor where certain halachos are given over to both Moshe and Aharon. The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? In Behaalosecha it is clear that Aharon and Miriam dd not know that Moshe's nevua was different then theirs, yet, if Aharon heard these like a regular nevua as a vision not clearly then how did he not realize that Moshe got a clearer nevua then he did? The first thing Moshe did after getting halachos from Hashem was go over them with Aharon and his sons. Also, the pasuk says that Hashem called out to all 3, Moshe Aharon and Miriam to go out, and Rashi comments that it was one dibur something that a person cannot do. If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 01:54:52 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 11:54:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? Message-ID: At the beginning of Bamidbar the Meshech Chochma asks the following question. A Baal keri is prohibited from being in the machane leviya, if so how could the Leviim ever live with their wives (in the machane leviya) and become a baal keri? Ayen sham his answer. Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A Baal keri is prohibited from going there. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Jun 4 11:24:18 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:24:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> Message-ID: On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns >> beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a >> case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows >> money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din >> is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and >> Reuvain claims insolvency. >> Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an >> ongoing business for Pesach? [Zev Sero:] > Not at all, for two separate reasons. > First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones > property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a > going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and > continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected > to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. AIUI there was no change in the business other than the 'titular" ownership > Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get > away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently > made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of > the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that > the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he > still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity > the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the > Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that > he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So > none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not > an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own > chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, > and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that > CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to > "pierce" it in the name of equity. https://headlinesbook.podbean.com/mf/download/reyy6b/headlines_6-2-18.mp3 6/2/18 Owning Businesses in Halacha and Hashkafa: People who are making a difference- Freddy Friedman, Elchonon Schwartz, Rabbi Yosef Kushner, Nesanel Davis, Shimon Webster, Mr. Sol Werdiger The first half deals with a similar type of arrangement for nursing homes-so aiui you're saying it's up to the Rabbis to evaluate the "need" in each case to determine if haaramah is allowable? KT Joel Rich From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 13:46:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:46:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180604204625.GA25546@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:28:46AM -0400, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : : Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student ... : 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, : as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could : agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him : about Ibn Ezra. ... : J. C. Salomon : May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm : Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that : the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, : before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late : addition to the text. : I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that : certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might : have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate : extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight : verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. Except that the tell-tale idiom is "sod ha-12", not 8. From Devarim 1:1: ... And if you understand sod hasheneim asar... Pit stop: the standard text doesn't even say that, it says "(hasarim) [tz"l hashneim] asar". So there is a slight chance it doesn't even say 12. Back to the IE: ... also "Vayikhtov Moshe" (31:22), "VehaKenaani as Ba'aretz" (Bereishis 12:6), "Har H' Yeira'eh" (Bereishis 22:14), and also "arso eres barzel (Devarim 3:11), you will regonize the truth. If it does refer to the last 12 pesuqim (from Moshe going up Har Nevo), then there are 5 quotes in discussion. 4 refer to the future, likely quotes for someone to say were actually written later. But Og's iron bed? And besides, it's the last 8 pesuqim that amoraim argue how and if Moshe could have written them. Now, if Moshe couldn't write "and Moshe died", then it makes sense to argue that he couldn't write "and Moshe went up Har Nevo" if he never came back. But that is more conjecture, that this "12" is "12 pesuqim", and the last 12 pesuqim at that, and that it is related to chazal's discussion of last 8 pesuqim, and all this despite one of the quotes not having this "problem" of not being true when Moshe left us. And for all we know, the secret could be about prophecy. Even if all 5 were about the future, who knows what secret the IE posited to explain them? One of the parts of the Torah that is NOT in this list is the list of kings of Edom "lifnei melokh melekh liVnei Yisrael", Bereishis 36:31. On which the IE qrites: Some say that this parashah was written bederekh nevu'ah. And Yitzchaqi says in his book that this parashah was written in the days of Yehoshafat, and he explains the generations as he wished. This is why his name was called Yitzchaq -- kol hashomeia yitzachaq li. .. Vechalillah chalilah that the matter is as he said about the days of Yehoshafat. His book is worth burning... And he explains that the kings ran in rapid succession, this being warrior tribes of Edom. And the melekh Yisrael in the pasuq was Moshe, "vayhi bishurun Melekh. A lot of work if the IE was okay with later interpolations of narrative snippets of 12 pesuqim or less. In 2002, RGStudent reposed something from Cardozo at . See fn 50: Most enlightening is Spinoza's observation that some texts of the Torah, such as the ones in Genesis 12:6; 22:14, and Deuteronomy 1:2, must have been written many years after Moshe's death, since they reveal information that refers to latter days. Spinoza relies here on the famous Jewish commentator Ibn Ezra (1088-1167), who wrote that these verses were "mysteries" about "which the wise should be silent" (on Deuteronomy 1:2). The traditional understanding of Ibn Ezra, as also confirmed by the modern Jewish scholar Samuel David Luzzatto (ShaDaL) (1800-1865), is that these passages must be understood as prophetic and anticipating the future. .... However, in RGS's own essay on that web site writes: Also, phrases and even verses were added to the texts that perhaps even these prophets could not have written. For example, Ramban explains (Genesis 8:21) "G-d said in His heart" as meaning that this was only revealed to Moshe at the time of the writing of the Torah. See also Ralbag there and Moreh Nevuchim 1:29. Another case is Genesis 32:33, "Therefore the Children of Israel are not to eat the gid hanasheh." According to the Mishna and Gemara in Chullin 101b, as explained by Rashi, this verse was a later insertion by Moshe. See the Radak's commentary to this verse. It is possible that Ibn Ezra, in his "secrecy", believed that many more verses fall into this category and were inserted into pre-existing narrative by G-d to Moshe. His thesis there is that the Torah was redacted from pre-existing scrolls during the Exodus; that it was this redaction that was dictated to Moshe in Sinai. Since such megillos are named in a few places, it's a pretty hard thesis to totally dismiss. The only question is how much was already given in writing in texts like Seifer Milkhamos Hashem (cf Bamidbar 21:13). Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 14:21:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 17:21:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 11:49:06PM -0400, Michael Poppers via Avodah wrote: : If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two : recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; : and "vaya'as kein Aharon." But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. Y-mi Nedarim 9:4 (violna ed. 30b) has the famous machloqes between R' Aqiva and Ben Azai about whether the kelal gadol baTorah is "ve'havta lerei'akha" or "zeh seifer toledos adam". In the version in the introduction to the Ein Yaaqov, he quotes Ben Zoma, attributes Rav Akiva's opinion to Ben Nanas, and then adds a new opinion: Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi says: We have found a more inclusive verse than that, and it is, "The first lamb you shall sacrifice in the morning and the second lamb you shall sacrifice in the evening." Rabbi Ploni stood up and said: The halachah is like Ben Pazi as it is written, "As all that I show you, the structure of the Mishkan and all its vessels: so shall you do." That makes constancy kind of important. FWIW, here is how my discussion (ch 2. sec. 3) of that quote goes: There are two interesting implications to Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi's and Rabbi Ploni's words. First, Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi could be making the point that Rabbi Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov found in Ben Azzai's position -- the role of personal development. After all, there are a number of verses that discuss this offering; Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi chose a verse that discusses its constant and regular nature. In his opinion, this is the most important verse in the Torah -- even in his or our day, after the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash and there are no korbanos. Perhaps the point here is consistency in avodas Hashem in-and-of-itself, not limited to this one mitzvah. Just as service in the Mishkan has its schedule and routine, so too our observance must be a discipline with well-defined structure and consistency. Second, the anonymous rabbi endorses this view by quoting a verse about the Mishkan and its vessels' structure, their composition, not their service. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi statement is about something done in the Beis HaMikdash as part of its daily service, but the proof is about its structure. This rabbi is relating "so shall you do" not only to following the description of that structure Hashem gave us when building it but also to the discipline of the ritual within it. The discipline in avodas Hashem of the previous implication is a taken as fundamental part of what the building is. At least homiletically, we can say this is true of both microcosms -- not only the Mishkan, but also the human soul, as Rav Shimon ben Pazi is giving importance to structure and consistency even in our era, without a Mishkan or Beis HaMikdash. Discipline in avodas Hashem is not only part of the structure of what the Mishkan is, but also our own soul's structure. This homily would be consistent with Rav Shimon's statement ... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search micha at aishdas.org of a spiritual experience. You are a http://www.aishdas.org spiritual being immersed in a human Fax: (270) 514-1507 experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 15:06:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:06:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180604220616.GC25546@aishdas.org> On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Rn Toby Katz Avodah wrote: > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be > bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before > feeding their children. According the Tosafos (Yuma 77b) and the Yam Shel Shelomo (Chulin 8:31) there isn't any ru'ach ra'ah anymore. Unsurprizingly, the Rambam (Rotzeiach 12:5) doesn't mention ru'ach ra'ah when he discusses not putting food under your bed, his reason is "shema yipol bo davar hamaziq". If it is a modern and mundane issue, I would think ru'ach ra'ah is depression, not a physical illness. The day after Shaul learns he lost his throne, "vatilach ruach E-lokim ra'ah el Sha'ul". (Shemu'el I 18:9) On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:17:24PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Actually, you need to do both for neigl vasr, as you need to get rid of chatzitzos. AhS 161:1, MB s"q 7,10. So the question might be... What's the problem with chatzitzos? Can someone make an argument that it's about places where disease can hide? Then why haqpadah? I really don't know what to do with RASoloveitchik's suggestion that ru'ach ra'ah can be things like germs. If it's a saqanas nefashos thing, then pesaqim should indeed be more maqpidim about things like soap than about using a cup, koach gavra, etc... BUT... this is RAS. I am assuming he did indeed have an explanation. Keeping the discussion alive (and CC-ing R Harry Maryles) to see if we can get down to one. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water micha at aishdas.org that softens the potato, hardens the egg. http://www.aishdas.org It's not about the circumstance, Fax: (270) 514-1507 but rather what you are made of. From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Tue Jun 5 19:06:11 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 22:06:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. < Agreed, and both examples I mentioned are examples of doing, not knowing. The point is that not just "v'halachta bidrachav" but also that "v'halachta" in the path of the noted examples, that one should imitate paragons of *derech H'*. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 05:07:43 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah Message-ID: The article below gives many halachas that are applicable to situations where gentile workers are employed in one's home. IMO it is worth reading carefully. YL Click here to download "Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 6 10:49:54 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:49:54 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Why I support the private kashrut initiative of Tzohar rabbis Message-ID: <628e074c-450f-a464-ed95-2eca5d3ed825@zahav.net.il> Placing this article in Avodah because Rav Melamed uses the model of the 70 elders to show how differences in community leadership should be handled. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22250 A few critical paragraphs: But when groups and institutions try to impose their opinion on members of another circle, and abolish the status of their rabbis (and to boycott them from becoming rabbinical judges and rabbis) we are no longer speaking of a situation where the rabbis of Tzohar should also establish a kashrut organization, but rather a situation in which it is almost obligatory for them to establish one, just like other accepted rabbinic organizations, in order to give halachic and Torah expression to their part in the Torah. If they do not, then they are similar to a prophet who suppresses his prophecy, or as our Sages said: ? Yea, all her slain are a mighty host? ? this refers to a disciple who has attained the qualification to decide questions of law, and does not decide them? (Sotah 22a). How Does a Difficult Dispute Develop? At first, there is an argument over a focused halakhic issue. However, when an agreement is not reached, instead of agreeing to disagree and continuing to respect each other, one side thinks that the other has no authority to retain his position, because, essentially, his position is inferior, since he belongs to a liberal circle, or his position differs from that of most rabbis. Then, that same party departs from the particular halakhic issue they have debated, and moves on to a more acute arena, in which the main argument is that the rabbi against whom he is arguing with is not authorized to express a halachic position, for in any case, who appointed him to be a rabbi who can express a position at all? Since this argument is not convincing enough, and the rabbi who is being attacked remains in his position, consequently we are now moving over to a dispute of a different magnitude ? since we are no longer dealing with a person who rules on a matter without authority, but with a person who undermines the foundations of authority as a whole, and thus, it is compulsory to wage an all-out war against him? From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 11:31:07 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 18:31:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: Please see the article at Eretz Yisroel, Zionism,and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH This article is from The Jewish Observer Vol. 23 No. 6 September 1990/Adar 5751 and is available at https://goo.gl/LNRpZZ YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 7 01:06:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 08:06:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra Message-ID: The letter below appears on pages 113 - 114 of this week's Flatbush Jewish Journal. It is not clear to me that all FJJ readers appreciate the gadlus of Rabbi Shamshon Raphael Hirsch when it came to Torah. Indeed, last week MW (whomever this may be) referred to RSRH as "Reb Shamshon Refoel Hirsch" rather than as Rabbi or Rav or even Rabbiner. Therefore, I feel that I should refer FJJ readers to Rav Yaakov Perlow's article Rav S. R. Hirsch - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra that appears in The World of Hirschian Teachings, An Anthology on the Hirsch Chumash and the Hashkafa of Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, Published for the Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer Foundation, Feldheim, 2008. Reading this article will give one a true understanding of how great a Torah scholar RSRH was. Moreover, the following is from page 102 of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, Architect of Torah Judaism for the Modern World by Rabbi Eliyahu Meir Klugman. We also have the assessment of the K?sav Sofer, Rabbi Avrohom Shmuel Binyamin Sofer, Rabbi of Pressburg and leader of Hungarian Jewry. The K'sav Sofer first met Rabbi Hirsch in Vienna, not long after the latter assumed his post in Nikolsburg. On the first Shabbos after his return to Pressburg, a large crowd came to his home for Shalosh Seudos in order to hear his observations about the new Chief Rabbi. Their curiosity was understandable, since, as followers of the Chasam Sofer, the K'sav Sofer's father, they harbored deep suspicions of anyone versed in secular studies, which they considered a potent danger to the Jewish people. The K?sav Sofer described his meeting with Rabbi Hirsch in the following terms: ?We spoke at length on Torah subjects with the new ?Rosh Medinah? and whatever topic we discussed, his reply showed that he had Shas and poskim on his fingertips. We, the rabbonim of Hungary, have to consider ourselves very fortunate that he holds us to be his superiors as scholars, for if he were only aware of the extent of his own scholarship, we would have no rest from him.? Finally, a talmud muvhak of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, ZT"L, told me that Rav Hunter once told him that anything that Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch wrote is Kodesh Kedoshim. Based on this It should be clear to all that what RSRH wrote about one going to see the wonders of nature is to be taken very seriously. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 7 06:02:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 13:02:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? Message-ID: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, how else might the desired result be accomplished? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 7 07:48:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 10:48:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: [VBM] Chassidic Service of God (continued) Message-ID: <20180607144830.GA19716@aishdas.org> This is where our compartmentalization into camps holds us back. The Piaseczner Rebbe (the "Aish Qodesh", R' Kalonymous Kalman Shapiro zt"l Hy"d) is largely reinventing Mussar. Admittedly his goals are different; the elements of the ideal Jew that are emphasized in Chassidus and Mussar differ. But he procedes to build and advocate from scratch a toolset for somthing that another tenu'ah invested the lion's share of their effort on -- self-awareness. To quote RYGB's loose translation of REEDessler (MmE vol 5 pp 35-39), cut-n-pasted from : In our times: The qualities of "Emet" that personified the Ba'alei Mussar [Mussar Masters] are already extinct. We no longer find individuals whose hearts are full with profound truth, with a strong and true sense of Cheshbon HaNefesh [complete and rigorous reckoning of one's spiritual status and progress]... Contemporary Chassidus lacks the component that was once at its core: Avodas Hashem with dveykus... For today's era, there remain only one alternative: To take up everything and anything that can be of aid to Yahadus; the wisdom of both Mussar and Chassidus together. Perhaps together they can inspire us to great understandings and illuminations. Perhaps together they might open within us reverence and appreciation of our holy Torah. Perhaps the arousal of Mussar can bring us to a little Chassidic hislahavus. And perhaps the hislahavus will somewhat fortify one for a Cheshbon HaNefesh. Perhaps through all these means together we may merit to ascend in spirituality and strengthen our position as Bnei Torah [adherents of a Torah centered lifestyle] with an intensified Judaism. May G-d assist us to attain all this! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight, micha at aishdas.org and he wants to sleep well that night too." http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok Fax: (270) 514-1507 Yeshivat Har Etzion PHILOSOPHY > Great Thinkers > The Piaseczner Rebbe > Shiur #24: Chassidic Service of God (continued) Dr. Ron Wacks Ways of Achieving Hitragshut (continued) The Importance of Self-Awareness One of the primary keys for entering the gates of inner service is self-awareness. Remarkably, although a person is generally concerned for his own wellbeing, he is not always aware of what is happening in his own inner world. His psyche is in constant movement, expressing its will and its aspirations, but even though the person may sense something going on, he is not equipped to interpret it and to take the appropriate steps: The hiddenness and imperceptibility of what is happening inside him distances a person greatly from himself. He is unfamiliar with himself and ignorant of what goes on inside him. Even the psyche of the simplest person never ceases its restlessness and writhing, crying out in supplication over its lowliness, and over all the blows and trials and tribulations that he causes it through his foolish actions, speech, and thoughts. The fact that he senses none of this is because he gives no thought to listening to this tempestuous wretch.[1] A person naturally tends to occupy himself with matters external to himself; he is not attentive to his own inner workings. It is easier to engage with the outside world, with its affairs of greater and lesser importance, than it is to listen inwardly. Even when he detects inner movement, he is unable to decode and make sense of it: For that is the way of man: he always strive for that which is extraneous to himself, the affairs of the world, both those that are vital and those that are not. He interests himself in what happens at the end of the world, but he pays no heed to his own psyche, and does not listen and give attention to the business that is within him. Or he may sense it, but since even at the moment that he senses it his desire, his attention, and his thought are turned to the lowly muck of this world, he hears the moaning and its voice only weakly. This may be compared to a person who is asleep and a mosquito bites him on his forehead. If he is a merchant, he dreams that a bag of his merchandise has fallen on his forehead and struck him; if he is a tailor, he dreams that his needle has pricked his forehead, etc. Each individual perceives his inner workings in the guise of his own dreams.[2] The psyche expresses its longings in different forms, but often a person is unable to decode any of these spiritual needs, such as a desire for teshuva and the fear of God. Sometimes, when he feels something oppressive inside him, he goes to the refrigerator and takes out a bottle of sweet drink and some cake, or he tries to distract himself by joking with his friends. Often, a person makes the mistake of thinking that it is his body that is suffering physical hunger, and he believes that he can satiate it by filling his stomach - while in fact it is his psyche that is starved and crying out in distress: Sometimes the psyche of a Jew is animated by regret, teshuva, submission, fear of God, and so on, and the person feels some sort of movement and restlessness within himself, but he has no idea what the problem is. He thinks he may be hungry, or thirsty, or in need of some wine and wafers, or he may think that he has fallen into melancholy, and in order to lift his spirits he chatters playfully with the members of his household, or goes over to a friend to joke and engage in lashon ha-ra, gossip, foolishness, etc.[3] R. Kalonymus's grandfather, author of Maor Va-Shemesh, also addresses the connection between an unhappy psyche and stuffing oneself with food. Attention should be paid to the chain of wrongdoing: Bnei Yisrael complain, convincing themselves of how bad things are for them. This leads them to melancholy, which gives rise to the craving for meat and the punishment that follows: "And when the people complained, it displeased the Lord" - This means that they fell into melancholy... and the Lord's fire burned amongst them, for black bile is detestable and abhorrent, for it is a tinge of idolatry... and for this reason they were punished. And Moshe prayed, and the fire subsided, but it continued through their melancholy, for they felt a lusting and they said, "Who will feed us meat?" For as we explained, the lust for food is drawn from black bile... Therefore, one has to distance oneself far from melancholy, for it brings a person to all sorts of sins. And despondence begins with a growing desire to eat, as we see when a person is mired in black bile, heaven forfend, he eats with lust, ravenously, and very quickly.[4] When a person tries to "quiet" his inner distress with sweets and snacks, not only has his psyche not received what it really wanted, but it is greatly pained by his failure to understand its true needs. Sometimes, after a person continually ignores and steamrolls his inner voice, it simply grows silent: Sometimes, after all of these actions which he has done, he still feels inner discomfort, since with these worthless medicines not only has he not cured the sores of his psyche, nor given it relief from the blows that he has administered to it, but he has in fact added further injury and assault. But sometimes it happens that after these misguided actions he actually feels better, and his spirit is quieted within him, because the blows and injuries and sores that he has added through his actions have rendered his psyche unconscious, or he has piled mounds of dirt and refuse over it to the point that it is completely hidden. Then he will no longer hear even the slightest peep out of it - and he can relax.[5] The psyche also transmits signals of joy, not only distress. A person often misses these signals too, failing to give them expression. For example, when a person fulfills a mitzva or rejoices in his prayer, and his psyche awakens with joy and hitragshut, he will fail to notice this - both because of his general insensitivity to his inner world and because his attention is oriented elsewhere. R. Kalonymus argues that the way to achieve hitragshut and hitlahavut is not by "importing" new feelings from outside of oneself; they are already to be found inside him. However, they must be given more powerful expression and allowed to effect a greater influence on his consciousness: It is not new excitements that you need to seek, nor a heavenly-initiated awakening. First and foremost, the work is required of you yourself, for everything exists within you. You are capable of hitragshut, and you are a person who is able to attain fervor; you simply need to try to get to know yourself and what is going on inside. Your psyche is full of signals, shouts, and supplications, and all you need to do is to provide space within yourself within which it can be revealed and strengthened. Then you will come to know and feel your natural hitragshut, with no need to garb yourself and your needs.[6] R. Kalonymus not only demands self-awareness, but also explains how to attain it. A person has to learn to listen to his own inner world and ask himself questions: Is my psyche happy, and if so, about what? Is my psyche sad, and if so, why? What are the inner feelings that accompany me in this situation, and how did they come about? At first, this work will involve only the major movements of the psyche. It is not advisable to start with weaker movements, since, owing to their delicate nature, their meaning is not always clear. Attention should therefore be paid to the stronger signals, and when one notices them, he should "provide space" and allow them expression. This is facilitated through paying attention to them, strengthening them, and allowing them to reveal themselves through our power of imagination. We will now elaborate on each of these tools individually. (To be continued) Translated by Kaeren Fish _______________________ [1] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 29. [2] Ibid., p. 40. [3] Ibid. [4] R. Kalman Kalonymus Epstein Ha-Levi, Maor Va-Shemesh (Jerusalem, 5748), Parashat Beha'alotekha. [5] Ibid., p. 29. [6] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 30. Copyright ? 1997-2017 by Yeshivat Har Etzion From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 7 21:17:05 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 06:17:05 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <950f4b82-36d2-0f57-abef-73c113119730@zahav.net.il> RSH's third objection to Rav Kalisher is the key one (RSH couldn't imagine that non-religious Jews could be the vehicle for redemption). Once you say that "I can't imagine. . . " than everything else has to fit into that paradigm that you just set up for yourself. The author's conclusions are also strange. To mention all the benefits and great things that have come from the state but to still look at it as if it is a treif piece of meat boggles my mind. I would also add that if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - he should move here. Like I always tell my Reform Jewish friends - If you move here, you get a vote which is 10,000 times (at least) more important than Facebook posts. Ben From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 07:09:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:09:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi Sacks on 'The Great Partnership' Message-ID: <20180608140928.GA11777@aishdas.org> R/L J Sacks on Science and Religion. In short: It's Gould's notion of non-overlapping magesteria -- they can't contradict, the discuss different topics. But RJS says it so well, giving the idea emotional "punch". And sometimes even maaminim need a reminder that the point of religion isn't to fill in the gaps in our scientific knowledge. (I know I do.) Our rishonim offer answers to the question of why an Omnicient and Omnipotent G-d would create a universe that requires His intervention once in a while. His Wisdom inheres more in the things science CAN explain than in the miracles that even in principle can't be studied scientifically. (Pace the Ralbag, whose actual position on nissim is a longer discussion.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LltoUg_WL2k That said, I think this is overstatement, as they do overlap when it comes to discussion of origins. I would instead posit "barely overlapping magesteria" -- they only overlap at the fringes, where no open question can threaten my trust in either. Yahadus explains the "why?" of life to well to question, and many scientific theories do too well at the "how?" I have a question about where they seem to contradict? Nu nu. Scientists believe that quantum gravity has an answer, and don't expect either QM or Relativity to be overturned just because we have a question where their fringes overlap. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 09:19:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 12:19:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? Message-ID: From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) apply only to male Kohanim, or does it also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V?kidashto applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K?Hilchaso 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash. This description applies only to men and not to women. Although the daughters of Kohanim are entitled to eat Teruma and may eat from certain Korbanos that are designated only for Kohanim, they are not eligible to serve in the Beis Hamikdash. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:48:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:48:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? Message-ID: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> I wanted to talk this out here, as this se'if in the AhS appears to use the kind of reasoning that is exactly what I argued for decades with C rabbis (and more recently with one or two of the more innovative OO rabbis) isn't how halakhah should be done. AhS CM 89:2 discusses the reason for a taqanah that if a sakhir and the BhB disagree about whether the sakhir had been paid, the sakhir can make a shevu'ah binqitas cheifetz, and the employer would have to pay. Normally, f two sides make conflicting unsupported claims, the rule would be that the defendent (the nitba) would make a shevu'as heises (which is a less demanding shevu'ah than the shevu'ah BNC) and not pay. A taqanah beyond the usual hamotzi meichaveiro alav hara'ayah to disuade liars. The stated reason for treating the sakhir as a special case is that many times the employer has many workers, and it's more likely he wouldn't remember the details of who he paid what than the employee not remembering the details of getting paid. However, the AhS continues, this doesn't explain why chazal worried more about employers than salespeople. Someone who has a lot of customers is prone to the same parallel likelihood of confusion. So, he explains that the iqar haataqanah is because employees have a lot riding on getting paid, "nosei es nafsho lehachayos nafesho venefesh benei beiso, chasu chaza"l alav..." And therefore even if it's a boss who has only one employee, and he isn't overhwlmed keeping track of vay, lo chilqu chakhamim. Doesn't this sound bad? Chazal really had some social end in mind, so they invented some pro forma excuse to justify their conclusion. I guess that in dinei mamunus, Chazal can do whatever they want -- hefqer BD hefqer -- and therefore on /that/ ground they can force payment of a worker for the sake of social justice. But that's not what the AhS invokes. Thoughts? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 12:15:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:15:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din but a takanah. By definition, takanos are ends-driven; they're made not because this is what we believe Hashem ordered, nor to avoid some issur, but in order to achieve some desirable goal. The same applies to the usual shvuas hesses that Chazal instituted; it's to achieve the two desirable goals of creating a disincentive for defendants to lie, and of assuring the plaintiff that the courts are not biased against him. So I see no problem with Chazal making a special takana for the benefit of employees, since the Torah itself gives their needs priority, and gives the reason that employees often risk their lives for their livelihood. And just as the Torah does not distinguish between those employees who actually do risk their lives and those who sit on comfortable chairs in air-conditions offices and risk nothing more serious than a paper-cut or RSI, Chazal saw no need to distinguish between a lone employee and one among many. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 12:53:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:53:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:35PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din : but a takanah... Not just a taqanah, a taqanah that needs an justification for why they're not following the din deOraisa. And so simply saying "it's a taqanah" doesn't really satisfy me. DeOraisa, the employer would have the right to not pay the money. The usual taqanah for conflicting claims would require he make a shevu'as heises first. Here, we're putting the power to extract the employer's money despite the deOraisa. Had the taqanah not violated the deOraisa, but went "beyond" it, I wouldn't have asked. And as I said, had the AhS invokved hefqer BD hefqer, we would need no excuse for how Chazal can move money despite the deOraisa. But he doesn't. Instead, he says they came up with a justication that isn't real. That opens a whole pandora's box of ascribing hidden "social justice" reasons for legislation that has an explicit explanation already given. And it makes it sound like legal mechanism can indeed be nothing more than a hopp to jump through, rather than justification in-and-of itself. So my question isn't "how did they make this taqanah", but "how can you claim that they wanted to ignore a deOraisa because they thought they had a 'more moral' alternative, and then just found some way to legally justify it?" :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the micha at aishdas.org second time and as if you had acted the first http://www.aishdas.org time as wrongly as you are about to act now! Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 12:15:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 15:15:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:52 PM 6/8/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's >OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: >: A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto >: applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso >: 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he >: offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... > >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to be "honored" like all other Kohanim? I recall that there was a Kohein when I lived in Elizabeth who had a deformed hand. However, I think that he still got the first aliya. However, I do not think that he duchened. He left the shul right before duchening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:52:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:52:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: : A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto : applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso : 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he : offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 13:21:23 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:21:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:09PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to : >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. : : If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability : that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to : be "honored" like all other Kohanim? ... I think aliyah laTorah is different than duchaning because it's not about the kohein as a kohein, but mishum tiqun olam. So, we divy out the kavod according to strict rules, so that society runs smoother. Not based on qedushah. Maybe it's even kavod vs qedushah. Tangents: BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not a kofer. There is also a separate discussion is someone who is wheelchair bound can get an aliyah at all, or if the chiyuv for an oleh to stand is me'aqiev. From the pasuq "amod imadi". The accepted pesaq really only permits calling someone who can't stand if their reason for not being able to stand is obvious or known to the tzibbur. IOW, oneis Rachamanah patrei for his non-standing, but the kavod haTorah is an issue if it looks bad to the tzibbur. I didn't spend the same time researching this tangent, as you can tell by the lack of a single source. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe micha at aishdas.org you can be certain of improving, http://www.aishdas.org and that's your own self. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aldous Huxley From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:41:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9e545852-4e47-2e1a-0f1b-f6fe418d3daa@sero.name> I don't think it's accurate to say that mid'oraisa he doesn't have to pay. If he really does owe the money then mid'oraisa he has to pay, and has an *additional* obligation to pay this debt over all other debts, because of "lo solin". The only question is whether he really owes the money or not. Normally, the way the Torah left things, we can't be sure he owes it, so we can't *force* him to pay; we have to leave it up to his own conscience. But his obligation (or lack thereof) is unchanged. Now Chazal come along and meddle with that setup, for social reasons. In order to discourage defendants from falsely denying their liability, and in order to give plaintiffs a sense that justice has been done, they instituted the sh'vuas hesses. If you don't swear we'll make you pay, despite the Torah saying we can't. According to you, how could they do that? Here Chazal went a bit further: We can't make the defendant swear, because he may honestly have forgotten or got confused, so we tell the plaintiff that if he's willing to swear, not just hesses but binkitas chefetz, then we'll believe him, and once we do believe him the *Torah* says the defendant must pay. Comes the Aruch Hashulchan and asks, what about the exceptional case where the defendant is not confused and unlikely to have forgotten? And what about other defendants who may be confused or have forgotten? And he answers "lo plug" because there's a deeper reason for the takana here. It's not just that we're worried about the defendant inadvertently making a false oath; if he's really worried about that let him pay up, but if he's not worried we won't be. The deeper reason why we've given the plaintiff a slight edge here is that we're emulating the Torah itself, which made the "takana" of "lo solin" for the explicit reason that employees *in general* risk their lives and so deserve extra protection. And just as it did not distinguish between employees, so we won't either. I have a bigger question, though: This takana seems to be biased *against* the employee whose employer is a yerei shamayim. Without the takana the employer would decline to swear because he can't be sure he's right, and he'd have to pay. Now we say no, you don't have to pay until we test the employee, more rigorously than we were going to test you. So mah ho'ilu chachamim betakanasam? It seems as if our real concern here is not for the employee's welfare but to protect honest employers from employee fraud! That's surely a worthy goal, but opposite to the one the AhS posits. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 9 20:19:14 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2018 23:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Korach "There's Good Even In The Worst Of Us" Message-ID: The rabbis saw a hint that while the Korah rebellion ended so tragically, it had the seeds of redemption. In the Shabbos Maariv we recite Psalm 92: Tzaddik katamar yifrach, the righteous will blossom like the palm tree (v. 13). The last letters of those 3 Hebrew words (kuf, reish, chet) spell Korah. Although blinded by anger and envy, Korah's egalitarian vision will indeed be established. Then the "righteous will blossom like the palm tree, and grow mighty like a cedar in Lebanon, planted in the house of the Lord." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:47:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <36fd05b2-e021-0e98-cdcc-6e84353eb84b@sero.name> On 08/06/18 16:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. > Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the > first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not > a kofer. This is not just RMF, it's the plain halacha. A kohen who eats treif and breaks shabbos can even duchen, let alone get the first aliyah. Even if he's living with a nochris he can still duchen. But the moment she converts and marries him he can no longer duchen. And if he can't duchen then of course he can't get the first aliya either. (The baal mum is different. The only reason he can't duchen is because the deformity is in his hand; if it were anywhere else he could duchen. And even so he still has a *chiyuv* to duchen, which is why he has to leave before retzei in order to avoid it. A cohen married to a grusha doesn't have to leave, since he is a temporary chalal and thus has no chiyuv.) It seems to me that "vekidashto" *does* apply to the wives of cohanim, because for purposes of kavod the general rule is ishto kegufo, and a wife who marries up gets her husband's social status. As for his unmarried daughters, it seems to me that they too are included in their father's status for this purpose, since they are called by his name. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 11 08:07:53 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:07:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. There are two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Should the Kohanim be asked to leave the shul during Kriyas HaTorah, so that both Yisroelim will receive aliyos? A. The Mishnah Berurah (135:9) writes that a Kohen may not give up his aliyah because we are obligated to honor a Kohen. This is the case not only on Shabbos or Yom Tov when the Shuls are crowded and it will be noticeable, but even on a Monday or Thursday when it is less obvious. However, many poskim, including Igros Moshe (OC 3:20), write that if there is a pressing need on a Monday or Thursday, a Kohen may be mochel (forgo) his kovod and give up his right to the first aliyah. In such a situation, the Kohen exits the Shul before the Torah reading so as not to cast any doubts on his lineage. In contrast, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt?l held that it is not proper for a Kohen to relinquish his aliyah. Aside from the issue of the Kohen being mochel (forgoing) the honor of receiving the first aliyah, there will also be a deficiency in the Kriyas HaTorah itself. The Gemara (Megilla 21b) states that the three aliyos on Monday and Thursday and on Shabbos Mincha were instituted to correspond to the three categories of Jews: Kohanim, Levi?im and Yisroelim. If a Kohen is not called up for an aliyah, the Kriyas HaTorah is lacking this kiyum (fulfillment) of reflecting the three categories of Jews. Therefore, one should not ask a Kohen to forgo his aliyah, since this would diminish the fulfillment of the mitzvah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Jun 11 19:53:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:23:36 +0930 Subject: [Avodah] Kashrus - Wooden Sticks and Feathers Message-ID: If a wooden stick is used to stir a hot pot of non-K meat, it becomes non-K. It will in turn, render a pot of hot Kosher food non-K, if it is used, whilst fresh, to stir that pot. But, wood is not a food. May one eat the shavings of that wooden stick? Probably yes. Hog hair is not a food and it cannot be deemed to be non-K. Therefore one may sprinkle hog hair on ones food, or cook it in ones soup. Does it get worse if the hog hair is first cooked in a pot of non-K meat? Probably yes. This is an issue faced today by Kashrus agencies regarding food ingredients/additives that are extracted from non-foods, like bird feathers. In order to facilitate plucking, the dead, non-Shechted birds have been plunged into a tank of boiling water. Thus the feathers have absorbed the non-K taste of the birds. Although the feathers are dissolved in acids in order to extract what will be used as food additives, this consideration is not accepted regarding gelatine since gelatine is a 'food' at the conclusion of its processing, and it is similarly not accepted by the Kashrus agencies for feathers. Some suggest that there is a difference between the two. Gelatine is worse because it is extracted from the non-K item itself i.e. the skin and bones, whereas the non-K absorbed in the feathers, is not the source of the extracted food/additive which are derived exclusively from the feathers that are a non-food. Therefore, even though skin and bones do become inedible during their processing, this is just a temporary state, generated by acids and alkali, which are removed from the finished product and the finished product is essentially still the same skin and bones. Whereas the product extracted from feathers is entirely disassociated with the absorbed non-K flavour and is therefore K. Nevertheless, a well known Rav argues that in any case where the chemical is removed, the product returns to its non-K status, even in the case of feathers. It will permitted only if the chemical remains but is camouflaged by other additives. Therefore, feathers and what is derived from them remain prohibited because whatever chemicals are used to process and extract the foods/additives, are removed. Is it possible that the foods/additives extracted from the feathers are permitted because all, or almost all of the absorbed non-K flavour is removed - in other words, just as we can Kasher our wooden stick, so too we can deem the feathers to have been Kashered? Now if we were to actually Kasher the feathers or the wooden stick, we require 60 times the volume of the stick. For example, a 500g stick requires 30 litres [500gX60=30,000g] and 3 tonnes of feathers would require [3,000litresX60=500,000 litres] which we obviously dont have in the normal processing. Now the only reason we cannot Kasher in less than 60 is ChaNaN [ChaTiCha NaAsis Neveilah] This means, Kashering is not a process of dilution of the prohibited component that is absorbed until it is less that 1:60, in which case we could immerse the non-K spoon or feathers in 100 small pots of boiling water and each dip would further dilute the concentration of the absorbed Issur Kasheing is rather a process that MUST revoke the prohibited status. If it is not revoked - i.e. it is immersed in a pot that does not have more than 60, then EVERYTHING becomes non-K and the spoon is just as non-K as it was before it was immersed. In other words ChaNaN applies to Kelim. And yet the Kosher agencies permit the additives extracted from non-K feathers because the feathers are not food but a Keli, and are therefore not limited by ChaNaN. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Jun 11 11:09:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:09:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:19 PM 6/11/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would also add that >if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >he should move here. Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who come here collecting for all sorts of things? What would they do if there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious community of Jews in the US? Indeed, how many religious Jews living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things. Is this not a huge mitzva? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 11 20:48:41 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 05:48:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <4a055873-1dcb-8b0f-2b31-69cec4cbdb81@zahav.net.il> 1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. 2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - what does that mean? Ben On 6/11/2018 8:09 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the > frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who > come here collecting for all sorts of things?? What would they do if > there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious > community of Jews in the US?? (1) Indeed, how many religious Jews > living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things.? Is > this not a huge mitzva? (2) > > YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 12 05:36:49 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah Message-ID: Please see the article at Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah by Dr. Leo Levi This article appeared in the December 1988 issue of the Jewish Observer which is available at https://goo.gl/9JUkt4 YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 11:25:42 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:25:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? In-Reply-To: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <10180612182542.GA32068@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 01:27:43PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a : Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) : but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose... However, when fundraising, pidyon shevuyim comes first, even after the funds were raised and the building materials bought for the not-yet-existent shul. SA YD 252:1. And the Tur says this is the only mitzvah we may sell those building supplies for. : 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities : and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent : in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? Is this distinction more than semantic? You are asking whether the "other priorities" are outside the label "tzedaqah" and therefore "other halakhot", or within the label, and therefore tzedaqah's priorities would be "multivariate". But the word "tzedaqah" has multiple usages. For example, in the sense we have been using it, we've been including pidyon shevuyim and binyan bhk"n. But it could be used to refer to supplying the poor with their needs exclusively. Or to mean their needs and dei machsero. Etc... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. micha at aishdas.org I awoke and found that life was duty. http://www.aishdas.org I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:31:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 10:42:20AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like : Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem : spoke to both? ... : If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would : seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply : they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. Like "shamor vezakhor bedibur echad"? There is no proof they all heard the same thing, never mind in the same way. But that's not where I wanted to go. If we take the Rambam's approach to the uniqueness of Moshe's nevu'ah, then the difference isn't in the "Dibbur" (which didn't actually involve heard words, leshitaso). It's in the shomeia'. Moshe's seikhel was able to accept the nevu'ah unmediated. Others, the same message could only be received via koach hadimyon so that it reaches the navi's conscious mind cloaked in visions and metaphoric sensations. So, if Hashem did make one dibbur to both, Moshe would still receive it Peh-el-peh and Aharon would experience the revelation as a prophetic vision. OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then we are left with two possibilities: - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, and passing Torah down the generations, etc... - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording the kelal, there could be others. There are other potential exceptions, most enigmatically Bil'am (Yalqut Shim'oni 966) on the very pasuq that describes Moshe's nevu'ah as being "Panim al panim" -- "velo qam navi od beYisrael keMoshe", but among the other nations, there was Bil'am. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that micha at aishdas.org a person can change their future http://www.aishdas.org by merely changing their attitude. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:39:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:39:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? In-Reply-To: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180612203937.GB20060@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 01:02:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 : minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority : of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to : reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish : the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, : how else might the desired result be accomplished? Through unofficial norms. It wasn't all that long ago (at most a couple of decades) when speed was left to the chazan watching the rav (or the chazan himself, if the rav is at another minyan), and the norms of the minyan set the chazan's pace without a watch and often without conscious thought. But then, even in those days people were coming late. I think you're dealing with a misdiagnosis. To my mind, the only real way to get people to come on time and to stay for davening and not spend the time learning with breaks for prayer is to offer programming that helps people relate to davening. If you don't cure the problem of boredum, people will come late regardless of the scheduling system, and find excuses to step out, whether physically or mentally. I would suggest the minyan in question explore in that direction, rather than worry about how Yishtabach time is determined. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. micha at aishdas.org - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 12 14:24:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 17:24:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> References: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <233e14ea-9b86-d3dc-f8fc-2d8bb4c8c50c@sero.name> On 12/06/18 16:31, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part > of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah > itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, > and passing Torah down the generations, etc... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording > the kelal, there could be others. Other possibilities: * Moshe told Yehoshua what he should write the next day. * The Rambam says that after a navi's vision a mal'ach explains it to him. I see no reason why the mal'ach in Yehoshua's vision could not have told him exactly what he should write. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Wed Jun 13 06:07:13 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:07:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW SHOULD COME FROM THE LETTER Message-ID: <9D3675F5-16E2-4542-A632-D76A033B1BCE@cox.net> There?s the story of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi who, when studying Torah, heard the crying of his infant grandson. The elder rebbe rose from his studying and soothed the baby to sleep. Meanwhile, his son, the boy?s father, was too involved in his study to hear the baby cry. When R. Zalman noticed his son?s lack of involvement, he proclaimed: ?If someone is studying Torah and fails to hear the cry of a baby, there is something very wrong with his learning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 13 12:29:17 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 21:29:17 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Perhaps there are several aspects of nevuah. One is the hearing, which Moshe did better. Another is the experience itself.? Here, it doesn't matter if Moshe's experience was "better" than Aaron's and in fact the word better doesn't apply. Aaron experienced this totality called nevuah and he did it his way. After doing that, he isn't the same person, or the same cohen. The same would apply to the hundreds of thousands of people who experienced nevuah but didn't have anything recorded. They became different people, and their avodat Hashem was completely upgraded as a result of the experience. Ben On 6/3/2018 9:42 AM, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was > the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 13 12:51:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:51:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah Message-ID: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> >From your friendly neighborhood clipping service. Taken from , with transliteration added for Avodah digest purposes. R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" of "Torah lishmah" means. I intend to reply, once I have time to collect a mar'eh maqom or two. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Tvunah in English Beit Midrash for Birurei Halachah Binyan Zion Under the Leadership of Maran HaRav Asher Weiss Shlita Learning Torah L'Shma Introductory Note Our Sages[1] have greatly commended one who learns Torah Lishmo -- literally, for its own sake.[2] Many times in the Talmud [Pesachim 50b, Nazir 23b, Horiyos 10b, Sotah 22b, Sotah 47a, Sanhedrin 105b, Erchin 16b] they have stated that one should always learn Torah, even if it not Lishmo, for through this one will eventually reach Lishmo. The goal, though, is total Lishmo. Two questions have to be dealt with: Firstly, is there anything negative or positive if one enjoys one's learning? Secondly, what precisely is Torah Lishmoh? Position One -- Enjoyment Is Not Ideal The Agrah D'Kallah[3] states that the disciples of the Ba'al Shem Tov asked their master if there is a problem if one enjoys learning Torah. He answered that since this is the very nature of Torah, as is written in Tehillim[4], "the statutes of Hashem are straight, [they] gladden the heart," Hashem will not act unfairly towards a person[5] and punish him for having had such enjoyment. This statement seems clear that the ultimate aim would be not to derive any enjoyment from one's learning. A similar sentiment seems to have been echoed by Rav Chaim Volozhiner. He seems to writes[6] that one who enjoys his learning does not commit a sin.[7] On the other hand, the Eglei Tal[8] writes that he has heard some people make a grave mistake, thinking that the ideal is for one to learn without enjoyment. He argues vehemently that one must love and enjoy one's learning. The one whom the Eglei Tal was arguing with was the Yismach Yisrael. He writes[9] that the true learning of Torah is only when one learns with no intention of any enjoyment at all. My feeling is that there is room for both the position of the Eglei Tal and that of the Yismach Yisrael to be correct. On one hand, Hashem wants us to enjoy His Torah, and, as we shall discuss in length soon, it is the proper way for one to study Torah. However, there are many instances where one does not enjoy learning, either because one has had a bad day, or because it is a piece of material which really does not grab his interest. In such a case, one needs to recall the words of the Yismach Yisroel that one needs to study Torah even if one does not have any enjoyment. Position Two -- Enjoyment Is Ideal In my opinion, it seems clear from many Rishonim that enjoyment and pleasure in one's learning is an integral part of the process of Torah study. Firstly, the Mishnah in Avos[10] states that when one studies Torah one needs to know in front of Whom one toils. Rabbeinu Yonah[11] explains that just as the Torah was the plaything of Hashem[12], so to speak, before the creation of the world, so too one's Torah should be one's own plaything. This seems to state clearly that deriving pleasure for Torah study is an ideal. Secondly, the general rule regarding commandments is that they were not given for pleasure[13], and therefore the pleasure of having fulfilled a commandment is not Halachikally considered pleasure. For example, if one took a vow not to derive pleasure from one's fellow, one's fellow may still blow the Shofar on his behalf, since the mere fact that one's fellow is enabling the fulfilment of one's commandment is not considered pleasure.[14] However, regarding the commandment of Torah study, Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar writes[15] that the essence of the commandment is to enjoy one's learning. Therefore, says Rabbeinu Avraham, if one forbade one's fellow from using one's Torah scroll, one's fellow may not use it. Again, this is a clear statement that enjoying one's learning is ideal. [A note of explanation is in order. It is difficult to understand how Rabbeinu Avraham can state that enjoyment is the essence of learning Torah. It is understandable how it is an integral part -- but to be the essence? I think his intent is as follows. The Shulchan Oruch HaRav[16] argues that there are two separate commandments of learning Torah. One is to study the Torah, and the other is to know the Torah. In my opinion this particular formulation is difficult, since we do not find that the Rishonim count the commandment of Torah study as two separate commandments.[17] Rather, it seems that these two categories make up the commandment. The commandment is to learn, while the essence and purpose of this learning is in order to know the Torah. The proof to this understanding of the commandment is that the commandment of Torah study is the verse veshinantam levanekha -- "And you shall teach your children,"[18] and our Sages explain[19] that the word veshinantam is to be expounded from the root shinen -- sharp. The words of Torah should be totally clear to oneself, to the extent that if one is asked about a given Torah matter one should be able to answer immediately, without babbling. This teaches us that the essence of the study is to achieve clear knowledge. Since the clarity of Torah knowledge is the essence of the commandment of Torah study, and this clarity of knowledge brings one great pleasure, Rabbeinu Avraham writes that the essence of the commandment of Torah study is to have pleasure from it.] A third proof: If deriving pleasure from the study of Torah is not the ideal state, how could it be that our Sages instituted the words, "veha'arev na es divrei Sorasekha befinu" in the morning blessing on the Torah? However, it could be that this is not a proof. The Avudraham[20] cites two verses to explain the word ????? in this context. The first is from Malachi[21] -- Ve'orvah Lashem minchas Yehudah viYrushalayim kiymei olam ukhshanim qadmonios -- "And the flour-offering of Yehudah and Yerushalayim will be pleasing to Hashem as the days of old and the years past." However, his second verse is from Tehillim[22] -- arov avdekha letov, which the Ibn Ezra[23] explains is the same root as an areiv -- a guarantor -- "Guarantee Your servant for good". Accordingly, the blessing is to be understood as a request from Hashem that He should act as a guarantor that our children should know the Torah, and does not refer to a request for having pleasure from the Torah. On the other hand, Rashi[24] explains that this blessing is a request that the study of Torah be with the tremendous pleasure of loving, feeling loved by, and being close to, Hashem. His interpretation is also cited by the Avudraham.[25] According to this interpretation, there is strong proof that pleasure is an ideal part of the study of Torah. Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind on this thought. 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must learn Torah in order to fulfil it. Support for these Positions All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the Rishonim. 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov. 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Uniting the Opinions However, in my opinion, it seems that these are really three sides to one coin. Before I demonstrate this, I would like to show some indications in this direction: 1. Although Rashi in Brachos[38] writes that Lishmo means in order to find out what to do, however in his commentary to Ta'anis he writes[39] that Lishmo means to fulfil Hashems will. 2. Although the Ba'al Shem Tov seems to be of the opinion that Lishmo means in order to fulfil the will of Hashem, however two of his main disciples[40] write that one must learn in order to act. Therefore it seems to me that all these three interpretations are really three parts of one whole. The first step is that one has to learn in order to fulfil the will of Hashem. However, what is His will? It is that one should learn and know clearly His Torah. What is the purpose of us knowing his Torah? In order that one should know what to do. In light of this, it would seem that we can understand that which we quoted from Rav Chaim Volozhiner in the beginning of the Shiur[41], even though at face value his statement that "there is no sin," seems to contradict that which we quoted later in the Shiur from him.[42] According to my understanding of Lishmo it is not a contradiction. The earlier quote is directed at one for whom part of his motivation to learn is because of his enjoyment. The motivation, ideally, should be purely because Hashem said so. But one should most definitely enjoy one's learning when one is learning. [1] For example, Mishnah Avos 6:1 and Sanhedrin 99b [2] We shall later discuss another manner to translate this word. [3] Agrah D'Kallah Parshas Chayei Sarah d"h BeMidrash BeParsha Zu Kad Damich Rebbe Avahu [4] Tehillim 19:9 [5] Avodah Zarah 3a [6] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [7] We shall return to this statement in the end of the Shiur [8] Hakdamah to Eglei Tal [9] Yismach Yisrael Parshas Bechukosai [10] Mishnah Avos 2:14 [11] Rabbeinu Yonah ibid d"h VeDah Lifnei Mi [12] Mishlei 8:30 [13] Rosh HaShannah 28a [14] Ibid, as explained by Rashi d"h Mutar Litkoah Lo [15] Peirush Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar Nedarim 48a d"h Sefarim [16] [Blank on web. -mb] [17] See, for instance, Rambam Sefer HaMitzvos Mitzvah 11 [18] Devarim 6:7 [19] Kiddushin 30a [20] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [21] Malachi 3:4 [22] Tehillim 119:122 [23] Ibn Ezra ibid [24] Rashi Brachos 11b d"h Ha'arev [25] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [26] Degel Machane Efraim Parshas Vayishlach d"h Ba Na El Shifchasi [27] Yosher Divrei Emes Os 7 [disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch, who was a major disciple of the Ba'al Shem Tov]; Ma'or VeShemesh Parshas Vayetzei d"h Vayomer Eilav Lavan [disciple of the Noam Elimelech, who was a major disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch] [28] Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 2 and 3 [29] Chiddushei Chasam Sofer Nedarim 81a d"h Shelo Borchu [30] Reishis Chochmah, Hakdamah [31] Shnei Luchos HaBris, Chelek 1, Ba'asarah Ma'amaros, Ma'amar 6, Os 187 [32] Yerushalmi Brachos 1:2 [33] Peirush HaRosh Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen [34] Mefaresh (Rashi) Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen. [There is doubt whether the commentary printed as Rashi on Nedarim is actually from Rashi, hence this commentary is commonly referred to as "the Mefaresh (commentator)"] [35] Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah 10:5 [36] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [37] Tosfos Pesachim 50b d"h Vekan [38] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [39] Rashi Ta'anis 7a d"h Lishmo [40] Likutei Amarim of the Maggid of Mezeritch (otherwise known as Maggid Devarav LeYa'akov) Siman??, Sod Yachin U'Boaz Perek 2 [41] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [42] [Ed. Note] According to the later quote, as is clear from the end of Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 4, learning for the love of the pure understanding of Torah is Lishmoh. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 04:22:44 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:22:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How to pour nesachim, major differences between the first and the second beis hamikdash Message-ID: Yesterdays daf (Zevachim 61b) says that the mizbeach in the first beis hamikdash was 28x28 amos and in the second beis hamikdash was 32x32 amos. Rabin explains the difference as follows: In the first Mikdash, Nesachim would flow into Shisim (a pit south-west of the Mizbe'ach) down the wall of the mizbeach. In the second Beis Hamikdash they enlarged the Mizbe'ach in order that the Shisim would be within (under) the Mizbe'ach and they made the corners of teh mizbeach hollow so that they could pour nesachim in the mizbeach. At first (during the first Beis Hmikdash), they learned from the words "Mizbe'ach Adamah" that the mizbeach has to be completely solid. In the second beis Hamikdash they thought that drinking ('consumption' of libations) should be like eating (Korbanos that are burned, i.e. within the boundaries of the Mizbe'ach) and therefore made the holes to pour the Nesachim as part of the mizbeach. Therefore, they understood that Mizbe'ach Adamah" teaches that the Mizbe'ach cannot be built over domes or tunnels (that are not needed for the Mizbe'ach). According to the Rambam in Hilchos Mamrim, this is perfectly standard practice. Any Beis Din can come and darshen the pesukim differently then a previous beis din. However, according to others this is not so simple. For those who hold that there is one halachic truth, this would seem to be very difficult, in either the first or second beis hamikdash they did the avoda of the nesachim wrong. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 05:50:21 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:50:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40a627c0-37a1-a74d-6f72-165b6d6d9469@gmail.com> On 6/14/2018 8:17 AM, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org wrote: > Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 From: Micha Berger > ...who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah? If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah ... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. ... Another possibility: Hashem dictated the last pesukim about Moshe's death to Moshe beforehand, even before Moshe ascended the mountain, and Moshe dictated them to Yehoshua, who did not write them down until after Moshe's death. Thus, all the Torah, to the last letter, was revealed to Moshe, but it was Yehoshua who put the last pesukim in writing. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Jun 14 06:47:54 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: At 08:17 AM 6/14/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you >regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. >2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That >isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >what does that mean? I am going to give you an answer that I know you will not like and will dismiss out of hand, but IMO, it is the truth. Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to Eretz Yisroel. After all, I said, Orthodox Jews are interested in doing mitzvahs, and one can certainly do more mitzvahs in Israel. He responded by pointing out that the additional mitzvahs that one can do in Israel are only of rabbinical origin at this time. Furthermore, he went on, one has to keep in mind the following. The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the right spiritual level before you go." While reciting the Shema twice a day we say, ?Beware lest your heart be seduced and you turn astray And you will swiftly be banished from the goodly land which G-d gives you.? Thus it is clear to me that one must be on the appropriate spiritual level to live in Eretz Yisroel. Encouraging those who are not on this level to settle in Eretz Yisroel was and is perhaps a mistake. This is a radical statement, and many will react strongly to it. However, is it possible that part of the reason for what is going on in Israel today is a result of the fact that the vast majority of Jews living in Israel are not properly observant, and the statement quoted in Shema is being, G-d forbid, fulfilled? I am not the one to judge anyone else, but each person should look in the mirror and ask themselves if they are sure that they are spiritually elevated enough to live in Eretz Yisroel. As Reb Dovid said, "You just don't go to Israel." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:19:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:19:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? Message-ID: We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping that stringency. Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? KT Joel Rich From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:18:14 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:18:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? Message-ID: The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases (each iteration away from the primary source can cloud fine points, or Godel's incompleteness theorem at play?). I also see much more of the implicit sociological assumptions made over time (and wonder how we define the community [e.g., town, city, continent...] and time [every decade, exile...] that we measure). Two examples: 1) S"A O"C 153:12 (MB:76) discusses an individual who had a stipulation with a community to build a Beit Knesset (synagogue), it stays with him and his family but it's not transferable. Why not? "Mistavra" (it's logical) that that's what the community had in mind unless specifically stipulated differently at origination (me -- who measured? How?) 2) S"A O"C 153:18 (MB:95) concerning a private object (e.g., Menorah) used by the synagogue. Originally, the assumption was they became kodesh once used, however, "now" it's assumed that they remain totally private (as if this were the original stipulation). So how, when, and where did this change? Were the first people who acted this way sinners, but enough sinners makes it OK? KT Joel Rich From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:35:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:35:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17593052-ba12-6371-5050-960187b566d0@zahav.net.il> Yes we have heard this answer before, several times. Putting aside its multiple problems, it is basically rejecting the paper you linked, given that the paper's author supports the state albeit with several large reservations. You can't say that the aliya of the vast majority of people to Israel is a mistake and support the state at the same time. Ben On 6/14/2018 3:47 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if > one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the > exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D > forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong > deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be > on the right spiritual level before you go. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:36:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:36:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. ?Ben On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > > Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? > From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 14 15:07:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:07:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, micha at aishdas.org but it's smarter to be nice. http://www.aishdas.org - R' Lazer Brody Fax: (270) 514-1507 From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 14:18:33 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 21:18:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: , <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. > Ben ?1?/??? Which raises a question I?ve been thinking about lately. When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From zev at sero.name Thu Jun 14 15:39:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:39:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <76b76294-55ee-c10b-66b4-858544078685@sero.name> On 14/06/18 18:07, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the > : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to > : Eretz Yisroel... > > : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one > : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact > : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, > : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed > : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the > : right spiritual level before you go." > > This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It's much earlier than that. It's a Tosfos (Rabbenu Chaim, quoted in Tosfos, Kesubos 110b, sv Hu Omer). -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 22:37:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 07:37:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> Message-ID: <1d515cf4-41e6-53ed-9246-feaee76b81cd@zahav.net.il> I'd guess the latter - the Gemara is telling us you have to decide for yourself and that while the Gemara will give values and weight, it? leaves the final choice up to you. On 6/14/2018 11:18 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 15 01:27:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 04:27:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 06:07 PM 6/14/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the >: Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to >: Eretz Yisroel... > >: The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one >: does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact >: same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, >: in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed >: here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the >: right spiritual level before you go." > >This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. If so, then why are there Satmar Chassodim living in Israel? Are they all on a high spiritual level? And could it be that the Satmar Rebbe left Israel, for this reason? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmeisner at mail.gmail.com Fri Jun 15 05:27:58 2018 From: jmeisner at mail.gmail.com (Joshua Meisner) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 08:27:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > Question -- is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? On Jun 14, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Ben Waxman wrote: > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a > bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. The implication of this sugya is that given that one has made a neder, it is better not to keep it than to keep it. Clearly, it is not suggesting that one violate the neder but rather that one be matir it before a chacham. The meforshim provide different reasons why this is the case -- e.g., because the neder was made out of anger that would hopefully subside or because the neder is characteristic of ga'avah -- but a chumra taken on because a person perceives a need for a s'yag or similar reasons (or, for that matter, a neder bish'as tzarah) may not be what the gemara is referring to. Going back to RJR's question, to provide a few data points, while on the one hand offering a korban without making a neder is assur, one tanna used to be makdish his korban only after he brought it to the mikdash to avoid the possibility of stumbling. Not sure if these cases can be translated into nidrei issur. Josh From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 15 12:02:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 15:02:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Referring to "the holy month of Ramadan" In-Reply-To: References: <163fc9b81f2-c8f-124c4@webjas-vaa038.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180615190235.GA17319@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:18am EDT, Prof. Levine wrote on Areivim: : What about referring to the "holy month of Ramadan"? Aren't their : restrictions regarding what a Jew is allowed to do when it comes to : non-Jewish holidays? Interesting question... Yes, if Moslems are aku"m. But Islam is monotheistic. In fact, they're more pedantic about it than the Torah requires. E.g. Many Moslems believe that the Torah's use of "Yad Hashem" et al even acknowledging they are meant as metaphors shows Shaitan's alleged corruption of the text. So, it's not yom eideihem in the normal sense. For that matter, one might even argue that many versions of Ramadan observance are actually qadosh (in our sense of the word). They fast to learn self-discipline and empathy for those who are less fortunate, they give sadaqah to the poor (I'm bet you can guess that Arabic) and there is a point of having a nightly meal, iftar, in fellowship with the broader community, not alone or as a nuclear family. All values the Beris Noach would want them to be fostering. So, the previous intentionally provocative paragraph aside, is there really a problem talking about Ramadan or referring to it as they do, as "the holy month of"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The trick is learning to be passionate in one's micha at aishdas.org ideals, but compassionate to one's peers. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 12:09:48 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:09:48 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? Message-ID: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with whom did the PC disagree? Ben From hanktopas at gmail.com Sun Jun 17 18:49:29 2018 From: hanktopas at gmail.com (Henry Topas) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch Message-ID: Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in a din Torah pls? Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. Thank you and kol tuv, HT Sent from my iPhone From zev at sero.name Sun Jun 17 21:42:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:42:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? In-Reply-To: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> References: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 17/06/18 15:09, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. > In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered > putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim > on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with > whom did the PC disagree? The issue was the way he wrote about gedolei haposkim, especially the Bet Yosef. http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1640&pgnum=250 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 23:10:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 08:10:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] machloquet - good or bad Message-ID: <5c275a89-82ba-3763-db85-3c8663f1b5a9@zahav.net.il> Summary of a talk given on Shabbat and then my commentary: According to the Rambam, machloquet is a fashla, something we don't want. It started when students didn't properly learn from their teachers. Had they done so, Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai would not have had so many disagreements. Rav Kook and Rebbe Nachman had a much more positive approach to machloquet. According to RK, when say that talmidei chachamim bring peace to the world, it is because they know how to argue with someone yet respect him and his opinion. A talmid chacham knows how to be inclusive, how to allow for and even want other opinions. According to RN, machloquet is a reenactment of Creation. God created the world through tzimmzum, allowing space for others. When there is one opinion only, that opinion fills the entire space so to speak. When someone else comes up with a different opinion, the first person has to contract to allow room for the new idea. This in turn allows for even more opinions. Ad kan the class. Today we don't do machloquet very well or at least we struggle with it. We try and either destroy the other side or we say that the other position doesn't really exist. This week a rav made a statement about Rav Lichtenstein tz'l and his position regarding (a very minor) women's issue. The easiest thing to do if one wanted to know RL's opinion about something is to pick up the phone and ask his sons, his daughter, an extremely close talmid. Instead the rav simply heard something and made a conclusion. When he was shown that his conclusion was incorrect, he pontificated that RL really didn't accept the more liberal position, he simply gave in to pressure. Occam's razor says that if RL said something and did something, it is because RL believed that to be the right thing to do. There is no need to come up with any explanation. Simply accept that there is a machloquet in the matter. Similarly, there is a mechina whose rosh yeshiva said things about women's role in society which people in the left wing MO world don't accept. No one says that anyone needs to send their kid there, but to try and work to shut down the mechina? You can't accept that someone, who BTW probably agrees with the LW on a whole bunch of other subjects, differs with you? You want to shut them down? Come on people, get a grip. From yherczeg at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:15:11 2018 From: yherczeg at gmail.com (Yisrael Herczeg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:15:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Re: Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." ::This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It is also in the Tashbetz Kattan. Yisrael Herczeg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:53:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:53:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is One Required To Live In Israel? (Bava Batra 91a) Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NKZ2eR by Raphael Grunfeld. (Note: Raphael Grunfeld is a son of Dayan Dr. Grunfeld who translated the Horeb and other works by RSRH from German into English.) First, it is not universally accepted that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel. Rashi?s commentary on the Torah as understood by the Ramban implies that there is no obligation to live in Israel. Rabbeinu Chaim, one of the Tosafists of the twelfth century, states clearly that following the destruction of the Second Temple and the exile from Israel, there is no longer any requirement to live in Israel. The Rambam agrees with Rabbeinu Chaim and accordingly did not include living in Israel in his list of the positive commandments. In more contemporary times, the Rebbe of Munkatch, in his responsa Minchat Eliezer, endorses Rabbeinu Chaim?s position. The Rebbe of Satmar, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, points out that the Shulchan Aruch does not include the mitzvah of living in Israel in its code of law. The majority opinion prevailing in the halacha, however, follows the Ramban and maintains that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel today. Although it is preferable to live in Israel, there is no obligation to go. However, once you live in Israel, there is an obligation not to leave. In fact, the language used by the Ramban in his supplement to Sefer Hamitzvot is that ?anyone who leaves Israel? ? ?kol hayotze mimenah? ? is like an idol worshiper. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:56:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:56:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In just a few weeks, we will observe Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av. This particular Rosh Chodesh is always only one day long, and this year it happens to fall on Erev Shabbos. This means that when Shabbos occurs, Rosh Chodesh will be over. I want to discuss the ramifications of a person who begins Shabbos early in this situation. Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal. (I know that there are poskim who advise one to eat a kezayis of bread after tzeis, but they don't require it.) In my experience, mealtime goes much quicker when there are fewer people at the table. This past Friday, for example, I went to a very nice minyan, beginning Kabalas Shabbos and Maariv shortly after Plag, I took a leisurely stroll home, and despite our best efforts at taking our time through the meal, my wife and I were still ready for Birkas Hamazon a full five minutes before shkiah. In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? I don't recall ever learning about this particular situation. There is an analogous but very different situation that I *have* seen discussed, namely that of a Seuda Shlishit that begins on Shabbos Erev Rosh Chodesh, and continues into Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos. In that case, the poskim give a wide variety of answers, but (among the poskim who *don't* pasken to say both) it is not always clear whether their rule is to base oneself on the beginning of the meal, or the end of the meal, or the holier of the two days. Further, some of them make a distinction, paskening differently for one who is merely benching after tzeis but didn't actually eat after tzeis, as opposed to one who actually ate [food in general or perhaps bread specifically] after tzeis. All that is a good starting point for my situation, but it is only a starting point. A tremendous difference between the two cases is that in the more common case, the calendar day DID change during the meal, to some extent or another. But in the case that I'm asking about, the calendar day did not actually change, only that the people involved are doing the mitzvah of Tosefes Shabbos. To be more explicit: Imagine a couple that goes to an early minyan on Erev Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Av. They daven Maariv, make Kiddush, and say Birkas Hamazon, all before shkiah. Then, after benching but still before shkiah, imagine that the wife gives birth to a boy. This boy will have his bris milah a week later on *Erev* Shabbos, and his bar mitzvah will be on Rosh Chodesh. Is it possible that his parents should have omitted Yaaleh V'Yavo from Birkas Hamazon? Of course, I understand that the answer may depend on details like whether or not the meal continued after shika, or even past tzeis. But I am most curious about the simple case, where benching was before shkiah. And the other cases will perhaps flow from that one. Any and all sources are appreciated. Thanks in advance. (Disclosure: I have other questions about the calendar and a person who begins Shabbos early, but I'm starting with this one, and perhaps I'll open new threads later about the others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:10:57 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:10:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What to do with old pots Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I found an old set of pots in my parents' basement. They have not been used in many years. No one remembers if they were milchig or fleishig. I would like to use them for milchig. May they be kashered and used for milchig? A. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Commentary on Nidah 27a) writes the pots may be designated for meat or dairy without kashering. The pots have not been used in more than 24 hours. After 24 hours any taste that was absorbed in the pot becomes foul, and on a Torah level the pot can be used for meat or dairy without kashering. Nevertheless, there remains a Rabbinic obligation to kasher pots even after 24 hours have elapsed. However, in this case, we may apply the principal of ?safek d?rabbanan l?kula? (in cases of doubt that pertain to a Rabbinic prohibition one may be lenient). Additionally, Igros Moshe (Y.D. II:46) writes that if a utensil is not used for more than a year, there is an opinion that holds that it does not need kashering. Although we don?t follow this opinion, it can act as an additional mitigating factor. However, since one can avoid the doubt by kashering the pot, it is proper to do so. Although the Magen Avrohom (OC 509:11) writes that the custom is not to permit kashering a fleishig pot to use it for milchig, in this case kashering is acceptable since it is only a chumra (extra stringency). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 04:30:24 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:30:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder Message-ID: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don?t know the exact reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That?s only known by HQBH. However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah that you?ve taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 07:50:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:50:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Learning, Spirituality, and Neo-Chassidus In-Reply-To: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> References: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180618145018.GE28907@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 1:14pm, R Aryeh Stein wrote on Areivim: > Rabbi Shafran's letter to Mishpacha included the following paragraph: >> It's easy to say that a person has a relationship with Hashem wherever >> he is, regardless of what he is doing, but it's not true. Many of us break >> that connection through destructive habits and the like, and sugarcoating >> them doesn't make them any less destructive. "Feeling spiritual" may >> be better than feeling bad about yourself, as quoted in the article, >> but are we to be content with feeling spiritual? I think the real problem with R' Avi Shafran's article was picked up in the replies. It's not an either-or. Rather, people whose core learning is the regular gefe"s or shas-and-posqim aren't getting inspired by intellectual pursuit *alone* and are looking for a better connection to the emotional and experiential aspects of Yahadus. Addition, not replacement. The question is more: Are we content with thinking the right thoughts while being parched spiritually? > Rabbi Moshe Weinberger was very disturbed by this paragraph in which > Rabbi Shafran seems to state that one's relationship with God can be > severed if one engages in destructive behavior. > He didn't discuss this specific point in his response to Rabbi Shafran > that was printed in Mishpacha, but he dedicated two shiurim to > demonstrate that Hashem's love for every Jew is eternal and > unconditional (see links to shiurim below) At 03:59:40PM -0400, Zev Sero via Areivim wrote: : To Hashem's love may be unconditional, but the direct connection a : person has with Him can certainly be severed; that is what kares : means. See Igeres Hateshuvah ch 5-6: : https://tinyurl.com/y9hckn5t : https://tinyurl.com/y6wtghxf But on another level, I don't think a person or even an object can be fully severed from the Borei, because withough Or Ein Sof, there is no such thing as existing. This fits kareis as per the Rambam, that the onesh after misah is ceasing to exist. (Except that we would have to translate the Baal haTanya's "Or Ein Sof" language into the Rambam's chain of sikhliim.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:14:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:14:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180618151454.GF28907@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:49:29PM -0400, Henry Topas via Avodah wrote: : Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in : a din Torah pls? : Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. A to'ein is a plaintiff. Could you ever have a din Torah in CM without a to'ein and nit'an? Ah, just googled. I take it you mean a to'ein rabbani, a modern Israeli coinage in order to avoid calling someone an oreikh din, since the job was defined in a way so as to avoid violating "al ta'as atzmekha ke'orkhei hadayanim" (Avos 1:8). The Yerushalmi, Kesuvos 4:10 and BB 9:4 (same quote; both gemaros are short and it's easy to find the quote), says the issur in the mishnah is telling only one side the law when they're still trying to phrase their claim. See also Kesuvos 52b and the Ritva d"h "asinu". So, while I don't have a maqor for when it became normal to have to'anim rabbaniim, I would think the place to look is the earliest shu"t that explain how they're not orkhei din. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, micha at aishdas.org The end is near. http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Moshe Sherer Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:57:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:57:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms Message-ID: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> See "Hezekiahs Religious Reform -- In the Bible and Archaeology" on the Biblical Archeology Society web site at . Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to get rid of everything hidden in private homes. A large 9th-century horned altar was discovered [in Beersheba] -- already dismantled. Three of its four "horns" [rectangular projections on the four corners of the top of the altar] were found intact, embedded in a wall. Their secondary use indicates that the stones were no longer considered sacred. The horned altar was dismantled during Hezekiah's reign, which we know because some of its stones were reused in a public storehouse that was built when the Assyrians threatened Judah and was destroyed by the Assyrian army in 701.... Next we move to Lachish. The second most important city in Judah after Jerusalem, Lachish was a military and administrative center in the Judean hills.... In 2016, an 8th-century BCE cultic place at Lachish was uncovered next to the main city gate. Archaeologists have called this cultic place a "gate-shrine." In it were found two small horned altars, whose horns had been cut off and embedded in an adjacent wall. Further, a square toilet was found installed in the shrine but was never used. The toilet was more of a symbolic act of desecration (see 2Kings 10:27) -- part of Hezekiah's cultic reforms. The best candidate for the elimination [of these cultic sites and others] is King Hezekiah, who probably ordered the abolition of all official cultic sites. Only the Jerusalem Temple and small, household shrines were spared. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. micha at aishdas.org Life is about creating yourself. http://www.aishdas.org - George Bernard Shaw Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:48:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:48:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder In-Reply-To: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> References: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180618154848.GG28907@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 07:30:24AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don't know the exact : reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That's only known by HQBH. : However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah : that you've taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. To do a mitzvah Hashem obligated you in, yes. But one you've taken on yourself? I don't know. As for untuitiveness, see my 9/8/2001 post at . But it ties together why Hashem would command men in something He didn't command women to that mitzvah likely being of more value to a man, to the greater reward. A line of reasoning that doesn't apply to volunteerism. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten micha at aishdas.org your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, http://www.aishdas.org and it flies away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 18 12:50:21 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:50:21 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? On 6/18/2018 5:57 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's > portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the > archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to > get rid of everything hidden in private homes. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 12:13:52 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:13:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chukas Message-ID: <0955AA8C-8FE3-48BA-A965-3E9AA6A10782@cox.net> 1) Four Torah laws cannot be explained by human reason but, being divine, demand implicit obedience: a) to marry one's brother's widow (Deut. 25:5); b) not to mingle wool and linen in a garment (Deut. 22:11); c) to perform the rites of the scapegoat (Lev. 16:26, 34); and d) the red cow. Satan comes and criticizes these statutes as irrational. Know therefore that it was the Creator of the world, the One and Only, who instituted them. Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 19:8). 2) [Ch.19:1] "Hashem spoke to Moses and to Aaron saying:" Symbolically the cow came to atone for the sin of the Golden Calf, as if to say let the mother come and clean up the mess left by her child. If this be the case, this explains why the commandment was directed to Aaron, the one who made the calf. 3) [19:2] "Zot chukat ha-Torah...." This is the statute (also translated as "ritual law," or "decree") of the Torah......" This unusual expression occurs only once more in Bamidbar 31:21. The rabbis have commented that it should have said ?Zot chukat ha parah.? Why does it sound as if this chok is the whole Torah? There are several explanations such as only Jews can be ritually impure. A non-Jew cannot have tum?ah. Also, since a chok is incomprehensible, it is as if you have observed the whole Torah if you follow an irrational, illogical commandment. 4) The Midrash to this chapter focuses primarily on one paradox in the laws of the Red Cow: Its ashes purify people who had become contaminated; yet those who engage in its preparation become contaminated. I thought of a contemporary example of something that would appear just as paradoxical. Radiation treatment is used to treat many forms of cancer, and yet, the same radiation can cause cancer. For someone who has no knowledge of medicine, this would appear as irrational as the paradox of the Red Cow. In a similar vein, the Midrash notes a number of such paradoxical cases of righteous people who descended from wicked parents, such as Abraham from Terach, Hezekiah from Ahaz, and Josiah from Ammon. The Talmud adds the paradox that it is forbidden to drink blood, but an infant nurses from its mother, whose blood is transformed into milk to become the source of life (Niddah 9a). You won?t go broke if you follow the chok. But if you don?t keep trying, you?ll end up dying. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 12:24:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:24:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180618192417.GC12350@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:50:21PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, : had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real : reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split : with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have : been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira : in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? I dunno. Look at David haMelekh. He had what to do teshuvah for as well. (Yeah, yeah, I know, kol ha'omer David chatah... But let's look at the navi's presentation of David, if not the historical figure.) However, he owned his mistakes, did teshuvah. And indeed, excelled at singing shirah. It seems there is a big difference between someone who errs, but stays connected to the Borei through it all well enough to be moved to song, and someone who doesn't. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, micha at aishdas.org and after it is all over, he still does not http://www.aishdas.org know himself. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Jun 19 00:15:18 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:15:18 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive into a hostile Arab town? Ben From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 19 03:01:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 06:01:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive : into a hostile Arab town? I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, no? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 19 06:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Used Metal Pots Bought From a Non-Jew In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Q. I bought a set of used metal pots from a non-Jew. Do I kasher them first or do I tovel them first? A. Shulchan Aruch (YD 121:2) writes that one should first kasher the pot and afterwards immerse it in a mikvah. If one toveled the pot first before kashering, it is a matter of dispute among Rishonim whether the tevila was effective. The Rashbam (cited in Beis Yosef YD 121) writes that toveling a pot before kosherization is like immersing in a mikvah while holding a sheretz (unclean item) and the tevila is ineffective. However, other Rishonim disagree and maintain that tevila is a separate mitzvah and is not connected with kashering. The Shach (YD 121:5) writes that if one was to tovel a pot before kashering, tevila should be repeated without a bracha because of the uncertainty. Nonetheless, the Dagul Merivava writes if the pot had not been used in the past 24 hours, one may tovel before kashering. After 24 hours, the non-kosher taste that had been absorbed in the pot is ruined. At that point the absorbed taste is no longer similar to a sheretz. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 19 08:17:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:17:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <3cd91821-d660-3a72-164e-c3abb8aaf807@sero.name> On 19/06/18 06:01, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone > : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the > : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the > : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive > : into a hostile Arab town? > > I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, > no? I don't know the answer, and wouldn't dare try to pasken it, but I do see a big question. The person is in no danger now. He will be in danger only if he chooses to drive on Shabbos. Is it permitted to help him do so safely? Does it make you an accomplice to his avera? Does hal'itehu larasha' perhaps apply here? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ydamyb at mail.gmail.com Tue Jun 19 05:19:56 2018 From: ydamyb at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:19:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 6:17 PM Akiva Miller wrote: > Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and > begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal > before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal... > In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a > regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling > Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Akiva Blum From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jun 19 09:44:50 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 16:44:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10d8a9cc4d8f47e593bd2928a907b8fd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. -------------------------- I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you can daven maariv after plag-would he say if you did that you don't say retzeih if you ate later? BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 05:11:06 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 08:11:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some degree or another. Would they pasken the same way if the Seuda Shlishis was earlier, and - for whatever reason - he had davened maariv and said birkas hamazon on Saturday afternoon after Plag Hamincha? I concede that it is a bizarre example, but the boundaries of halacha are defined by exactly this sort of situation. It's not done nowadays, but a person *IS* allowed to daven maariv on Shabbos afternoon after Plag. If someone did so, and did it during seudah shlishis, and then chose to say Birkas Hamazon while the sun was still above the horizon on Shabbos afternoon, perhaps he should indeed say Retzeh? Perhaps not, but I'd love to know what a posek might say. Summary: The question in this thread concerns someone who is benching on Friday afternoon which is Rosh Chodesh but he already said the non-RC maariv. This is VERY analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday afternoon which is Shabbos but he already said the non-Shabbos maariv. It is NOT so analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday night and he already said the non-Shabbos maariv, and the only argument in favor of saying Retzeh is that the meal began on Shabbos. I just thought of another difference between Friday Rosh Chodesh and the situation cited by RAB. If a person davened Maariv during seuda shelishit - and presumably included Ata Chonantanu - then he has verbally and explicitly declared Shabbos to be over, and it would be contradictory to reverse this by saying Retzeh in the benching (even if the sun is still shining on Saturday afternoon). BUT: When someone says maariv on Motzaei Rosh Chodesh he merely omits Yaaleh V'yavo, and there is no explicit declaration that RC has ended, so perhaps he could still include Yaaleh V'yavo on Friday afternoon. [There would still be a problem of including both Retzeh and Yaaleh V'yavo in the same benching, but some poskim do allow that in the Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos situation.] Akiva Miller From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 20 13:47:08 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:47:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi S. R. Hirsch Takes On The Rambam Message-ID: My grandson Daniel Levine who is studying in Yeshiva KBY and I are in the process of reading RSRH's Nineteen Letters with the notes written by Rabbi Joseph Elias. Today we read part of letter 18. While I knew that RSRH criticizes the RAMBAM, I was surprised at how strong this criticism is. Some of what is in letter 18 is posted at https://goo.gl/o3uXdg Below is a sampling. "Pressure of the times demanded more: the underlying ideas of the Tanach and the Talmud were recorded in the aggados, but again, in a veiled form, requiring of the student an active effort on his part in order to grasp the inner spirit, which really can be passed down only by word of mouth." "However, not everybody grasped the true spirit of Judaism. In non-Jewish schools Yisrael's youth trained their minds in independent philosophical inquiry. From Arab sources they drew the concepts of Greek philosophy and came to conceive their ultimate aim as perfecting themselves in the perception of truth. Hence rose conflict. Their quickening spirit put them at odds with Judaism, which they considered to be void of any spirit of its own; and their view of life was in contradiction with a view that stressed action, deeds, first and foremost, and considered recognition of the truth to only be a means toward such action." And so the times brought forth a man of spirit who, having been educated within an uncomprehended Judaism as well as Arab scholarship, was compelled to reconcile this dichotomy within himself. By giving voice to the way in which he did this, he became the guide for all who were engaged in the same struggle. It is to this great man alone that we owe the preservation of practical Judaism until the present day. By accomplishing this and yet, on the other hand merely reconciling Judaism with the ideas from without, rather than developing it creatively from within, and by the way in which he effected this reconciliation, he gave rise to all the good that followed- as well as all the bad. His trend of thought was Arab-Greek, as was his concept of life. Approaching Judaism from without, he brought to it views that he had gained elsewhere, and these he reconciled with Judaism. Thus to him too, the highest aim was self-perfection through recognition of the truth; and the practical, concrete deeds became subordinate to this end. Knowledge of God was considered an end in itself, not a means toward the end; and so he delved into speculations about the essence of God and considered the results of these speculative investigations to be fundamental axioms and principles of faith binding upon Judaism. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ydamyb at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 21:34:54 2018 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:34:54 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, 4:46 p.m. Akiva Miller via Avodah, < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > R' Akiva Blum wrote: > > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. > > Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are > presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and > benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some > degree or another. > > Please see the MB 424:2 where he quotes the MA specifically about where one davened maariv while still day that he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. I wonder about a case where one said kabolas shabbos, then ate and davened maariv later. I would think that too would be sufficient. Akiva -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 21 03:56:40 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:56:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Timeless Rav Hirsch Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/ZEcnxP The writings of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (RSRH) deeply resonate with many people today, as they have since the time he penned them in the middle of the nineteenth century, using them to recreate a community of modern, Torah-faithful Jews in Frankfurt that had all but disappeared. Many find that, ironically, his words seem more suited for our times than when he composed them. He stands almost alone among commentators in dealing with many themes of modernity: cultural evolution; our relationships with non-Jews; the Jewish mission to the rest of civilization; freedom of the will versus determinism; autonomy and totalitarianism; understanding the impact of paganism on the ancient world. Of course, his treatment of symbolism. This web page contains links to commentaries on the parshios by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein based on the writings of RSRH. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 06:00:23 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:00:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: Perhaps the machmirim would say to respond, "It is Shabbat and it is assur to drive, so I cannot tell to how to go. BUT I will tell you this: Do not go on such-and-such a road, because it will take you through such-and-such a dangerous area." That would not be a problem by those who the OP refers to as machmirim, it seems to me. (Of course, personally, I would label Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as the machmir, and would use the response he suggests: "It pains me that you are driving on Shabbat, so to minimize the Chilul Shabbat, I will give you the very best directions...") Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 21:02:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:02:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. And R' Joel Rich asked: > I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent > and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you > can daven maariv after plag - would he say if you did that > you don't say retzeih if you ate later? This situation is raised by Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen in "The Radiance of Shabbos" (ArtScroll). He writes (pg 95?), "If one interrupts a prolonged meal to daven Maariv or recite Havdalah, he does not say Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon afterwards. If one merely said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, he should still recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon. Rabbi Cohen cites MB 263:67 that if one said "Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol" during the meal, it is a "Tzorech Iyun" whether he can say Retzeh. Then he cites Eliya Rabba 299:1, Petach Hadvir there, Chayei Adam 47:24, Kaf Hachayim Palagi 31, and Rav Moshe Feinstein all as saying that one *can* still say Retzeh, but that Shulchan Aruch Harav 188:17 says not to. Personally, I am surprised that so many poskim distinguish between Maariv/Havdala on the one hand, vs. Omitting Shem Umalchus on the other hard. Here is a situation which will illustrate this point: Suppose someone had a long seuda shlishis, and after Tzeis he said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, and then he actually did a melacha. Would those poskim still say that he should recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon? Akiva Miller From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 21 18:01:47 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 01:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Individualism? Message-ID: <6b39dd928de144b0ba94b9a16c4318c5@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Anecdotally, it seems to me I've seen an increase in "individualistic" practices across the orthodox spectrum [e.g., davening at one's own pace with less concern as to where the tzibbur is up to (shma, shmoneh esrai, chazarat hashatz . . .), being obvious about using a different nusach hatfila, wearing tfillin at mincha . . .] I'm curious as to whether others have seen this? If yes, any theories as to why? (e.g., outside world seeping in?) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Jun 22 13:51:26 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:51:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In Avodah V36n72 (to which I'm humming "Chai, Chai, Chai/Am Yisrael Chai" :)), RJR asked: > BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? < Iff we're considering when one ended the meal; but then you're comparing unlike items (BhM vs. Ma'ariv), not to mention that BhM is a Torah-level *mitzva* while Ma'ariv is .... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 23 19:24:37 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 22:24:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BALAK "JACOB'S TENTS, ISRAEL'S DWELLING PLACES, MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD" Message-ID: "How goodly are your tents, O Jacob; your dwelling places, O Israel." [Num. 24:5] Why the repetition? What does each of these terms [tents and dwelling places] represent? And furthermore, why is the first appellation used "Jacob" and the second one "Israel?" In addition to the sensitivity and modesty demonstrated by the arrangement of the tents and camps, the Sages (Sanhedrin 105b) expound that these terms refer to the habitats of Israel's spiritual heritage. Tents (Ohalecha), alludes to the study halls, and dwelling places (Mishk'nosecha), which is related to Shechinah, or God's presence, alludes to the synagogues and Temples (Sforno). Rav Kook has a novel interpretation. He says that the verse, which mentions tents first, reflects a lower level and hence, uses the name Jacob, the first and lesser name. However, the verse which mentions dwelling second, reflects a higher level. Thus, it uses the name Israel, Jacob's second and more elevated name. The reason Rav Kook considers "tents" to reflect a lower level and "dwelling places" a higher level is because the tent is inherently connected to the state of traveling. It corresponds to the aspiration for continual change and growth. The dwelling is also part of the journey, but is associated with the rests between travels. It is the soul's sense of calm, resting from the constant movement, for the sake of the overall mission (sort of a parallel to Shabbos). I delved into the gematria aspect of this and came up with some heavy, mystical stuff. The gematria for "Ohalecha Ya-akov" (your tents O Jacob) is 248. There are 248 positive mitzvot. The word 'Avraham' and 'bamidbar' (In the wilderness) is also 248, as is the phrase 'Kol Adonai Elohim' (the voice or sound of Hashem, God). The word 'romach' (spear) is also 248. Now to tie all this together-- Balaam had intended, in a manner of speaking, to use a 'spear' to harm the Jewish people and curse them 'in the wilderness.' However 'the voice of Hashem, God' caused Balaam to turn the negative to the positive, (symbolized by the 248 positive mitzvos). Thus when Balaam said "How goodly are your tents O Jacob," he was blessing the Jewish people completely right from 'Abraham.' The gematria for "Mishk'nosecha Yisrael" (Your dwelling places, O Israel) is 1,381. As Rav Kook said, this part of the verse was on a higher level. In Gen: verse 25 (last part) and verse 26 (first part) we have: "Vayar Elohim ki tov. Vayomer Elohim na-a-seh Adam b'tzalmeinue" ("And God saw that it was good. And God said: "Let us make man in Our image..."). The gematria for this is also 1,381 as is the word "Ha-ashtaroth" (the principal Phoenician goddess, the consort of their chief male deity, Baal). Though Balaam was steeped in idolatry ("Ha-ashtaroth"), when he pronounced the second part of the phrase, ("mishk'nosecha Yisroel") God 'saw that it was good.' And so, the "image of God" wins out! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 25 07:17:25 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:17:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Waiting After Some Cheeses Before Eating Meat Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I know that we are supposed to wait after eating certain cheeses, before we can then eat meat. After which cheeses should one wait, and what is the basis for this practice? A. The Rama (Yoreh Deah 89:2) writes that the custom is not to eat meat after eating hard cheese. The waiting time for this is equivalent to the amount of time that one waits after eating meat, before then eating dairy foods. (See Taz ibid. 89:4, Aruch HaShulchan ibid. 89:11, Chochmas Adam 40:13.) There are two reasons that one needs to wait after meat before then partaking of milk; these two reasons apply as well to eating certain cheeses after meat. The first reason is that of basar she?bein ha-shinayim ? meat that gets stuck between the teeth ? which takes a considerable amount of time to dislodge or disintegrate, before which one may not consume milk. (Rambam, Hilchos Ma?achalos Asuros 9:28) The second reason for waiting after eating meat is meshichas ta?am ? an aftertaste left in the mouth, due to meat?s fattiness; only after a substantial lapse of time does this aftertaste dissipate, whereupon one may then consume milk. (Rashi in Chullin 105a s.v. ?Assur?) Poskim apply both of these reasons to cheese: Hard cheese, due to its firm and brittle texture, is like basar she?bein ha-shinayim, and is termed gevinah she?bein ha-shinayim ? cheese that gets stuck between the teeth. One therefore needs to wait a considerable amount of time for such cheese to dislodge or disintegrate before then consuming meat. (Sifsei Da?as Yoreh 89:2) Also, cheeses that are very pungent and leave a noticeable aftertaste are like meat that has meshichas ta?am; one must wait for the aftertaste to dissipate before then eating meat. (Taz Yoreh Deah 89:4) Although some classical poskim argue as to whether one or both of the above rationales for waiting apply to cheese, contemporary poskim rule that both apply. The next installment of Halacha Yomis will discuss further details. View OUKosher's list of Aged Cheeses. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sun Jun 24 23:26:22 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:26:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] [Commentary] Rabbi Meir Soloveichik: Why Christians Are Reading the Rav In-Reply-To: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: [RET emailed me this under a subject line that began "Too long for Avodah thought you might be interested..." But I thought his reluctance was missplaced. I just held on to the piece for its own digest. -micha] Jun 20, 2018 The nature of the dilemma can be stated in a three-word sentence. I am lonely. - Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik In 2015, I was invited to a conference held at a Catholic University in Spain, celebrating the first Spanish translation of *The Lonely Man of Faith*, the seminal philosophical essay of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik (my great uncle), reverently referred to by many Orthodox Jews as "the Rav." Published 50 years earlier, the essay contrasts two biblical accounts of the creation of man and teases out two personas, known as Adam the First and Adam the Second. In the first chapter of Genesis, humanity is created in the image of God and instructed by the Almighty to "fill the world and subdue it." Adam the First, Rabbi Soloveitchik suggests, is majestic; through his God-like creative capacities he seeks scientific breakthroughs, to cure disease, to build cities and countries, to advance the health and comfort of mankind. But then there is Adam the Second, who in Genesis 2 is created from the dust of the earth and remains in the sanctity of the garden of Eden, "to work and protect it." This represents the religious aspect of man, man who is ever aware of his finitude, who finds fulfillment not in majestic achievement but in an intimate relationship with a personal God. These two accounts are given, Rabbi Soloveitchik argued, because both are accurate; both Adam I and Adam II are divinely desired aspects of the human experience. One who is devoted to religious endeavors is reminded that "he is also wanted and needed in another community, the cosmic-majestic," and when one works on behalf of civilization, the Bible does not let him forget "that he is a covenantal being who will never find self-fulfillment outside of the covenant." The man of faith is not fully of the world, but neither can he reject the world. To join the two parts of the self may not be fully achievable, but it must nevertheless be our goal. In his letter of invitation to the conference, the president of the Spanish university reflected on how Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings spoke to his own vocation. As a leader of a Christian school, he said he grappled constantly with the challenge of being an *hombre de fe* in a Europe that, once the cradle of Christendom, was now suddenly secular: As Adam the First understandably and correctly busies himself with the temporal concerns of this world, we encourage our students to not lose sight, within their own hearts, of Adam the Second, the thirsting Adam that longs for a redemption that our technological advances cannot quench. We hope that our students, who come to our university seeking degree titles that will translate into jobs, will leave it also with awakened minds and hearts that fully recognize the deep aspirations that lie within their youthful spirits, and which *The Lonely Man of Faith* so eloquently describes. The letter reflected a fascinating phenomenon. As Orthodox Jews mark this year the 25th anniversary of Rabbi Soloveitchik's passing, more and more of his works are being studied, savored, appreciated, and applied to people's own lives -- by Christians. As interesting as this is, it should not be surprising. *The Lonely Man of Faith* actually originated, in part, in a talk to Catholic seminarians, and today it is Christians who are particularly shocked by the rapidity with which a culture that was once Christian has turned on them, so that now people of faith are quite lonely in the world at large. In his essay, Rabbi Soloveitchik notes that though the tension between Adam I and Adam II is always a source of angst, "the contemporary man of faith is, due to his peculiar position in secular society, lonely in a special way," as our age is "technically minded, self-centered, and self-loving, almost in a sickly narcissistic fashion, scoring honor upon honor, piling up victory upon victory, reaching for the distant galaxies, and seeing in the here-and-now sensible world the only manifestation of being." Now that the world of Adam I seems wholly divorced from that of Adam II, people of faith seek guidance in the art of bridging the two; and if, 70 years ago, Reinhold Niebhur was a theologian who spoke for a culture where Christianity was the norm, Rabbi Soloveitchik is a philosopher for Jews and Christians who are outsiders. The Catholic philosopher R.J. Snell, in a Christian reflection inspired by the Rav's writings, wrote that "like Joseph B. Soloveitchik in *The Lonely Man of Faith*, I am lonely," and he tells us why: In science, my faith is judged obscurantist; in ethics, mere animus; in practicality, irrelevant; in love, archaic. In the square, I am silenced; at school, mocked; in business, fined; at entertainment, derided; in the home, patronized; at work, muffled. My leaders are disrespected; my founder blasphemed by the new culture, new religion, and new philosophy which...suffers from an aversion to the fullness of questions, insisting that questions are meaningful only when limited to a scope much narrower than my catholic range of wonder. Yet Rabbi Soloveitchik's thesis remains that even when society rejects us, we cannot give up on society, but we also cannot amputate our religious identity from our very selves. Adam I and Adam II must be bridged. This will not be easy, but a theme throughout Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings is that all too often religion is seen as a blissful escape from life's crises, while in truth the opposite is the case. In the words of Reuven Ziegler, Rabbi Soloveitchik insisted that "religion does not offer an escape from reality, but rather provides the ultimate encounter with reality." Traditional Jews and Christians in the West face cultural challenges to their faith -- disdain, scorn, and even hate -- but if the challenge is faced with fortitude, sophistication, and honor, it will be a religious endeavor worthy of being remembered. And as both traditional Jews and Christians face this challenge, it will often be as compatriots, in a fellowship that we may not have foreseen 50 years ago. After attending the conference, I was emailed by another member of the administration, the rector of the university. He thanked me "for the pleasure of sharing that deep friendship which is a sign of the community inspired by the principles of the second Adam," and added, "[I] really enjoyed the time we passed together and the reading of the book of Rabbi Soloveitchik," which was, he reflected, "so stimulating for a better understanding of my own life and my faith." To be a person of faith is indeed to be lonely in this world. But more and more, lonely men and women of several faiths may be brought together by *The Lonely Man of Faith.* From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:42:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:42:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627194234.GE22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:18:14PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand : the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic : sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's : underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases... This is why the Maharal (Be'er 1, ch 19 or so) says that the Tur is only usable because of the BY, and SA, because it comes with the suite of nosei keilim. Speaking after years of learning AhS daily... There is a strong feel for the flow of the pesaq and how each area of halakhah is reasoned through by going to Tur, BY, SA, nosei keilim, AhS. It could be the Maharshal too would be more bothered by the Yad than by the other codes, IFF once studies the Tur or SA (or MB) with the other texts that explain how we got there. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The worst thing that can happen to a micha at aishdas.org person is to remain asleep and untamed." http://www.aishdas.org - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:36:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:36:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627183655.GC22635@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 11:54:52AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At : the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking : against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi : comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas : keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same : question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A : Baal keri is prohibited from going there. Or to put it less obliquely... The pasuq there (Bamidbar 12:4) refers to their location as Ohel Mo'ed. But the idiom is not necessarily referring to the Mishkan. Moshe went to the Ohel Mo'ed to get nevu'ah *outside* the camp. (Shemos 33) It had a pillar of cloud at the door, not at a mizbeiach. In Bamidbar 11:16 we learn that the 70 zeqeinim, after getting ruach haqodesh at the Ohel Mo'eid, returned to the camp. The Sifrei Zutra where (Bamidbar 11) writes: And he set them round about the tent the tent for speaking which was outside the camp. They made two tents, a tent for service and a tent for speaking. The outer tent had the same dimensions as the inner one, and the Levites served in both with the wagons. Two ohel mo'eds, the mishkan, and the nevu'ah center. The Ohel Mo'eid in this story also has a cloud at the door. So, I would think it was Moshe's place of nevu'ah, not the Mishkan. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and micha at aishdas.org this was a great wonder. But it is much more http://www.aishdas.org wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a Fax: (270) 514-1507 "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:38:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:38:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627193824.GD22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:19:19PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency : greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? It depends why gadol hametzuveh ve'oseh. The accepted theory is that it's because the YhR chimes up when a prohibition -- issur or bitul asei -- is involved (what pop-psych would describe as the attractiveness of "forbidden fruit"), so so one gets greater sekhar for winning the greater battle. Lefum tzaara agra. In which case, the YhR would work against keeping a neder, and so one should get more sekhar for fighting that battle. I argued that it's that someone we are obligated to do is indeed obligated because we need its effects more than someone who isn't. In which case, no one *needs* the chumerah for basic development; because if they did, it would have been obligatory. Then there would be no added value for keeping the chumerah in terms of the substance of what he's doing, but there is added value to keeping a neder. Meanwhile, it's subject to the Chullin 2a: "Tov shelo tidor mishetidor velo meshaleim." (Qoheles 5:4) Utanya: Tov mizeh umizeh, she'eino nodei kol iqar. -- Divrey R' Meir. R' Yehudah omer: Tov mizeh umizeh, nodeir umeshaleim. The gemara then continues by limiting R' Yehudah to nedarim of "harei zu" not shavu'os of "harei alai". Which would appar to include maintaining a chumerah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:07:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:07:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah In-Reply-To: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> References: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180627180708.GB22635@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 03:51:17PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote: : ... : R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" : of "Torah lishmah" means. ... :> Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions :> :> We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing :> opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. :> :> 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion :> of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent :> generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to :> fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice :> was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind :> on this thought. :> :> 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing :> in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo :> [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, :> one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is :> learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] :> :> 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh :> means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to :> learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah :> is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- :> i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar :> with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must :> learn Torah in order to fulfil it. :> :> Support for these Positions :> :> All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the :> Rishonim. :> :> 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara :> in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir :> bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the :> commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, :> that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." :> :> 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text :> reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake :> of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, :> for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out :> of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of :> the Ba'al Shem Tov. :> :> 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] :> and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Along the lines of #3, Yesushalmi Beraikha 1:1 (vilna 1a), Shabbos 1:2 (vilna 7b): One who learns but not in order to do, would have been pleasanter that his umbilical cord would have prolapsed in front of his face and he never came into the world. The Meshekh Chokhmah, Devarim 28:61, explains this in terms of the idea that the soul learns Torah with a mal'akh before birth. Someone who wants to learn as an end in itself would have been better off staying with that mal'akh! And (citing the intro to Qorban Aharon) a soul that was not born is a seikhel nivdal who grasped his Creator. All that is being given up by being born. But, if one is learning al menas laasos, which one can only do after birth, then their birth had value. The other opinion in the Y-mi is that someone who is lomei shelo al means lelameid is better off not existing. Again, the MC, notes, because the point of learning is to bring it into the world. The MC also gets this from Sanhedrin 99b, where the gemara concludes that "adam la'amal yulad" is for amal peh -- speaking Torah. While the gemara doesn't say al menas lelameid is a definiition of lishmah, the transitive property would lead me to conclude that's the implication. Al menas and lishmah... can they be distinguished? And if not 4. Al menas laasos. (I have discussed this MC before. He ends up showing that in terms of priorities, one who is going somewhere to teach doesn't have to stop to do mitzvos maasiyos; but someoen who is actually learning (and not teaching) has to stop even for a hakhsher mitzvah (maasis). This is one of my favorite shtiklach; worth a look! (There is a complete copy with a bad translation scattered among .) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jun 29 11:07:36 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 18:07:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? Message-ID: >From OU Kosher Yomis Q. What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? A. Chazal, the Talmudic Sages, prohibited cheese that is not made under the special supervision of a Jew (Avodah Zarah 29b, 35a-b). Various reasons are advanced for this rabbinic prohibition, but the reason accepted by most halachic authorities is the concern for the use of rennet enzymes from the stomach flesh of neveilah/non-kosher animals. Unsupervised cheese is termed Gevinas Akum. Cheese is only permitted if it is Gevinas Yisroel ? Jewish-supervised cheese (Yoreh Deah 115:2). This rule is unrelated to the rules of Cholov Yisroel (Jewish-supervised milk) and Cholov Akum/Cholov Stam (milk not under Jewish supervision). Therefore, even if a person eats Cholov Stam dairy products, he may only eat Gevinas Yisroel cheese. According to the Rama (Yoreh Deah 115:2) and many other poskim, Gevinas Yisroel is obtained by the mashgiach visually supervising the incorporation of the enzymes into each vat of milk in the cheese-making process; this way, the mashgiach will verify that the enzymes are kosher. According to the Shach (ibid. 20) and many other poskim, the mashgiach must manually add the enzymes to each vat of milk in the cheese-making process. The Vilna Gaon (ibid. s. 14) provides the rationale for this: Gevinas Yisroel is similar to Pas Yisroel (bread with onsite Jewish involvement) ? just like Pas Yisroel means that a Jew actually participated in the baking process, so too does Gevinas Yisroel mean that a Jew actually participated in the cheese-making process. Contemporary poskim rule that the basic halacha follows the Rama, although kashrus agencies typically endeavor to fulfill the Shach?s requirement as well. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:00:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:00:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Game Theory and Bankruptcy Message-ID: <20180629190056.GA23432@aishdas.org> Nobel Laureate R/Dr Robert Aumann famously (in our circles) explained the distribution of funds in the mishnah on Kesuvos 93a. In that mishnah, a man left behind 3 wives -- but the case works for 3 debts in general. Whatever wife 1's kesuvah is worth in the mishnah would be the same as if 1 of 3 creditors were owed the same amount. It is the creditor version that is the topic of AhS CM 104:15. But it only holds in cases where the assets aren't real estate, or if the debts are loans without certified contracts, if all the debts' contracts have the same date -- in other words, in cases where one doesn't pay the oldest loan fast. Creditor A is owed 100 zuz, creditor B is owed 200 zuz, and creditor C, 300. And the debtor has left than 600 zuz to divide. The AhS notes that there is a minority opinion that would have them divide as we today would probably consider more intuitive -- proportionally. A gets 1/6 of the assets, B gets 1/3 (ie 2/6) and C gets 1/2 (=3/6). And in his day this was a common practice. So, while one may say this became minhag hamaqom and thus a tenai implicitly accepted when doing business or lending money, the AhS recommends that if the creditors assume this division, beis din seek pesharah and divide this way. However, iqar hadin is as per the mishnah. Which the gemara tells us is R' Nasan, and R' Yehudah haNasi disagrees. (Stam mishnah, and the redactor of mishnayos doesn't mention his own opinion???) The first 100z has three claims on it and is divided in thirds. The second 100z has two claims on it, and is divided equally between B & C. And whatever is left is given to C. What this means is that whomever has the biggest loan is most likely to absorb the loss. RRA explains this case in two papers. The first, aimed more at mathematicians, invokes the Game Theoretic concept of nucleolus. (R.J. Aumann and M. Maschler, Game Theoretic Analysis of a Bankruptcy Problem from the Talmud, Journal of Economic Theory 36, no. 2 (1985), 195-213.) In the second, written for people who learn gemara, he avoids all the technical talk. ("On the Matter of the Man with Three Wives," Moriah 22 (1999), 98- 107.) The second paper compares this mishnah to the gemara at the opening of BM, and derives a general rule, RAR saying that no other division in Qiddushin would follow the same principles as the 2 person division in BM. Here is an explanatory blog post on Talmudology blog ("Judaism, Science and Medicine"), by R/Dr Jeremy Brown. (The blog would particularly be interesting to someone learning daf who is interested in science or math.) The aforementioned AhS gives two sevaras for R' Nasan's position: The first is that the first division is taken from the beinonis (mid-quality property) of the debtor's or the estate's holdings. Therefore, it has to be divided separately from the rest of B & C's debt. Each has claim to the full 100z, so each gets equally. The second division is taken from the beinonis of what the person owned that the time he started owing B & C money, and if there is non left, from the ziburis (lesser quality). Again, different material, so it is divided without consideration to the remainder of the debt to C. merchandise. Therefore, it is accounted for separately The second explanation focuses on why this case is different than shutefus, where the shutefim do divide proportionally to their investments. The debtor's assets are entirely meshubadim to A just as much as to B or C. C can't get his 300z until A's 100z is accounted for, no less than the other way around -- each has full power to halt distribution of any of the man's assets. So the division is by shibud, which is equal. But with shutefim, the profit is clearcut. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late micha at aishdas.org to become the person http://www.aishdas.org you might have been. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - George Eliot From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Migo vs Chazakah Message-ID: <20180629194917.GA8106@aishdas.org> AhS 82:18 is a qunterus on migo. Looking at #6 (within se'if 18), RYMEpstein looks at two gemaros that discuss migo bemaqom rov -- BB 5a and Qiddushin 64. In BB, Raza"l say that while rov adif meichazaqah, this is not true for every chazaqah. Chezqas mamon outranks rov (you don't make someone pay up on a "probably"), because the mi'ut yeshno ba'olam, so we can't take something out of his hands -- maybe he is of the mi'ut. This is true even though chezas haguf adif mechezqas mamon and migo adif meichezqas haguf. So chazaq IOW: rov > migo rov > chezaqa chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon So rov > chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon But chezqas mamon > rov -- where mi'ut yeshno be'olam, without bitul Acharei rabim lehatos is a case of bitul, so if the majority of dayanim rule that the nit'an has to pay up, that rov does trump chezqas mamon. Hoserver the gemara in R' Nasan says: "Mah li leshaqer?" ki chazaqah dami. Lo asi chazaqah ve'aqrah chazaqah legamrei. (R' Nasan shows up in two of my posts in a row!) Migo doesn't trump chazaqah, because assuming a person wouldn't give that particular lie is itself a chazaqah. Which is it? Another related issue that confuses me is what kind of chazaqah is a chezqas mamon: One could say it's a chazaqah demei'iqara -- preserving the status quo of who has the money. One could say it's a chazaqah disvara -- normally property belongs to the person holding it. Now, say the to'ein is tofeis the money he claims. This can at times work, because it shifts which is hamotzi meichaveiro when they get to BD. However, we know this is a normal case of the person holding the money, we know how he got it. So how would my chazaqah disvara apply? OTOH, it's not your usual case of presrving the old halachic state, because everyone agrees that before the dispute, the property was the nitan's. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger How wonderful it is that micha at aishdas.org nobody need wait a single moment http://www.aishdas.org before starting to improve the world. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anne Frank Hy"d From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jun 30 21:01:59 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? Message-ID: Naaah, of course he was not Jewish. The subject line was just to get your attention. But then again.... I would not have surprised me if Bil'am had said, "I can't do what my god doesn't let me do." After all, religious people of *any* religion generally refrain from going against the will of their god. Likewise, I would not have been surprised if he said, "I can't do what Hashem doesn't let me do." He is a professional, and he knows the rules of the game (most clearly seen in maftir). He knows who he is dealing with, and if he is trying to curse the Jews, it would be a good idea to follow the rules of the Jewish God. But Bil'am didn't say either of those things. What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase. There have been plenty of polytheists who accept the idea that there are many gods, One of them being Hashem, the God of the Jews. But in this pasuk, we see that Bil'am goes beyond accepting Hashem as *a* god - he accepts Him as "my God". I checked my concordance and found about 50 cases in Tanach of the phrase "Hashem Elokai", spelling "Elokai" with either a patach or a kamatz. It seems that this was the ONLY case where this phrase was used by a non-Jew. Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Sat Jun 30 22:44:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 01:44:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180701054415.GA28439@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 12:01:59AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me : do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase... : Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding : has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply : spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now : it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not : have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I : guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. This works well with my recent (few minute old) blog post. I argue that the whole point of Bil'am might have been to illustrate how monotheism and deveiqus don't guarantee being good people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Aspaqlaria Bil'am the Frummy by micha ? Published 18 Tammuz 5778 - Sun, Jul 1, 2018 Sun, Jul 1, 2018 The Medrash Tankhuma (Balaq 1) says: And if you ask: Why did the Holy One blessed be He, let his Shechinah rest upon so wicked a non-Jew? So that the [other] peoples would have no excuse to say, `If we had nevi'im, we would have changed for the better', He established for then nevi'im. Yet they [these nevi'im] broke down the moral fence of the world... For that matter, the Sifrei says on the last pasuq of the Torah: And another navi did not arise again in Israel like Moshe: In Israel, [another] one did not arise, but among the nations of the world, one did arise. And who was it? Bil'am ben Be'or. So here you have a prophet with the abilities of Moshe (whatever they meant by that) and yet he was no paragon of moral virtue. He didn't teach them how to lift themselves up, but how to corrupt the Jews. So how does that address the complaint of the nations? They had their navi, but they said it was unfair that they didn't have nev'i'im to give moral instruction -- and Bil'am wasn't capable of leading them in that way. Perhaps Bil'am stood for them as an example to teach them just that point. The nations are described as complaining that if they only had a navi they would have been as good as the Jews. But Bil'am was there to show them nevu'ah wasn't the answer. Even being a navi and having the Shechinah rest upon them is not sufficient to make an ideal person. The whole detour into telling us about an event in the lives of Balaq and Bil'am is such a departure from the rest of the Torah, it is considered a separate book. "Moshe wrote his book and Parashas Bil'am" (Bava Basra 14b) So why it it included? Based on the above suggestion, the section teaches us about the dangers of frumkeit. We can get so caught up in the pursuit of deveiqus, one's personal relationship with G-d, one can end up as self-centered and honor-seeking as Bil'am. We need to start out pursuing moral and ethical behavior, ehrlachkeit, and then the connection with the Divine can be harnessed to reach those goals. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 30 21:01:27 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pinchas Message-ID: <56A42568-E095-442F-A19F-017F306492C3@cox.net> ?Pinhas? has turned back Chamasi, my wrath, from the people of Israel.? (Num.25:11) Pinhas has proven his unusual power to turn back God?s wrath from Israel through a very courageous, difficult and controversial act. The Vilna Gaon brilliantly observes that in the word chamasi (my wrath), the two outside letters ches and yud read chai ? life ? while the inside letters mem and sav read meit ? death. The hidden meaning is that by Pinchos facing squarely what has taken place on the outside, he has miraculously turned back the wrath of the Almighty. In doing so, he has removed death (meis) from the inside, replacing it with life (chai). Why do we pray with a set text? An opinion recorded in the Talmud states that prayers correspond to the daily sacrifices offered in the Temple which are mentioned in this coming week's portion of Pinchas. (Numbers 28:4) It has been argued that this opinion may be the conceptual base for our standardized prayer. Since sacrifices had detailed structure, so too do our prayers have a set text. If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 08:09:35 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 01:09:35 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: This year's incarnation of the Gebrochts discussion attempts to discuss the Halacha and I think traverses territory not clearly enunciated in the past. Also I would not characterise this as Gebrochts-bashing; I dont believe anyone is troubled by those who say, "My Rebbe/My tradition is not to eat whatever it may be" the issue is that Gebrochts is promoted as Halachically legitimate and therefore preferred if not mandated. The ShA HaRav declares firstly, that as far as the Halachah is concerned, there is no concern with Kneidlach during Pesach, see the link - http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=25074&st=&pgnum=486 He does however advise that it is a valid stringency his first observation/proof however is that flour can be found on the surface of the Matzos and later on says this is quite common However, A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years B] no other Posek ever verified this claim this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within the finished Matza - but C] there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already been made D] even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link provided - It is universally accepted these days that flour is not added to a dough already made and there is no Matza baking program that permits adding flour to the already made dough Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 18:30:38 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 21:30:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The not-Korban Pesach Message-ID: I had asked: : It has come to me attention recently that the Torah never refers to : the Pesach as a Korban... : My question is this: Whatever reason it was, why the Torah avoided : using that word in this context ... why did Chazal feel differently? Upon further research, it seems that my question was based on the *mistaken* assumption that the Pesach was unique in this regard. It turns out that while the Torah does use the word "korban", it never uses phrases such as "Korban Tamid", "Korban Todah", or "Korban Musaf". These were referred to simply as the Tamid, the Todah, and the Musaf, just as the Pesach was. Apparently, construction of the phrase came much later, and was applied to them all. Exception: The "Korban Mincha" is mentioned three times in Vayikra 2, but that would change the whole question drastically. I should also clarify: these phrases aren't missing only from the Torah, but from the whole Tanach. They seem to have arisen after the Tanach. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sun Apr 1 20:40:08 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 23:40:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b27445d-5dde-c27e-a809-871e12258604@sero.name> On 01/04/18 11:09, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years Who is "we"? > B] no other Posek ever verified this claim > this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within > the finished Matza - but > > C]? there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not > thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product > the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already > been made Perhaps you mean no *other* posek, because this one clearly says it. It's no surprise that nobody before him mentions it, because he says it's a recent phenomenon. > D]? even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link > provided - This is a bizarre claim. The teshuvah "admits" no such thing. First of all, the footnote is obviously not part of the teshuvah, not by its author, and thus completely irrelevant to anything. Second, the footnote does not "admit" such a thing either. It brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 1 21:12:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 06:12:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions, one that basically is an exception that proves the rule and the other is a real exception. 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. 2) Powered chalav nochri. Labels here are supposed to state that a product containts powered chalav nochri (if it does). This was the result of a lawsuit.? I guess that no one wants to start listing every possible kula that goes into a food product. OTOH? if meat isn't halaq, labels generally don't state it. They only state the meat's halaq status if it is halaq. Ben On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: > I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the > lines to fine, or it becomes unusable. Once it's certifying a product > as lacking qitniyos, it might as well stick to avoiding all qitniyos > rather than having a confusing (to some) explanation on each package > which minhagim can or can't use the product. > > The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that > in a number of ways. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 1 18:58:35 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 21:58:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which >is eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give >his full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are >15,000 Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. Have patience and watch developments. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 2 07:10:57 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:10:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 01/04/18 21:58, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >> I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which is >> eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give his >> full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are 15,000 >> Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. > > Have patience and watch developments. Do you claim prophecy, or are you breaking silence on some vast and hereto unsuspected conspiracy? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 3 08:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180403150030.GA23693@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 06:12:23AM +0200, Ben Waxman wrote: : On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: :> I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the :> lines to fine, or it becomes unusable... :> The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that :> in a number of ways. : I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions... I think what I said is really particular to the US, or maybe chu"l as a whole. Where people who keep kosher will suffer with less, and people who don't won't care what has a hekhsher and what doesn't. Few people will make a less observant choice if an Amerucan hekhsher chooses to be more machmir than their own minhagim require. Non-Mehardin rabbanut has a strong motive away from least common denominator. They have a responsibility to a large population that will buy with a hekhsher IFF and only if the sacrifice is not too onerous. : 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that : they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that : proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any : case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically : stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. I recall the marshmallows sold in the US with a long explanation as to why the mei qitniyos they contain are a non-issue. Tha candy with a teshuvah on every wrapper. (Even better than Laffy Taffy or Bazooka Joe!) Unfortunately, they all have the same one. Pretty much the same thing. But didn't work in the US in the long run, as the rightward drift continued. :-)||ii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 3rd day micha at aishdas.org in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Chesed: What is perfectly Fax: (270) 514-1507 balanced Chesed? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 3 21:58:05 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:58:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin Message-ID: One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, he does this privately, since the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was sitting up front without wearing tefillin. When I asked his brother, who does put on tefillin during Chol Moed, about this, he told that the rabbi put on tefillin during Chol Moed until he married. "Our minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed," he said. My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in the ladies section. Thus I do not understand how the rabbi of the shul that I davened in yesterday could sit up front facing everyone without wearing tefillin. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 06:28:11 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:28:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Professor L. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 12:58 AM > My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them > in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put > on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should > not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in > Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in > the ladies section. This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom came from different places with different minhogim. According to halokho, what the acharonim say about wearing t'fillin or not halakhically does not apply here. Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where there was a mnhag hamokom. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 4 07:44:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:44:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin References: Message-ID: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 09:28 AM 4/4/2018, Mandel, Seth wrote: >This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." >But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from >Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom >came from different places with different minhogim.... >Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where >there was a mnhag hamokom. If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 08:07:12 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 15:07:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: , <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: From: Prof. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 10:44 AM > If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section > than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin > can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section Any shul has the right to set up its own rules, and anyone who davens there has to follow its rules. That is also halokho. Even if they were to make a rule, for instance, that one must wear green on Chanukka. Or that the shul must say the prayer for the State of Israel. But to claim that it is halokho that in America people who daven with t'fillin may not daven together with people who do not is wrong. There is no such halokho in America. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 4 20:58:28 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 05:58:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6b0af463-987c-0e3e-d5a2-27cb630b86ba@zahav.net.il> On 4/4/2018 6:58 AM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is > to put on tefillin during Chol Moed,? he does this privately,? since > the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. > > > Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin > during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was > sitting up front without wearing tefillin.? When I asked his brother . > . . . . > Wouldn't the rav in question be the proper person to ask? ?Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at mail.gmail.com Wed Apr 4 23:46:31 2018 From: meirabi at mail.gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: The ShA HaRav does not initiate this ban on Gebrochts as his own, rather he bases himself upon the propositions of Poskim which we are now exploring, and it seems that they actually do not support the proposition to create a ban against Gebrochts. A] The observation made by the ShA HaRav, which is central to his anti-Gebrochts argument - is un-supported. Our Poskim and our personal experience, has verified that there is no such thing as flour being found on the surface of baked Matza. B] The ShA HaRav does not issue his own assessment [other than observing flour on the surface of baked Matza] but relies upon other Poskim to support the proposition that flour remains within the finished Matza. However, no such thing is found in the Poskim, other than in situations where flour is added to a dough which is ALREADY formed. No Posek ever suggested that a normal dough may not be thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product. And the ShA HaRav admits this by saying that nowadays the dough is made very hard, dry, with very little water i.e. it is not surprising that Poskim have not discussed this as it is a concern that is due only to this recent change. But no other Poskim from his time endorsed the reasoning that flour is found on the surface of baked Matza etc. C] it is surprising to hear a devoted Chabadnik suggesting that the footnotes found in the KeHos, the official Chabad publishers' publication - are completely irrelevant to the Teshuvah. There are 2 versions to understanding note 33 on the link provided = here is the gobbledigook version - "it brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions" = here is the plain speak version - "this is the best we can find to support the proposition" which is, however which way you turn it, no support at all for this new concern of flour remaining within the baked Matza. One can hardly but suspect that the footnote was added because the Taz and MaAv that the ShA HaRav next refers to, is no support at all for banning Gebrochts, because their observations are exclusively applicable to thick soft Matzos that were under suspicion of having had flour added to the dough during its kneading - and as we mentioned - this had already been comprehensively stamped out by the times of the ShA HaRav. Remember, they were kneading soft dough for soft Matza and it was quite likely that the dough may have been a little too loose and one would be tempted to add more flour to it. So there we have it - if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not - then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha - then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Apr 7 20:38:51 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 23:38:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Isru Chag Message-ID: <64A81636-64D4-4FF1-B35D-C25381E32A1C@cox.net> The gematria for Isru Chag is 278, the same gematria for l'machar found in Bamidbar, Ch.11, vs.18. This is in the Sidra, Beha'alotch, where God has Moshe establish a Sanhedrin because Moshe complained that he could not carry on alone. God says to Moshe: "To the people you shall say, 'Prepare yourselves for tomorrow and you shall eat meat..." There is an interesting tie here. The day after a festival is the "morrow" and even though the holiday is over, we must always be preparing ourselves. As a matter of fact, in counting the omer, we are preparing ourselves for mattan Torah in 50 days. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Sat Apr 7 21:15:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 14:15:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 "Rabbi Meir G. Rabi" wrote: > So there we have it -- if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your > parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o > Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and > enjoy Pesach Is RMG Rabi's post on Gebrokts consonant with the comment of the Mishna Brura. The Chafetz Chaim stated that even though one may have doubts as to the Halachic imperative of being careful (yes, perhaps needlessly) about Matza Shruya, nevertheless, "one should not be MAZNIACH [translate as you will] those who have this Chumra" In particular, it seems to me that the practice of actually keeping Shruya is very much in line with many other Chumras that people have. Consider Garlic on Pesach, for example. I would posit that today the chance of garlic inducing Chametz is akin to itinerant matza flour being present on a baked Matza. Nonetheless, those who have this Chumra, keep it. They keep it because of the Minhag to be Machmir on Pesach! That Minhag, by its nature is concerned with the infinitessimal. There are many other examples. The Belzer don't eat carrots because of a Chametz incident. They were Machmir from then on. Lubavitchers has an incident with sugar and were Machmir from then on to pre-cook it. Halacha on Pesach does admit the concept of remote Chumras! Yes, for those who look at things from a non Pesach purist halachic view, may well scratch their heads. Nonetheless, the Chafets Chaim taught us that we should not be Mazniach. The idea that Pesach cannot be enjoyed without Kneidlach is fanciful, and not directly born out by plain Halacha. The Halacha specifies Meat and Wine as primary inputs from Gashmiyus food that give rise to happiness. Yes, B'Sar Shlomim (not chicken) and wine (good enough for Nisuch Hamizbeach?) To state "if you are CONCERNED about Halacha... eat Kneidlach" is perhaps a worse actualisation than "Mazniach" as it implies that such people are acting in perhaps some antinomian-like chassidic voodoo practice. [ One can argue quite cogently, for example, that wearing a Gartel today is also "not in line with the Halacha". (We wear underpants!) We do not, however, dismiss such practices. [On Shruya see also Gilyoney Hashas from Rav Yosef Engel Psachim 40b]] The Ari z'l stated that he would never 'talk against' a minhag yisrael/chumra on Pesach. In summary, and I've felt that RMG Rabi, Halacha is not a pure science which leads to a true/false conclusion for every question that is investigated using the rules of the Halacha. Admission: My father a'h had the Minhag from his family (likely via Amshinover fealty) not to eat Gebrokts. This is Toras Imecha for me, especially on Pesach, and whilst I know that in general this practice is unique to families who follow the minhogim of the Talmidei HaBaal Shem, and is most minor, I state quite openly that deciding NOT to follow a family minhag/chumra on Pesach would be FAR more upsetting and disturbing to me than not eating Kneidlach. I'm happy to wait for the last day, and for the record, I am not a fan of them, despite my wife being a superlative cook. Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a "hot dog roll". "It is only the anticipation of redemption that preserves Judaism in Exile, while Judaism in the Land of Israel is the redemption itself." Rabbi A.I. Hacohen Kook From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 8 05:55:41 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 12:55:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent actions of Simcha Felder. >From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv "Using his leverage as the swing vote in the divided State Senate, Sen. Simcha Felder appears to have strong-armed a provision into the budget that significantly changes state oversight of yeshiva curricula, political observers say. " I have talked to some people who live in Willimsburg, and the picture they paint of the level of secular education in Hassidic yeshivas is not a good one. One Satmar woman who lives in Williamsburg told me that her sons received no secular education in the Satmar yeshiva they attended. For the record NYS law requires that all children receive a secular education. What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf R. Barukh Schick of Shklov (d. 1808): When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . . . He urged me to translate into Hebrew as much secular wisdom as possible, so as to cause the nations to disgorge what they have swallowed, making it available to all, thereby increasing knowledge among the Jews. Thus, the nations will no longer be able to lord it over us-and bring about the profaning of God's name-with their taunt: "Where is your wisdom?" R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. I:Iayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, 6 through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash. The Gaon of Vilna's sons: By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... 8 First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): I cannot refrain from repeating a true and astonishing story that I heard from the Gaon's disciple R. Menachem Mendel. . . . 10 It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. This included its inner and outer manifestations. He explained: All secular wisdom is essential for our holy Torah and is included in it. He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. He especially praised music, explaining that most of the Torah accents, the secrets of the Levitical songs, and the secrets of the Tikkunei Zohar could not be comprehended without mastering it. ... He explained the significance of the various secular disciplines, and noted that he had mastered them all. Regarding the discipline of medicine, he stated that he had mastered anatomy, but not pharmacology. Indeed, he had wanted to study pharmacology with practicing physicians, but his father prevented him from undertaking its study ,fearing that upon mastering it he would be forced to curtail his Torah study whenever it would become necessary for him to save a life. . . . He also stated that he had mastered all of philosophy, but that he had derived only two matters of significance from his study of it. . . . The rest of it, he said, should be discarded. To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw for this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 8 05:22:36 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 08:22:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Message-ID: <9ABBE35B-0F5B-4CD1-917D-550FD3E33394@cox.net> 9:1 "Vay'hi bayom hashemini..." The Sages teach that the word "vay'hi" often indicates that trouble or grief is associated with the narrative (Megillah 10b). What trouble or grief could there have been on that joyous first day of Nissan? It presages the tragic deaths of Aaron?s sons, Nadav and Avihu. Another explanation: Even in the midst of our greatest rejoicing, a Jewish wedding, we pause for a moment to recall the destruction of the Temple and the fragility of life through the breaking of the glass. Here, too, we have such a happy occasion, but the "Vay'hi" is to remind us of our fallibility and the frailty of life. There are many commentaries on Aaron?s response when told of his sons' deaths: Vayidom Aharon, ?and Aaron was silent.? It is somewhat coincidental that the third syllable of vayidom sounds a little like the English word ?dumb.? One of the literal meanings of the word ?dumb? is mute and unable to speak. It seems to me that Aaron?s silence was his inability to speak due to shock. Many people would faint dead away if told of such news. So it really isn?t surprising that his reaction was one of a deafening silence. When two egotists meet "It's an I for an I" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 8 12:08:57 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2018 21:08:57 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rabbis Ben Nun, Sherlo, and Rimon have come out strongly against the wheat substitutes and feel that they should be banned. In their opinion, the primary reason for the kitniyot minhag is to prevent mixing up the various grains. Eating these types of products will lead to the same confusion. Ben On 4/8/2018 6:15 AM, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: > Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they > essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and > pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are > quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a > "hot dog roll". From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 07:29:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 10:29:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180409142919.GG25254@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 12:55:41PM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects : in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent : actions of Simcha Felder. : : From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv ... : What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular : studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept : only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time : studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, rather than the one you're critiquing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 07:54:47 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:54:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: Message-ID: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:29 AM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with >the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? > >You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh >in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, >rather than the one you're critiquing. And what do you do with the GRA's statement When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . simply ignore it? This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech cannot go against the facts. Also from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf Friesenhausen's critique, however, was hardly confined to the left; he also had to contend with the right: I appeal especially to all those who fear God and tremble at His word, that they not heed the false claims of those who plot against secular wisdom . . . , unaware that those who make such claims testify against themselves, saying: "We are devoid of Torah, we have chosen folly as our guide." For had the light of Torah ever shone upon them, they would have known the teaching of R. Samuel bar Nachtmeni at Shabbat 75a and the anecdotes about Rabban Gamaliel and R. Joshua at Horayot 10a. Also, they would have been aware of the many talmudic discussions that can be understood only with the aid of secular wisdom. Should you, however, meet a master of the Talmud who insists on denigrating secular wisdom, know full well that he has never understood those talmudic passages whose comprehension is dependent upon knowledge of secular wisdom. . . . He is also unaware that he denigrates the great Jewish sages of the past and their wisdom, as well. Worst of all are those guilty of duplicity. They speak arrogantly in public, either to appease the fools and gain honor in their eyes, or out of envy of the truly wise, disparaging those who appreciate secular wisdom, yet in their hearts they believe otherwise. See in the above link the Chasam Sofer's evaluation of Rabbi Friesenhausen. He was indeed a talmud Chacham. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 08:17:47 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:17:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:54:47AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : And what do you do with the GRA's statement .... : simply ignore it? Yes, that's exactly what the Chassidim who run the mosedos in question do with many of the Gra's statements. Why would it surprise anyone if they ignore this as well? As for me, as in your question, "what do you do", that's an entirely different issue. : This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree : with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech : cannot go against the facts. It may be more productive to ask about 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on and 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. Being surprised when Chassidim don't see the world the way the Gra did isn't really useful or warranted. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 11:28:06 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 14:28:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 1144 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 13:30:59 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:30:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180409203059.GB4975@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is : not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with : what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find : that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Or any of a million other things someone who disagrees with the Gra might suggest. A few years back there was a storm, and my son's grade school rebbe ended up losing a son to a downed power line. The friend who tried saving the son died immediately. The boy lingered for about 2 weeks. We attended the levayah. The father was proud that his young son went to his Maker pure, unsullied even by learning the alphabet. Alef-beis, yes, the child knew; but they hadn't yet begun the English alphabet. Not a sentiment I would share. In fact, hearing it from a rebbe who taught my son in a MO school, I found it kind of startling. But it's a perspective. And if it fosters accepting ol malkhus shamayim and ol mitzvos, raising children who are "ohavei H', yir'sei E-lokim, anshei emes, zera qodesh..." who am I to say it's not the right answer for someone else? :> It may be more productive to ask about :> 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on :> and :> 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. : Rabbi Dr. Shnayer Leiman, who wrote the article from which the : quotes come... I meant in each point something different than what your responses reflect. To spell out further: 1- The reports that lead you to believe the norm for secular education in chassidishe chadorim today is actually as weak as you believe. Rather than the likelihood that the more extreme stories are the ones more often reported. They could all fully be true, and yet not reflect the experiences of a statistically significant number of American students. Or perhaps they do. I would want statistics, not anecdotes, before judging. For example, I did not notice it any easier to teach Sukkah 7b-8a "sukkah ha'asuyah kekivshan" and the diagonal of squares vs circles or their areas to MO Jews who weren't themselves in STEM fields than to American chareidim. And if things were so bad, how do so many end up "in computers", if not in a job that requires as much post-HS education as mine? 2- How do they understand those "facts" about needing limudei chol to succeed in limudei chodesh. Which of the numerous possible responses I refered to in response to the first snippet in this email they actually believe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 15:12:48 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 18:12:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:30 PM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: >: One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is >: not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with >: what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find >: that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... > >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 15:31:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 18:31:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409223134.GD12000@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:48PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's : >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. : : Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" : is learning? I hope not. I am implying that it is valid for the chassidim whose school you are critiquing to believe so. And yes, they probably believe that the Gra's hisnagdus was an error caused by his exposure to the wrong set of ideas. They *certainly* believe that of RYBS. (Or at least did in his lifetime. I see an "acharei mos - qedushim" effect currently going on with RYBS's memory.) As I wrote, I am defending the position in an eilu va'eilu sense. It is not a position to which I personally subscribe, nor could subscribe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com Mon Apr 9 23:17:53 2018 From: rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com (Rabbi Meir Rabi) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:17:53 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Gebrochts - MInhag but absolutely no foundation in Halacha Message-ID: My Gebrochts postings have been to clarify one point - it is wrong to claim that Gebrochts is Halachically mandated or justified and points to anything other than a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition. and I do thank RIB for his query to which the answer is a firm NO - my observation - [if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach] - is in no manner a violation of, "one should not be MAZNIACH [ridicule] those who have this Chumra" IF they do not eat Gebrochts FOR THE RIGHT REASON i.e. a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition BTW - I do not see this in the ChCHayim, pity RIB did not provide sourcing But it is in the ShTeshuvah [460:2] - Nevertheless those who wish to sanctify themselves by refraining from that which is permitted - soaked and cooked Matza, even that which has been [baked hard] and ground [again referring to the corrected practice of making Matza meal from thinner hard baked Matza and NOT from thicker soft Matza which was grated on a Rib Ayzen, and at greater risk of being underbaked and Chametz] - should not be ridiculed. RIB has not suggested any argument to associate not eating garlic during Pesach with Gebrochts, and I have no idea what makes one Chumra IN LINE with other Chumras. Neither do I understand the significance to our discussion/disagreement. We both urge those who do not wish to eat Gebrochts/Garlic etc because their parents etc did not - to keep their tradition. However, the natural corollary is - that IF you DO NOT have such a custom - then eat them and enjoy Pesach because there is no legitimate Halachic imperative. Also, the reference to Keneidelach being an important contribution to Oneg Yom Tov is not of my making - it comes from great and highly respected Poskim. It is also not correct to characterise this Minhag as being concerned with the infinitesimal - because that is the Halacha - a speck of flour can become Chametz and ruin your entire Pesach. Indeed this was the very point I am making - there is no substance in Halacha to support this concern - if there was it would be Halacha. And finally - If anything, the urging that we not be Mazniach, demonstrates that Halacha has no concerns about this issue. We ought to however, nevertheless, not ridicule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 01:37:42 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:37:42 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: " Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge." You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a question of cost/benefit for the masses. Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is greater then benefit. The people you listed were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 02:23:50 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:23:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: At 04:37 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will >affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a >question of cost/benefit for the masses. > >Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be >harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is >greater then benefit. The people you listed > >were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 03:05:03 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:05:03 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular > studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am > paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular > subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not > study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" > > I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from > observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of > Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. > > YL > > And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: "All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are largely Orthoprax." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 02:16:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:16:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: Will those who are against the teaching of secular subjects simply ignore what R. Yhonason Eybeschutz wrote in Yaaros Devash 2:7 (as translated by L. Levi in Torah and Science, pages 24-25)? For all the sciences are ?condiments? and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impureand how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:32:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:32:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:31:27AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: :> Is that a common interperation of minhag hamaqom -- that there be :> a common practice in all things? I understood minhag hamaqom to :> be designated practive by practice. : Otherwise the concept of Minhag Ha Makom is meaningless.... Again, why? It is meaningful to say, "here, the minhag hamaqom is to say "umoried hageshem", not "gashem", without making reference to anything else the qeillah might do. Why do we need a context of a qehillah that has many such rules rather than a few? And how many? : Many people wear tefillin on chol hamoed in Eretz : Yisroel, including some gedolim. However, some do : it betzinoh so it is not so well known. You misspelled, "a tiny percentage". : One such godol is the Erlauer Rebbe. You can go : in his beis medrash and see him with tefillin. He : keeps the minhogim of his zeide, the Chasam : Sofer, to wear tefillin on chol hamoed and daven nusach Ashkenaz. One may argue that the Erlau community has their own minhag, and their beis medrash it's own minhag hamaqom. But that raises questions of how one defines "maqom" that I don't know how to answer. .... : Bekitzur, Al titosh toras imecho, keep on : following your minhog and Al yisbayeish., as the : Rama says in beginning of Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim. Minhag avos is inferior to minhag hamaqom. In fact, we have had a hard time finding its basis. The best I can come up with is that minhag avos means that in the absence of a minhag hamaqom in your current location, you should follow the minhag hamaqom of your prior location even if that means the location of your avos. :> For other things? Give it time. How long did it take Jews from Provence, :> Italy and elsewhere to congeal into a single minhag Ashkenaz? : On the contrary, I doubt that the Chassidim will : ever eat Gebrokts on Pesach, the Sephardim will : stop eating kitnyos, and the non-Chassidic world : will stop eating Gebrokts on Pesach. And yet nowadays Sepharadim make an Ashkenazi qutzo shel yud, to be yotzei lekhos hadei'os. Yekkes and Litvaks eat glatt out of necessity (go find reliable non-glatt), but how many would eat that piece of non-glatt if they found a reliable hekhsher for it? Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. The choilam is far broader in the US than its ancestry; and in other communities, tav-lessness caught on. How many non-Morrocans in Israel celebrate Mimouna nowadays? It seems from the media, this minhag is spreading. (I think it would be a beautiful thing for "misht-night" communities to adopt. After a week of not being guests, make a point of sharing food and showing it had nothing to do with a lack of friendship.) I see lines coalescing. These things take centuries, and accelerate as people who remember pre-migration life pass away. We just begun. I think it is less that a Minhag America can't emerge than the mashiach won't give it the time necesssary to emerge. And Minhag EY may go back to being by sheivet and nachalah, but in any case its evolution will be radically changed by the rapid influx of the rest of Kelal Yisrael. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:03:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:03:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:37:30PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as : a trivia question for now). There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one were considered propitious for a large crop. (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:12:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:12:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101226.GC31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 07:50:13AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat before Biur : Chametz? What makes this mitzva different from so many other mitzvos, where : we cannot eat until doing rhe required act? When the issur de'oraisa begins is a machloqes tannaim (RH 28a-b): Rabbi Yehudah holds starting from chatzos, R Meir - from sheqi'ah. (Does the issur start from when the non-qorban could be shechted, or when it could be eaten?) The Rambam in Chameitz uMatzah 1:8 pasqens chatzos, as do we when we make the zeman 1 hour before chatzos (rather than 1 hour before sheqi'ah). MiDerabbanan, it's pushed earlier, and that's the safety margin. But I don't think that's enough to make it a morning mitzvah that it must be done first thing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:19:33 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:19:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 02:15:47PM +1000, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: : Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they : essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and : pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are : quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a : "hot dog roll". It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. Like not declaring quinoa to be qitniyos. And unlike declating peanuts to be. (Which some of Eastern Europe did, and as RMF attests, some didn't.) For that matter, is there anyone whose ancestors had the minhag of qitniyos but didn't include corn when it was brought over from the New World? Since minhag is by definition informal and mimetic, what happens to catch on or not doesn't trouble me. Boils down to a qasheh oif a masseh. (You can't ask a "question on a story"; how it happened is how it happened, unreasonalbe or not.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From isaac at balb.in Tue Apr 10 03:24:59 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:24:59 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> On Apr 10, 2018 at 8:19 pm, wrote: > It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, > even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. > There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels > would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of another term. From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 02:59:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:59:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] PESACH -- AFTER 400 YEARS GD'S IN A HURRY TO REDEEM US? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410095948.GA31049@aishdas.org> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:28:48PM +1100, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: : We begin the Seder with Matza being a reminder of our suffering -- but we : conclude it with a new perspective -- Matza reminds us of how quickly Gd : took us out of Egypt. Actually, that's the end of Maggid, not the end of the seder. Later than that in the seder, Hillel reminds us of a third aspect of matzah -- al matzos umorerim yokhluhu. Not that of slavery, nor of leaving, but of the midnight in between, and every Pesach thereafter. There is a fourth aspect: Lechom oni -- she'onim alav devarim harbei. Rashi takes this idea so seriously that he holds you're not yotzei the mitzvah with matzah eaten before Maggid. Matzah that didn't have the haggadah is not lechem oni. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:51:53 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:51:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> References: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> Message-ID: <20180410105153.GB23901@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:24:59PM +1000, Isaac Balbin wrote: : It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the : Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of : another term. The only thing we know for sure is that it included some subset of grain-like foods and of legumes. Any reason as to why is a post-facto theory. Multiple exist. In principle, pasqaning one such shitah is right, and therefore the rabbanim who made a din must have intended to include the new case is possible. But not compelled. We often leave a gezeira off where it originally ended because it's not for us to ban more things than Chazal did. All the more so in a case like qitniyos, when it's not a rabbinic issur but a minhag. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 05:14:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 08:14:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10.4C.08474.AFAACCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:05 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies >curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not >higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance >is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study >http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p >which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: >"All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, >when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are >largely Orthoprax." I am not claiming that the study of secular subjects is any sort of guarantee that one will remain religious. The reasons for someone to give up observance or to water down their observance are complex. However, for many reasons it is important to have a basic secular education. One of them is to open up some opportunities to earn a living. And let me be clear, I am not talking about a "Harvard" secular education. But I see no reason why someone born in the US should not be able to speak, read and write English. I have an Op Ed piece that will appear in this week's Jewish Press on the topic of secular subjects in chassidic yeshivas. In part it reads Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. Parents do not have a blanket right to determine the education of their children. Would you say that a parent has a right to send his child to a school that preaches Antisemitism and prejudice? Also, based on my experience as an educator for over 50 years, I have to say that parents do not always know what is best for their children educationally. Choosing to enroll one's sons in a school that does not give a basic secular education is a very poor choice. Also, having a school that does not give a basic secular education is against the law as is clear from my recent Jewish Press article. Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma let alone a Regents diploma? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Tue Apr 10 04:29:37 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:29:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: It's not only the lack of secular education (that R' Yitschok Levine refers to) or knowledge to interact with the secular world (that R. Hirsch z"l is reported to have referred to) that is the problem; it's the abysmal standard of the education they do receive, the overall intellectual integrity, and their attitude to anything scientific. Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. As far as i recall, the Munkatche Rebbe [frequently?] visited the Natural History Museum when he could. There is such a terrific gap in some of our children's education that it's hard to believe it's not going to be detrimental in some way to their development. [I know I'm spouting to the 'converted', but thanks for the opportunity to at least voice my concerns somewhere.] Dovid Rubin From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 06:07:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:07:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. I will just deal with one of the things you raised. If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against the crowd, this practice would end. YL The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of Volumes I-IV. The German custom to bring a young boy to the synagogue with a wirnpel (wrapping for t he Torah scroll) has no connection whatsoever to the practice of the chalaka (the Arabic term for Upsherin) observed by Sepharadirn and later ad opted by many Chasidirn. Th e custom of holding a special celebration marking the boy's first haircut developed among these groups. The celebration takes place at a specific age, usually three. Th e festivity is customarily held near the gravesite of a tzadik or in a synagogue. T his custom was unknown in ancient Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities. The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are found in accounts written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim. Some three centuries later, we find the first indications that the custom had made its way into Chasidic circles. The most important source concerning the chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. The details of this story are somewhat vague, and it is unclear whether the Ari-zal made a chalaka for his son, or whether the account refers to his disciple, Rabbi Yonatan Sagish. There is also some question as to whether the Ari-zal participated in Lag Ba 'omer events in Meron after his kabalistic insights because the custom to conduct a chalaka on Lag Ba 'omer runs in opposition to the Ari-zal' s final ruling that forbade hair cutting during the orner period. Furthermore, the custom of the chalaka has given rise to some questions as to the propriety of hair cutting at a gravesite or synagogue, which might constitute an infringement upon the sanctity of the site. Some have also questioned the permissibility of haircutting on Lag Ba omer, during bein ha-rnetzarirn (the three weeks before Tisha B' A v) or during Chol Ha 'rno 'ed. Yet another concern was the immodest behavior that occasionally accompanied this event. :Most Sephardic and Chasidic rabbis applauded, or at least defended the practices observed in their circles, though there were those who forbade The custom in this manner. Rabbi Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik of Brisk (1889-1960) disapproved of bringing children to rabbis on their third birthday for the chalaka, claiming that this practice "has no reason or basis." He noted that there are sources indicating that one should introduce the child to matters of Torah at the age of three, but none that involve haircutting. Rabbi Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky [the "Steipler Ga'on," (1899-1985)] also opposed this practice, and would send away parents who brought their children to him for the chalaka haircut. The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. Some, however, dismissed this argument, claiming that to the contrary, the chalaka perhaps began as an ancient Jewish practice which was later adopted by the gentiles. There are some older customs, originating in the times of Chazal and the Ge'onim, such as fasting on Erev Rosh Hashana and the ceremony of Kapaprot on Erev Yom Kippur which were opposed by some rabbis since they feared that their origins could be found in pagan rites. In any event, although some communities accepted this custom, Ashkenazi communities \yere never aware of such a practice. They did not receive this tradition from their forebears, and they found no mention of it in the writings of the Rishonim. The ancient tradition among Ashkenazi communities was to cut a boy's hair at a very young age. In fact, during the times of Chazal, parents would cut an infant's hair not long after birth, and they even permitted cutting a baby's overgrown hair on Chol Ha 'mo' ed. In the times of the Rishonim, too, boys' hair in Ashkenaz was cut already within the first several months after birth. The phenomenon of children with overgrown hair simply did not exist in Germany, and a boy with overgrown hair would have been mistaken for a girl. The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no special affair was held to celebrate the event. .. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:21:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:21:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 09:07:38AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for : >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. : : I will just deal with one of the things you raised. I only raised one thing. You are discussing an example, and not the point. : If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go : against the crowd, this practice would end. Which has nothing to do with the general principle of whether the resettlement of Jewry post-war should or shouldn't evolve into new minhagei hamaqom, nor the topic I raised -- the claim they actually are. Nor the reason why I raised the topic: the idea that minhag avos is only a stop-gap, a way to manage when in a maqom that has no minhag. Nor the reason for my post: Your claim that minhag hamaqom only has meaning if the maqom has loits of minhagim. That it can't be applied one-off to whatever practice is under discussion. And if you are correct, what's the threshold of minhagim that unify a community sufficiently to qualify. Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line accordingly. : The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: : Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of : Volumes I-IV. WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. : The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are : found in accounts : written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... It has to be earlier. Originally, chalaqah was held at the qever of Shemuel haNav on the 43rd of the omer, his yahrzeit. See teshuvos haRadvaz 2:608. (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get associated with a haircut at age 3. The move to Meron and Lag baOmer happened when the Ottomans restricted access to the qever in the 1500s. But that has little to do with upsherin in general, eg on a birthday.) The Radvaz, R' David b Shelomo ibn Zimra, was among the gerushei Sefarad, who ended up in Tzefas in 1513 and eventually end up in Egypt where he was RY (he taught the Shitah Mequbetzes, R' Betzalel Ashkenazi) and ABD. So, upsherin was already a practice old enough to get recorded as minhag by someone who lived through the transition from rishonim to achronim. : The most important source concerning the : chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. What makes this "post important source" if the practice predated the Ari by generations? Raising questions about a tradition that the Ari practiced it is a distraction if he isn't the basis of the minhag. AND, the problems with the story isaren't around upsherin, but around making a celebration the night of Lag baOmer, again nothing to do with making one on the child's 3rd birthday. (Unless it too is in the wrong part of the omer or during the 3 weeks. Issues we already navigate for bar mitzvah parties that aren't on Shabbos.) .... : The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice : stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka : transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's : hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in : ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation : of pagan ritual... All I know is that people invoke a similar Hindu practice. And while Hindus may wait to age 3 before making a celebratory first haircut, waiting until 5 or 7 are more common, and not making any ceremony at all is most common. (Although a girls' only haircut being at 11 months is most common.) Observant Sikh men never get a haircut. In Mongolia, between 2-5, girls get their first haricut when they are 3 or 5, boys when they are 2 or 4. No match. China - 1 month. (They wait until after the bulk of infant mortality; lehavdil but yet similar to our considering a child who dies in their first month a neifel.) Poles: a pre-Xian tradition that survived into the 1700s was 7-10. Ukraininans, 1st birthday. Polenesians, teens. Yazidi, originally 40 days, now, 7-11 mo. Interestingly, Moslem boys get their first haircut at 1 week old -- in other words, on the 8th day. In short -- no culture that wikipedia or google found for me has a special haircut for 3 yr old boys ceremony. And yet, I turned up much else. We've seen similar attacks on shlissel challah ('tis the week for that perrennial) based on a difficult to assert connection to key-with-cross breads in Xian communities that were nowhere near the areas where shlissel challah originated -- in either time or space. And yet, the same people continue dressing up their children in Purim costumes, despite the similarity to Carnivale -- and both being local to Italy in origin. Or milchigs on Shevu'os starting in the same region that already had Wittesmontag on the Monday before the Xian Pentacost. For that matter, both of those customs are first originated LATER than chalakah! ... : The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or : other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic : communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern : Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. : Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no : special affair was held to celebrate the event. Is using the haricut to tell the boy "You're not a baby now, time to start chinukh in earnest with alef-beis" really so terrible? Nothing will make that point as deeply as weeks of build up, followed by changing the look in the mirror. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From sholom at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:09:18 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:09:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> References: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <22b69f274e57a0d24c6dcbc45c456a93@aishdas.org> > : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? > : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as > : a trivia question for now). > > There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one > were considered propitious for a large crop. > > (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) REMT wrote me off line and noted: "I don't know its source, but I first heard it when I was a young child." He also answered my trivial question, writing: "In a leap year, the parsha read eight times will always be Acharei Mos. I know of no one commenting on its significance." It just occurs to me that the main event in parshas Acharei Mos occurred on the same day as the events in parshas Shemini. Kol tuv! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 09:30:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:30:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 11:21 AM 4/10/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line >accordingly. > >: The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: >: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of >: Volumes I-IV. > >WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. It was not RSRH who wrote this, but Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger who has spent much time investigating minhagim. >: The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are >: found in accounts >: written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... > >It has to be earlier. Again you are questioning Rabbi Hamburger. I suggest you contact him about this and the rest of your post. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:31:21 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:31:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 09:07, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >> Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >> children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. > > I will just deal with one of the things you raised. > > If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against > the crowd,? this practice would end. YL That is simply not true. The Baal Shem Tov and his talmidim practised it, and that is more than enough for most people. That not everyone did it is irrelevant; very few practices had unanimous support. The BeShT was far greater than the sources you cite, and many more people follow him today than follow those people, so they would have no reason to change. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:35:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:35:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, > and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get > associated with a haircut at age 3. Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From seinfeld at jsli.org Tue Apr 10 10:08:53 2018 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:08:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Playing devil?s advocate here. For the record, I have college and graduate degrees, my children all read and write well etc. However, in response to Prof. Levine. If the cost of that exposure to American secular culture (language, history, values, etc.) is that a certain percentage of children may be enticed by it and go OTD - more than would have otherwise - then, yes, it makes sense. That?s an unacceptable cost. I?m not saying that that is a real cost, but that is the perception. If you want to change the practice, you have to change that perception (which may have some truth to it, I don?t know). >Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America >cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade >science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he >has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the >history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what >happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the >mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic >knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the >digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of >HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has >no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. > From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 10:29:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180410172934.GA1877@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:35:39AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : >(This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, : >and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get : >associated with a haircut at age 3. : Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. As per the same discussion in previous years.... That's what the rishonim run with -- see Rashi and Radaq on the pasuq. Although Rashi says 22 mo in our girsa, I think the other girsa of 24 mo is more likely, because... As the Radaq points out, this fits halakhah, that the time a woman is mish'ubedes to nurse is 24 months. But while elegent, it is not mukhrach that Chanah kept to the minimum. (Thinking out loud: The exchange in 1:22-23 fits better if it was about Chanah not attending an aliyah laregel that was after Shem'el was 2. After all, why would Elqanah have pushed her to bring ShMemu'el to the mishkan before it was safe?) More to the point (and back to repeating myself), there is a machloqes in the medrash whether Shemu'el lived 52 or 53 years. And since that's 50 years after he was weaned and brought to the Mishkan, it implies a machloqes about when he moved into the Mishkan. The minhag was apparently based on the position that he was niftar at 52, and thus moved into the Mishkan at 3. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:06:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:06:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? Message-ID: One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has no inherent "Jewish" quality.) However, there are opinions that say that the Jews spoke Egyptian while in Egypt. I have posted some selections from the Sefer Lashon HaKodesh, History, Holiness, & Hebrew by Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/jews_egypt_hebrew.pdf While it is true that according to one Medrash the Jews did speak Hebrew while in Egypt, there is another Medrash that contradicts this. >From the above reference: GOD SPEAKS TO THE JEWS IN EGYPTIAN While the above sources point to the notion that the Jews in Egypt did not speak Egyptian, there is another Midrash that implies otherwise. This Midrash likens the Jews in Egypt to a prince who was kidnapped for an extended period of time. Finally, his father the king decided to exact his revenge on the kidnappers and release his son. Upon saving his son, the king conversed with the child in the language spoken to him by the kidnappers. Similarly, explains the Midrash, after God redeemed the Jews from exile in Egypt, He spoke to them in Egyptian.221 The Midrash explains that the Jews had been in Egypt for many years, where they had learned the Egyptian language.222 Therefore, when God wanted to give them the Torah, He began to speak with them in the Egyptian language with which they were already familiar. He began by proclaiming, "I (anochi, ) am Hashem, your God ... !"223 According to this Midrash, the word "anochi" in this context does not denote the Hebrew word for "I"; rather, it refers to the Egyptian224 word anoch (11:ix), which means "love" and "endearment."225 One Midrashic source even explains that the Jews forgot Lashon HaKodesh, which is why God had to speak to them in Egyptian. >From page 99 THEY SPOKE LASHON HAKODESH, BUT TOOK ORDERS IN EGYPTIAN Similarly, we can posit that even when exiled to Egypt, the Jews indeed continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, they were not accustomed to accepting orders in Lashon HaKodesh; their Egyptian taskmasters spoke to them only in Egyptian. Therefore, at Mount Sinai, when God was giving the Jews the Decalogue, He spoke to them in Egyptian, the language in which they were accustomed to "taking orders." THEY MAINTAINED THE ESSENCE OF LASHON HAKODESH, IF NOT THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE Even if we assume that the Jews completely forgot Lashon HaKodesh, we can still reconcile the contradiction based on a previously mentioned concept set forth by Rambam. Rambam, as we already mentioned, writes that Lashon HaKodesh is called so because it lacks the explicitness found in other languages, making it a chaste and holy language. Therefore, one can explain that although the Jews in Egypt spoke the Egyptian language, they did not deviate from the moral standards manifested by Lashon HaKodesh. God had to speak to them in Egyptian since that was the only language with which they were familiar. However, they did not change their manner of speaking; that is, they internalized the refined and moral linguistic style of Lashon HaKodesh, which they maintained even when speaking Egyptian. And from the Chapter Summary After discussing Joseph's personal exile to Egypt, we segued into discussing the Jews' collective exile to Egypt. A well-known Midrash states that the Jews in Egypt did not change their language, meaning that they continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, another Midrash states that God began presenting the Torah to them in Egyptian, because that was the language that they spoke in Egypt. While these two Midrashim seem at odds with each other, we presented several approaches to reconcile them and give a more concrete answer as to whether the Jews in Egypt spoke Lashon HaKodesh or Egyptian: ? Radak explains that there were some Jews who were not enslaved, and they spoke Lashon HaKodesh exclusively. Their not-so-fortunate brethren spoke Lashon HaKodesh between themselves, and Egyptian with their Egyptian overlords. ? Alternatively, it is possible that all the Jews spoke Lashon HaKodesh, yet God presented them the Torah in Egyptian because they were acclimated to accepting orders in that language. ? A third possibility is that since the hallmark of Lashon HaKodesh is its embodiment of holiness and purity, even if the Jews forgot the literal language, they could still be said to speak Lashon HaKodesh- The Holy Language-if their manner of speech remained holy. After the Jews exited Egypt and eventually arrived in the Land of Israel, establishing their own rule, it is clear that Lashon HaKodesh alone served as their spoken language. This arrangement lasted for several centuries until the language began receding under Babylonian influence, toward the end of the First Temple period. Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may not be true. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:22:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:22:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Legendary Chassidic Rebbe Admits: The Noda BiYehudah Was Correct In His Opposition to Lisheim Yichud Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/QEUCPq However, what is less well known, is that the Divrei Chaim, despite being a great Chasidic leader, actually said that the Noda BiYehuda was correct in the matter, and, based on that, his followers do not say lisheim yichud before sefira. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:39:28 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:39:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:06 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews > from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. > Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their > children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far > as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has > no inherent "Jewish" quality.) > > > ... > Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may > not be true. > > YL > > > May not be true is the operative word, there is no disputing that there is an opinion in Chazal that it is true and that the Jews spoke only Hebrew in Egypt. This is the opinion that the Chasidim follow and therefore they are against speaking English. I don't see how you can find fault with them when they are following a valid opinion in Chazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:10:49 2018 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Yehuda Gluck) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 04:10:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Wed Apr 11 02:59:49 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: R? Moshe Yehudah, Thank you for taking notice of my post! ?Only a narrow band of Torah studies are benefited by a narrow band of secular studies? - I agree with you - but only in part. 1. If I may add the word ?directly? to your statement (- ?only a narrow band of Torah studies are *directly* benefited?), as, arguably, the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education [though admittedly, this was not the thrust of my original statement]. 2. Re the case in point, Chullin and biology. Though, in general, the biology syllabus does not necessarily help in learning Chulin, biology could be taught in a manner that would: i.e. a teacher familiar with the various sugyos, could give a thorough grounding in anatomy, etc. This would be better than relying on Temunei Chol [or similar compilations], which (might) stifle critical thinking. Furthermore, an appreciable amount of Torah literature is based upon a medieval understanding of chemistry and anatomy. A fuller understanding of those thinking processes, coupled with a comparative study of [human] biology and the basics of modern chemistry, could conceivably open the door to a much fuller Torah experience. Indeed, a syllabus could conceivably be drawn up that would both benefit the Ben Torah and satisfy the requirements of an Examinatory Board. 3. Re maths; again, you are right, so far as a basic understanding of the sugyos are concerned. But to appreciate maths as a backbone of the world?s structure and thus marvel at the???? ????? , to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory to deeper areas of the Torah [which surely some of them will want to learn], requires a fundamental grounding in the subject. Dovid Rubin Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ________________________________ From: Moshe Yehuda Gluck Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 9:10:49 AM To: 'The Avodah Torah Discussion Group' Cc: 'D Rubin' Subject: RE: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:23:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:23:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Lets take a step back for a second. There has been a machlokes for thousands of years (see the Gemara in Berachos 35) whether the ideal is torah only or for lack of a better phrase torah im derech eretz. There is no disputing that in the last 200 years the overwhelming majority of Gedolim have been in the Torah only camp and in the 20th century the Torah im derech eretz is pretty much RYBS and the followers of R' Hirsch. I can provide an almost endless list of Gedolim who had zero secular education and knew kol hatorah kula while on the other hand the list of Gedolim who had a secular education is much much much smaller. Your position regarding secular studies while certainly a valid one is unquestionably the minority opinion and therefore it is ridiculous for you to simply dismiss the other opinion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 03:23:23 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 10:23:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <79615f4629784da49fb5941943399ebd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. ----------------------------- Bingo-and probably true on a micro level but not, I fear, on a macro level. I used to tell my boys that 80% (not based on a study but the handy 80/20) rule)of what they learned would not be used later, the problem is you don't know which 20% will be. Look here for the background of the inventor of the m-16 and you'll see what he brought together https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Stoner Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 04:40:52 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 07:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote, and I quote his closing last paragraph in full: > Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them > to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend > a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma > let alone a Regents diploma? The first and second sentences don't have any logical connection that I can see. There are plenty of boys who attended a Hassidic yeshiva, who now earn enough to support a family. Diplomas are not guarantees, and I'm don't know how much they help. They certainly don't help as much as drive and persistence and elbow grease. My boss, for example, asks me for help occasionally with English spelling and grammar, but that doesn't seem to have hampered his ability to own his business at half my age. (His mathematics abilities are a good example. He understands enough of the concepts that he can figure out anything on his calculator without my help. But he avoids doing even simple arithmetic in his head. And because he refuses to do the arithmetic in his head, I make more mistakes than he does.) Akiva Miller From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 11 06:22:58 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:22:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <1F.0A.18065.33C0ECA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:10 AM 4/11/2018, Moshe Yehuda Gluck wrote: >I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that >a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. >What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion >sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some >secular knowledge in order to understand them. Please read RSRH's essay The Relevance of Secular Studies to Jewish Education (Collected Writings VII) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 06:50:01 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:50:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption Message-ID: Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:20:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:20:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org> I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:45:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:45:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:50:01PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may : be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? All I have is the reverse. R' Gedalia Felder (Yesodei Yeshurun 2 pp 188-191) holds that an adopted child can be called up "ben Micha Shemuel", but that this shouldn't be done when the adopting father or the son is a kohein. In order to avoid confusion about the child's kehunah. (Or that of a future descendent, when people vaguely remember his name years later). I assume leviim too, but that's not in my notes. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 12:08:20 2018 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:08:20 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> References: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Tangentially, there is a convention to write the name of a chalal in official documents as Ploni ben Ploni Vehu Kohein, to signify the difference in status between father and son. I'm not sure that this would be recommended (or desirable) in the case of an adopted child. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 11 23:46:36 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 01:46:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: I suspect that some will feel that my position on the issue "secular" studies comes from the left of center. First off, we need to delineate what we mean by "secular" studies. This word as we use it today is far different from the science the GRA or the many achronim, rishonim and of course Chazal learned in the sense of math, astronomy and biology. Today that word would also include many areas such as social studies, psychology, philosophy, evolutionary biology, cosmology, comparative religion, black studies, sexual awareness, cultural studies etc, etc, that could lead a young untrained mind into problematic areas that could raise many question they are not prepared to deal with. The scientific study required by the various sugios in shas and halacha really require a minimal study of some elementary math such as some trig and geometry, some values such as that of Pi, square root of 2 etc and Pythagoras theorem, astronomy (mainly lunar orbit, seasonal and diurnal calculation), anatomy and some other limited areas of biology plus a handful of other concepts. By this logic much of what we call science today would be excluded from being necessary for learning Torah. Mi'sevoras libi, I would say that the study of much of what we think of in modern parlance of the many new fields of mathematics and the physical sciences such as the many branches of modern physics both classical and relativistic and quantum mechanics, the many branches of chemistry, biology and medicine and of course modern astronomy including much more than just solar system dynamics (mainly lunar & seasonal) and positions of a handful of stars are mandated for a very simple reason -- an understanding (the deeper the better) in these fields makes one truly understand that the world is so highly complex and functions so beautifully that this it can not be a random happening and that there must be a borei olam. A havana into the very ultra small as we find through quantum mechanics and particle physics, or into the wonders of the atom and chemistry and how things combine, or into the wonders of dynamics, optics, elec & magnetism, or the modern fields of solar and stellar astronomy and spectrographic analysis and through the beauty and understanding exposed through the many modern branches of modern math including advanced algebraic theory, statistical analysis, advanced calculus and vector and tensor analysis and the many other fields to numerous to mention here that are so useful throughout all of modern science.. These literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam. The understanding of biology from its lowest levels of its physics and chemistry to the molecular with the tremendous complexities at its molecular and cellular levels and onto its study at the organic and systemic levels, through developmental biology of the miraculous changes from conception through the fetus to birth, infancy and childhood to the adult and ultimately death. Many of these may not help much with the simple peshat of any particular sugio in shas, but they surely create emuna and tremendous yiras haromeimus. No one who has even the smallest inkling of any of this knowledge could believe that existence as we now can begin to perceive it is a bunch of random events. Just the mind boggling complexity of the functioning of a single cell is awe inspiring. With so many thousands of things happening in each cell with perfect timing, with everything just in the right place at the right time in each of the billions of cells in our bodies. Worst of all, leaving a young mind unexposed to many of these areas and without proper training in them leaves him vulnerable to the many questions he will eventually encounter as he goes through modern life. He will not be prepared to deal with evolution, cosmology, philpsophy etc that he will surely encounter no matter how well shielded he may be. In addition to the above, in our modern society some of the above may be needed merely to functional and earn a living in todays highly technical society and he will be severely limited in the types of parnasa available to him. I am sure that many will differ substantially from my position above. Please excuse my rambling and repetition at times and run on sentences in the above. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 12 10:20:51 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 17:20:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not utter the phrase with the congregation? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Apr 12 12:42:50 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:42:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "There is no way that a "Rabbinical committee (namely the Rabbanim/Poskim/Rebbeim of the respective chassidishe Yeshivos whom Simcha Felder is representing) decided that systematic secular education is forbidden by Orthodox Jewish law. The reason is that the Torah requires one to study secular subjects. I have posted part of an article by Dr. Yehudah Levi from his book Torah Study. " Of course there is. Dr. Yehuda Levi is coming from a Torah Im Derech Eretz point of view however, Chasidim and most Charedim have a different viewpoint, namely Torah only. You seem to be a classic case of someone living in an echo chamber. The only opinion/derech that you recognize as legitimate is Torah Im Derech Eretz. As I stated many times, Torah Im Derech Eretz is a small minority, the overwhelming majority of gedolim rejected it. So much so that Gedolim like R' Baruch Ber could not believe that R' Hirsch thought that it was lechatchila. R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch wrote a teshuva (end of Bircas Shmuel Kiddushin) where he explicitly forbid a secular curriculum: ?What emerges is (a) that according to the Torah the obligation of Banim Ubeni Banim means you must make your children into Geonei and Chachmei Torah ? and not merely to prepare them for life as a Jew. But rather, you must teach them and get them to learn the entire Torah, and if chas v?sholom you do not, you violate the entire Mitzvah of learning Torah as per Banim Ubnei Banim. ... (c) To learn secular studies on a regular basis is prohibited as per the Rama 246:4 ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 12 12:34:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:34:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu In-Reply-To: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180412193406.GA7972@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:20:51PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to : bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "barchu : hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in : order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait : and not utter the phrase with the congregation? See the Agur, Hil' Berakhos 98, which can be found at . The Maharam miRothenburg held the sha"tz needn't say it at all. R' Yehudah al-Barceloni says he should say. The Agur adds: and we are noheig to say it. The next source, the Avudraham (or to be accurate: Abu-Dirham), says that the sha"tz says it to be among the community of mevorkhim. He cites the Y-mi (Berakhos 7:3). And he adds that R' Yehudah b"r Barzili Barceloni (I assume the same source as the Seifer haAgur) writes in the name of R' Saadia that even though the sha"tz said "haMvorakh", and therefore didn't remove himself from the klal, he needs to return himself to the klal "legamrei" and day "Barukh H' Hamvorkh". Like in bentching, where the leader says "nevareikh" and yet repeats the responses of the rest of the zimun. No answer there. However, note that the assumption is that Borkhu doesn't need the sha"tz or the oleh to repeat it. The sha"tz needs to repeat it for his own sake, so as not to exclude himself from the kelal of mevorkhim. (Except according to the MmR, who doesn't believe the sha"tz has such a need.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 12th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Gevurah: What aspect of judgment Fax: (270) 514-1507 forces the "judge" into submission? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 01:31:53 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:31:53 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am surprised that you even bothered to quote him." And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his teshuva. There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 02:10:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 05:10:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: >"In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz >wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am >surprised that you even bothered to quote him." > >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with >his teshuva. If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in EY are pursuing higher secular education. >There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' >Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and >Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through >this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not >with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to >learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a >book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the >Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of >issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even >happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas >and poskim. Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat and Yom Tov (holy days) - and furthermore, it is better to occupy oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). >And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but >Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after >them." as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as >the Mishna Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of >people are capable of studying Torah all day. Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? The following is taken from Rav Schwab on Chumash, Parshas Acharei Mos. "At all times the Torah's unchanging teachings must be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, attitudes, relationships to man and beast, and positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and evaluation of the Torah. "What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the 'ways of the Earth.' The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world that surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities that confront him. "What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more crucial it is that this wisdom be conveyed to the Jewish contemporary world. It must be transmitted in a language that our generation understands and that will attract the searching youth, the ignorant, the estranged and the potential ba 1al teshuvah to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah leader must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. "There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose life task is to enlighten and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those 'messengers of G-d' the highest respect and a loyal following. These are the kohanim and levi'im of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. "Yet education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore it becomes mandatory for the present day 'Tribe of Levi' to initiate and encourage an educational system that can serve the other "eleven tribes who comprise the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meets its challenges, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head-on the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. "The Divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Sun Apr 15 05:53:59 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:53:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Micha Berger) In-Reply-To: References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com>, <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org>, Message-ID: This reply was sent earlier to R' Michah and is still valid: I agree. With respect, I did allude to ?learning skills and a mode of thinking? in both of my previous posts: ?the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education?, ? to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory?, and my reference to ?the [lack of] overall intellectual integrity?. Related to this: Is it incorrect to posit that a lot of ma?amorei Chazal was formulated in accordance to their understanding and cultural absorption of sciences of their day? Can we not further Torah with our understanding of modern science, both peripheral and integral ? even though clearly lacking their sya?ato dishmayo and Ru?ach HaKodesh? Is that not the derech taught both by the Ba?al Shem and his disciples, and the GRA and his school [to use the chochmoh of the world..]? Another q: Do we view Torah SheBa?al Peh on a par with Torah SheBiKsav, in the sense that it must be learnt ?as is?, without consideration of the worldview that shaped those comments? [I rather think we can see two views in the Rishoinim.] Dovid Rubin ________________________________ From: Micha Berger Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 5:20:06 PM To: Moshe Yehuda Gluck via Avodah Cc: Moshe Yehuda Gluck; 'D Rubin' Subject: Re: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:39:19 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:39:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:45:43 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:45:43 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 3:01 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a > regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance > secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > > > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > > The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he > already knew shas and poskim.? > > > Can you verify this assertion? > Not really but given that the Gra was a super genius and the stories that abound about how much he knew as a child it is certainly plausible to believe so. The fact is that no one really knows how old the Gra was when he learned these things so your assertion that he learned mathematics as a youth is unprovable as well. > > > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > > Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in > 1518? > > > Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there > would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. > > > And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple according to the Rama, the study of Torah is what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get us into the world to come and the study of secular studies will not. That fact remains the same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 03:39:38 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:39:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >> And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his >> teshuva. > If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who > attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend > the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in > Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today > offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. Touro College was established against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim see http://haemtza.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/yosefs-folly.html for example for details. > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in > EY are pursuing higher secular education. Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a pig with a streimel (see http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html ). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: " *Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the other nations, she didn't want to burn them, rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need any outside wisdom and therefore she was priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the world with his wisdom which was solely torah based. * *We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt."* >> There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch >> Ber. The Rama writes: >> "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >> and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will >> acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other >> wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all >> other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called >> by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the >> Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he >> knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >> regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance >> secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles > Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also > learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He > taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning > of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is > permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this > excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible > and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh > De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his > decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy > only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat > and Yom Tov (holy days) -- and furthermore, it is better to occupy > oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). Not sure what you point is here, the Rama is quoted exactly as I wrote, you cal leanr secular studies only now and then and only after you know shas and poskim. > And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but > Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them." > as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as the Mishna > Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of people are > capable of studying Torah all day. > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in 1518? From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 05:01:14 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:01:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:39 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. >R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a >pig with a streimel (see? >http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html >). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak >Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: > >" Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn >them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the >other nations, she didn't want to burn them, >rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need >any outside wisdom and therefore she was >priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the >world with his wisdom which was solely torah based.? > >We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish >home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish >wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt." Too bad this statement does not differentiate between un-Jewish and non-Jewish. as RSRH did. I agree that we do not want un-Jewish influences in the Orthodox world. However, there is no problem with non-Jewish influences. I wonder if they are against the use of, for example, modern medicine or electricity or running water, and countless other things that are "non-Jewish wisdom and come into Chareidi homes. >>There is no question that the simple reading of >>the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: >> >>"But it is not for a person to learn anything >>but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >>decisors that come after them and through this >>they will acquire this world and the world to >>come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >>In any case, it is permitted to learn through >>happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >>isn't a book of heresy.? This is what called >>by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person >>should not take a trip in the Pardes until he >>has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] >>and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> >>The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >>cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >>only that, but he writes that even happenstance >>secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > >Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > >The Gra was sui generis, when he studied >mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim.? Can you verify this assertion? >>And how many people are capable of capable of >>learning "anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >>and the halachic decisors that come after >>them."? ? as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah >>in Koheles as well as the Mishna Brurah make it >>clear that only a very small percentage of >>people are capable of studying Torah all day. > >Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > >Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah >less in 2018 then it was in 1518? Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 09:44:37 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:44:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:45 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not >for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna >and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come >after them and through this they will acquire >this world and the world to come. But not with >learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple >according to the Rama, the study of Torah is >what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get >us into the world to come and the study of >secular studies will not. That fact remains the >same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person >should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. The facts do not remain the same in 2018 as in 1518. The day school movement in the US as well as all of the Orthodox schools throughout the world where secular studies are routinely taught from kindergarten on show that things have changed. Please spend the time to read "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 ? 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 The Jewish Press, July 6, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916)" "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1786-1879)" "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1654 ? 1785) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 08:07:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:07:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi >world agrees with his teshuva. > >There is no question that the simple reading of >the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything >but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >decisors that come after them and through this >they will acquire this world and the world to >come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >In any case, it is permitted to learn through >happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by >the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should >not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and >he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >only that, but he writes that even happenstance >secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. I must admit that I do not understand your assertion against secular studies in conjunction with Torah studies even for boys at a young age.. The day school movement in the US was founded on the principle of a dual curriculum. The model was RJJ. Today in the US the vast majority of yeshivas follow this model save for some of the Chassidic yeshivas. Gedolim like Rav Yitzchok Hutner (Chaim Berlin), (Mr.) Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz (Torah Vodaath), Rav Avraham Kalmanovitz and Rav Shmuel Birenbaum (Mir), Rav Dr. Yosef Breuer and Rav Shimon Schwab (Yeshiva RSRH) , to name just a few, headed yeshivas in which boys were taught Torah and secular studies in elementary and high school grades. I am sure they were well aware of what the RAMA wrote and paskened that it did not apply today. Even in Europe in the 19th century there were some places where secular and Torah studies were taught along side each other. The Kelm Talmud Torah was one. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelm_Talmud_Torah "In addition to Jewish subjects, students studied general subjects such as geography, mathematics, and Russian language and literature for three hours a day. The Kelm Talmud Torah was the first traditional yeshiva in the Russian empire to give such a focus to general studies. " There was the L?mel-School in Jerusalem where both Torah and secular subjects were taught. So I really do not understand why you focus on the RAMA when it is clear that yeshiva education in many places, since the 19th century and throughout the 20th century involved a combination of Torah and secular studies. What are you arguing about? YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 11:16:15 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:16:15 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> On 4/15/2018 11:10 AM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, > in EY are pursuing higher secular education. I just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different story entirely). From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 10:14:25 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:14:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916) ... There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in have secular studies: 1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would have had no students 2. The law mandated secular studies Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a bdieved. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:22:23 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:22:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:14 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in >have secular studies: >1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send >their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would >have had no students >2. The law mandated secular studies When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young people. >Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but >as a bdieved. Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! YL From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:29:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:29:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <4C.65.18065.A7C83DA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:16 PM 4/15/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I Just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went >through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these >colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or >should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different >story entirely). And many of those who attend these institutions find their secular knowledge woefully inadequate and probably wish they had a stronger secular education when they were younger. Look at the first part of the video at https://goo.gl/WKrKyT and see what he says about his own yeshiva education. At about 2 minutes in he says he discovered that he didn't know anything when it came to being prepared to work. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 15 05:48:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:48:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria Message-ID: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> The leprosy mentioned here was special kind of leprosy which only the Jewish people suffered from only in Israel. It never occurred outside of Israel, even in a Jewish home. The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical but rather a spiritual disease. The Rabbis comment: b?sorah tovah hee l?Yisroel ? "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and mortar to act as if it were alive. It would be most unusual for a house to become sick just like a human being. Such an illness borders on the miraculous. Why does the Torah say that a house may be afflicted with leprosy? It means that a Jewish home is different from other homes; it has life and spirit attached to it. When the people who live in these homes are sinful, the very bricks of the home reflect that sinfulness. The Rabbis tell us that leprosy is a sign of evil and sin; therefore, it is natural that house would manifest leprosy as a sign of its inhabitants evil. Now we can understand why the rabbis say it is good news when a house is stricken with leprosy. If one can notice the disease before it spreads, he has a chance to cure it. When the disease goes unnoticed, the real trouble ensues. Since in today?s world we don?t have the warning of leprosy attached to our houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. The Bible will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible Dwight L Moody -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 11:02:08 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:02:08 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sunday, April 15, 2018, Prof. Levine wrote: > When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 > there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young > people. > Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a > bdieved. > Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 15 12:45:46 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 19:45:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. _______________________________________________ Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 13:08:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 16:08:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <13.9E.29097.691B3DA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:02 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >This is not something to be happy about. This is >more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu >torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very >difficult decision to violate the Halacha in >order to save the next generation. This was not >uncommon in America of that time. Young >Israel???s sponsored mixed dances for the same >reasons. However, now that the Torah community >is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. ? On the contrary, this is something that is appropriate for our time and the future. Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? See my article "Frum or Ehrliche?" The Jewish Press, October 20, 2006, page 1. This article is also available at "Frum or Ehrlich". Letters to Editor Also see "The Obligation to Support a Family" The Jewish Press, February 18, 2015, front page. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 15:35:12 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 18:35:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the > community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the > congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l?olam vaed" > and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included > with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not > utter the phrase with the congregation? Incidentally, the same situation and question applies by the Borchu prior to Birchos Krias Shema, as per S"A 57:1. I can't bring any source, but in my mind, the simple answer is that if the oleh would say it together with the congragation, he might not be heard. The delay is to insure that no one mistakenly thinks that the oleh is excluding himself. I was going to ask a related question about Kaddish that has bothered me for some time. Namely: When the Kaddish-sayer says "Yhei Shmei Raba" himself, why does Mishne Brurah 56:2 tell him to say it *quietly*? But I am *not* going to ask that question, because RJR's post has forced me to compare these tefilos carefully, and I have found a difference that might help to answer his question. RJR was very correct when he used the word "command" to describe what the oleh is saying. The word "Borchu" is indeed the tzivui/imperative form of the verb. But no comparable command exists in Kaddish. Yes, the Kaddish-leader does command them "v'imru", but he even specifies what it is that he wants them to say. Namely, a simple "amen". And so they do. May I suggest that the "Yhei Shmei Raba" is an impromptu addition, that the tzibur adds of their own accord, NOT commanded to do so by the Kaddish-leader. Thus, there is no fear of causing any illusions that he is somehow excluding himself. Indeed, he himself added to the praise by saying "Yisborach v'yishtabach", which (one might say) is simply an expanded version of "Yhei Shmei Raba". So I guess the real question on MB 56:2 is not why the leader says Yhei quietly instead of loudly, but perhaps we could ask whether the leader really needs to say Yhei at all. Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 20:59:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:59:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <54519ad6-5f2a-1c69-4e5f-2d8f0fa2f2a5@zahav.net.il> 1) Is the community as strong as it was back when Torah was transmitted orally? 2) Who is the rabbi who is going to overturn decisions made by the Ta'naim (as opposed to overturning decisions made by school administrators in the 50s)? On 4/15/2018 9:45 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es > laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. > KT From hankman at bell.net Sun Apr 15 18:13:32 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:13:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> R? Marty Bluke wrote: ?R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah.? My response to R? Marty makes a number of assumptions that may not be universally accepted but that I firmly believe. The times are different, the level of knowledge is different both in the physical sciences and in Torah hakedosha. Dare I say that these as a function of time seem to be moving on trajectories that are unfortunately inverse to each other ? particularly in the latter time frame that we live in ? most intensely over the last 10 to 12 decades but can already be clearly seen over the last 4 centuries. With each dor we can see an ongoing diminution in the level of our Torah havanah while a commensurate level of greater scientific understanding has come about (with perhaps the exception of a very few yechidei de?ah such as the Gra and a few others who may have achieved levels more common in much earlier times before them). While Chazal tell us ?haphoch v?haphoch d?kol bah? and that certainly for those who are capable of a great level of Torah understanding such as those of Chazal who were doresh all the essin or all the taggin in the Torah probably could have been able to find quantum mechanics or tensor analysis or molecular biology in the Torah if they so chose. Certainly if the scientists of our day were able to discover these facts, Chazal certainly were able to as well. But I would point out that there is no maimre in Chazal that relates to having discovered any of this knowledge through their pilpul and passing this on to us. Perhaps they did not feel it important enough to report. But this level of understanding in Torah in our times is sadly not available in our times. Given the level of limud for the average person (unlike for some of the gedolim of our times) in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics. The average person (maybe I am just giving away my matsav) will not find much yira or emuna from learning that which is typical of our yeshivos (say a sugia in shas say ?succa govoah m?esrim ama or a sugia on movuy or on tumas negaim ? of hilchos melicha or muktsa in shulchan aruch etc). For the average person these are not awe inspiring subjects and unfortunately only a true godol or great talmid chochom could extract yira and emunah from these cut and dry subjects. Such inspiration for the average yid are fewer and much further in between from most of his limud of Torah. This as a result of our sad diminution in our Torah learning ability. Today, given our greater abilities in understanding the Borei?s briah it is much easier for us to find yira and emuna from our hisbonenus in them. So ?of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none? is Torah, but a very solid adjunct in our times for a vehicle to further inspire yira and emunah would very effectively be math and scientific knowledge. Part of the mitsva of emuna, is not simply belief, but to go out and prove to your satisfaction (to be doresh v?choker) the truth of the Borei and his achdus and that he is the Borei olam and revealed Himself to us at matan Torah and so on. To the extent that science facilitates this search it is a MITSVA and not just mere secular studies at the cost of Torah studies. Clearly the experience our ancestors experienced at yetsias Mitzrayim, al hayam (ma sheroaso shifcha al hayam etc) and revelation on sinai etc was more than enough to inspire tremendous yira, awe and emunah without the need for any help from science (which was not great in their period in any case) and on through the period of the nevi?im and the batei mikadash and later Chazal inspiration was possible through there havana of Torah alone. But I do not see that to be the case in our generation and times. ?So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah?? Because in our day it may be another additional (I hesitate to say ?more? effective way b?avonoseinu harabim for most people) very effective way for most average people.? So today, for the yechidei olom the tried and true method of attaining great yira and emunah through limud Torah may be the best way to go as we have witnessed these great traits in our great gedolim, but that recipe may not work so well in our times for everybody else without additional help. I am also not comfortable with the notion that there are certain areas of knowledge that are off limits to even our gedolim. I feel quite confident to assert that in our time, non of even our gedolim come to discover the great advances in science through there limud hatorah. If they know these subjects it came from sources outside of their linudei kodesh. But Chazal was not constrained in their knowledge. They were required to know shivim loshonos, they studied kishuv and astrolgy and the chukos hagoyim and certainly the science of their day (sometimes even quoting chachmei ha?umos and cf the Rambam quoting Aristo often etc [I also imagine the Rambam learned his medicine in the conventional way mostly including sources outside of Torah]). I feel sad for many talmidei chachamim in our day who lack the background in (sometimes in even minimal) math and science to grasp that they are saying a peshat in a sugia that could not be, and to seek out another peshat therein or to at least realize there is a problem they need to deal with to get a proper havana. Also the chiyuv to teach a son an umnus, obviously means, other than the chiyuv to teach one?s son Torah. We do not assume that his limud haTorah will suffice to teach him an umnus as well. The conventional ?secular? methods of teaching an umnus are to be followed. If you want your son to be a carpenter, send him to carpentry school ? do not expect him to come from yeshiva a talmid chochom AND a carpenter just from his limud haTorah. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 16:30:43 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:30:43 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: Is it not likely that the prohibition is against non-Torah learning which serves no purpose other than engaging in those studies for their own interest and excitement? There is no prohibition against learning any skills for earning a livelihood. Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and research. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 18:06:13 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:06:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. It seems to me that there is indeed one very obvious exception, namely, the chometz which the Rav has not yet sold to the non-Jew. (I suppose that one could avoid this situation by delaying the bittul until the very end of the fifth hour, but the danger of missing that deadline scares me.) I have not seen any sifrei halacha, nor any pamphlets or bulletins or websites, that mention this point. Perhaps everyone just presumes that people have this exception in mind when they say the bittul? Here's a better way to phrase my question: Would a mental reservation be valid in this case? Perhaps halacha ignores the mental reservation, and only cares about the actual words of the bittul - which explicitly refers to ALL the chometz. If halacha does allow this exception - and people do have this exception in mind either explicitly or implicitly - then there is no problem. But I would like to hear that this is confirmed by the poskim. Some might say, "What's the problem? There is chometz in his house, but he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" No, I can see two very serious problems. But before I go further, I must reiterate that these problems would only arise in the case where one does his Bitul Chometz BEFORE the Rav transfers ownership to the non-Jew. (If the ownership transfer occurs first, then at the time of the Bitul, there is no problem, because the only chometz still in his possession is really and truly nothing more than the chometz that he is unaware of.) 1) If there is still chometz in his home, and he is expecting for it to be sold to a non-Jew several minutes or hours later, but the words of the bittul - "All the chometz in my possession, whether I know about it or not" - are to be taken a face value, doesn't this case aspersion on the sincerity/validity of the bittul? 2) Perhaps even worse: After Pesach, when it is time to re-acquire the chometz, he can no longer rely on "he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" Rather, a determination must be made. If he got rid of it via mechira (despite happening after the bittul), then the chometz may be eaten. But if, in the final analysis, he got rid of it via bitul, then it is assur b'hanaah (Mechaber 448:5, MB 448:25). So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? Akiva Miller From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Apr 16 06:35:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 23:35:36 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: I enjoy reading smatterings from the philosophical musings of the great scientists. But I suspect, that is the very reason they are banned. It is because they are NOT boring. And I suspect that unless it may assist me in my Parnassah even reading about new tech developments etc, is likely to be prohibited, not as a corrosive Hashkafa but simply as a time waster. But as the saying goes, Nobody's Perfect [which is sometimes followed by - I am a Nobody] Furthermore, the loud protests that I can already hear, are voiced by those who live in this world which is influenced by non-Torah energies. If we experience boredom when learning Torah - then is it not true that we are still far from the truth of Torah? Reb Avigdor M said - ever noticed how people yawn during Bentching? And would then wryly observe, They were not yawning a minute earlier during the ice cream. I have a friend, a Sefaradi Satmar Chossid, V Frum V Ehrlich, who asked R A Miller if he should learn ShaAr HaBechicnah in the ChHalevovos, R A asked him if he reads the newspapers, to which he replied, No - to which Reb Avigdor responded You need to learn it anyway because the streets are infiltrated with the HashpaAh of the newspapers. I apologise if I seemed to be dismissive of the scientists and their philosophical musings - and the truths that they may discuss Sure, I agree, truth is truth no matter the source. I was merely reflecting upon the reason for the ban on Alternative Wisdoms A] they are unnecessary - they are not required for Parnassah B] they waste time from Torah C] they may well harbour and cultivate life-concepts that are alien and contrary to Torah, amongst the granules of truth Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 06:51:02 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:51:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: <20EAE8A6498E468ABF14517EBCFFBC8A@hankPC> R' Meir G. Rabi wrote: > Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to > various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. > Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote > extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and > research. Do not ignore the truth of the message because you (and we all) do not like the like the lifestyle of the messenger. Pythagoras' theorem is a central truth to much of mathematics and science, and the truth of Einstein's science has withstood the test of time and been subject to much experimental verification. So what exactly is your point -- ignore the truth because you do not like its source? Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Apr 16 11:33:13 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:33:13 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <100f9bef-3e84-6df0-e91d-87b4c01ee3c7@zahav.net.il> Last year I read the document that one signs with the Rabbinate about the mechira. It was quite clear - you sell everything.? Everything includes things that you may have forgotten about? and even things that you have no idea if you own, like stocks in some company that deals in chameitz (even if your ownership is via your pension fund). Everything? means everything. I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". On 4/16/2018 3:06 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the > chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. > > > > So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? > > Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 16 11:07:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:07:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria In-Reply-To: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> References: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180416180705.GG23200@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:48:58AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical : but rather a spiritual disease. I like calling it spirito-somatic, coining a term to parallel "psychosomatic". Just as it stress can turn the presence of Helicobacter pulori in the stomach into having an ulcer. : The Rabbis comment: b'sorah tovah hee l'Yisroel -- : "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." : Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and : mortar to act as if it were alive... But they also say it's purely theoretical (Sanhedrin 71a). Although that's tied to R' Elazar b"R Shimon's side of a machloqes in the mishnah (Nega'im 12:3). R' Yishmael and R' Aqiva (the other two opinions in the mishnah) would apparently disagree. In any case, as with the rest of the cases in the gemara of laws that exist only for learning (ben soreir umoreh and ir hanidachas) it continues with tannaim saying they saw something local tradition said was evidence of one. Nowadays, house mold is known to be all too common. The actual physical side of tzara'as habayis needn't be miraculous. However, unlike tzara'as of the body, one can't invoke a soul - mind - brain causality. It would be pretty direct evidence of Divine Providence if tzra'as of the sort that would cause tum'ah struck only appropriate homes. Which is how I saw the quote. It requires people living on a level where blatant hashgachah peratis is approrpriate. As opposed to an era where even tzara'as of the body requires far more spirituality than people achieve. : Since in today's world we don't have the warning of leprosy attached to our : houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be : able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. There is a discussion of the role of learning Torah, and whether studying Torah that is non-applicabile is of value. Because of ideas like this one, it is hard to believe there can be Torah that is non-applicable. Even if the case isn't, "derosh vekabel sekhar" could refer to taking home lessons for the general principle. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 16th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Tifferes: What type of discipline Fax: (270) 514-1507 does harmony promote? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Apr 16 06:55:47 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:55:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzorah Message-ID: <672ECAA3-45E8-4B5C-A040-0A47C6B91FE2@cox.net> The second verse of this portion (14:2) states: "This shall be the law of the metzora on the day of his purification..." Since the Torah mentions that his purification takes place during the day, the Sages expound that the Kohen's declaration, which alone permits the metzora to begin his purification ritual, may be made only during the day (Rashi; Sifra). The observance of Taharat Hamishpacha has been a central feature of Jewish life for millennia. One finds Mikvehs in medieval Spain, in ancient Italy and in the famed desert outpost of Masada. This is consonant with Halacha which mandates that even before the town synagogue is built, a Mikveh must first be established. The source of the laws of Mikveh and family purity is found in this week's Torah portion. The Torah commands that when a woman has a menstrual flow, she and her husband must stay apart from one another. During this period she is "tameh," a Hebrew term that has been incorrectly translated as "unclean." In point of fact, the word tameh has nothing to do with uncleanness. When one is tameh it means that a person has had some contact with death. In the instance of a menstruating woman, it is the death of the ovum. Similarly, when a man has had physical relations (which inevitably involve the death of millions of sperm), he too is tameh. Implicit in this Biblical tradition is a great sensitivity and awareness of the natural life cycle. After a week has passed since the cessation of the woman's menstrual flow, the woman goes to the Mikveh where she undergoes a "spiritual rebirth." Various aspects of the Mikveh experience reinforce this notion of rebirth. The Mikveh itself must have 40 seah of water, the number 40 alluding to the 40th day after conception when the soul of a child enters the embryo. The woman must have no ornaments or barriers between herself and the water, for her emerging from the Mikveh is like that of the newborn leaving the waters of the womb with no ornaments or barriers. A child is the mirror of the family, he reflects the moral purity of his parents. Anonymous From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 16 08:34:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:34:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Kriyas HaTorah, Aseres Ha'dibros Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Rambam (Teshuvos HaRambam 60) writes that one who is seated should not stand up for the reading of the Aseres Ha'dibros (Ten Commandments). However, the general custom today is that the entire congregation does stand during this reading. Why is it that this ruling of the Rambam is not followed? A. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt"l pointed out that there are two versions of cantillation for the Aseres Ha'dibros. The first is called ta'am ha'tachton (lower cantillation) which punctuates the Aseres Ha'dibros into sentences in the same manner as the rest of the Torah. The second is called ta'am ha'elyon (higher cantillation), which punctuates following the order of the commandments, reconstructing the manner in which the Ten Commandments were received during matan Torah. There are two reasons why someone would wish to stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros. If one's intent is to show extra honor to this portion of the Torah, this is inappropriate. The entire Torah was given to Moshe on Har Sinai, and therefore all of Torah is equally precious. Standing for the Aseres Ha'dibros might lead some to the erroneous conclusion that only the Ten Commandments were received directly from Hashem. However, there is a second reason why one would stand during the Aseres Ha'dibros and that is to recreate the assembly at Har Sinai. We stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros in the same fashion that all of Israel stood during the original acceptance of the Torah. Today, the general custom is to always read the portion of the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'elyon. This indicates that this is not merely a reading of the Torah, but a recreation of matan Torah. Therefore, it is appropriate to stand. Rav Soloveitchik posits that the Rambam read the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'tachton, equating it to every other Torah reading, in which case, it would indeed be inappropriate to stand. The custom of Rav Chaim Soloveitchik, zt"l was to read the Aseres Ha'dibros both on Shavuos and during the weekly portion with ta'am ha'tachton, following the practice of the Rambam. Some, however, have the custom to read the Aseres Ha'dibros on Shavuos with ta'am ha'elyon, since this reading is a recreation of Sinai, but when parshas Yisro and parshas Va'eschanan are read on a regular Shabbos, the Aseres Ha'dibros are read with ta'am ha'tachton. In such a shul it would be best to stand from the beginning of the aliyah so as not to show more honor to one part of the Torah than another. From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 17:58:57 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 19:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: In my previous post responding R? Marty Bluke I wrote: ?in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics.? Upon reflection I wish to add to my previous thought about ?the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly? can lead to great awe and yiras harommeimus and emuna. I have no doubt that the pasuk jn Iyov (19:26) ?umibesori echezeh eloka? is a direct expression in Nach of this idea that my very tissues (biological systems) are great evidence and testimony to the the existence of the Borei Olam and His careful and intricate design and continuing hashgacha of the very smallest and finest, myriad intricate details of every living thing. It basically is the old argument that the existence of a complex system such as a clock implies that there must be a clock maker ? but ever so much in spades. Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 17 10:59:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:59:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> Message-ID: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a : bdieved. Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. The wave of rabbis coming in when the big drive for day school education started were predominantly a particular kind of Litvak. Look who the big voices were in the Agudas haRabbanim of the first half of the 20th century. RARakeffetR makes a strong case that one of the differences between RSRH and RYBS was just how lekhat-chilah secular studies are. RSRH held that our insulation from general culture and general knowledge was a tragic consequence of ghettoization. And that we never chose that life, it was forced upon us. The Emancipation was seen as a boon, allow the full expression of Judaism again. RYBS, in RARR's opionion (and of course, others vehemently disagree) only saw secular studies as the ideal way to live in a suboptimal situation. Secular knowledge in-and-of-itself as well as its ability to help one live in dignity is lekhat-chilah only within this bedi'eved world. But had we all been able to move back to Brisk, it would be all the better. Which gets us to the eis la'asos discussion. Shas too is lekhat-chilah and a great thing. What is bedi'eved is the reality that forced Rebbe, Rav Ashi, Ravinah to canonize official texts and (according to Tosafos) the geonim to write it down. But since we are still in that reality, we still publish TSBP -- lekhat-chilah. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? : Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, : "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of secular studies. Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. I would stick to discussing financial crimes: Yafeh Talmud Torah im Derekh Eretz sheyegi'as sheneihem mishkachas avon. VeKhol Torah she'ein imahh melakhah, sofahh beteilah vegoreres avon. - R' Gamliel beno shel R' Yehudah haNasi (Avos 2:2) But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the am hanivchar means. I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does not produce people less prone to these things. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 17th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Tifferes: What is the ultimate Fax: (270) 514-1507 state of harmony? From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 17 17:25:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 20:25:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz Message-ID: . I had asked: > On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat > before Biur Chametz? I thank those who responded. I still haven't found any poskim who deal with this exact question, but the Magen Avraham does mention something very close: "All melachos are assur once the time for burning has come, until he burns the chometz, just like above in Siman 431." - Magen Avraham 445:2, at the very end Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Apr 17 22:27:14 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 07:27:14 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Omer and Koolulam Message-ID: A Post by Rabbi Alex Israel. In this essay (originally posted on Facebook for public consumption), Rav Israel talks about his feelings about participating in a Koolulam sing along. If you don't know, Koolulam is an organization which gets hundreds, even thousands of people together to teach to sing one song in unison. They took this idea from the US with the twist of having regular folks and not just stars singing. For an example of what Koolulam does, here is their Yom Atzmaut video (described by many as a tefilla b'tzibbur): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxzR9Z-kG6Q (Al Kol Aleh by Naomi Shemer). Rav Israel's post is an excellent example about how people are dealing with inner conflicts of the Omer (and Three Weeks) mourning period and living in modern Israel. Note: There are rabbanim who wouldn't have allowed participation, during the Omer time or any other time. You can read the comments and discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/alexisrael1/posts/10157199448378942 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ If you have been following me on FB, you will know my obsession with Koolulam, especially their ??70th Yom Haatzmaut event. Prior to the event I was asked by 7 or 8 people, friends or talmidot/im, ?whether they could attend during the Omer. (If you watched the video, about half the participants ?were religious-looking.) ? I am generally halakhically conservative (small "c"!) and I try to keep halakha even if it disrupts my lifestyle. I ?am committed to halakhic practice and I don't knowingly contravene the law. So was it forbidden?? On the one hand this was a live event. So is it a problem? The Shulchan Arukh restricts weddings ?and haircuts as modes of marking the death of Rabbi Akiva?s 24,000 talmidim. Magen Avraham ?adds dancing and revelry to the list and I grew up not even going to movies in the Omer. Koolulam ?isn?t a wedding and did not include dancing, but was very much a public celebratory event. Could I ?go and allow others to go? I went to consult. One authoritative Posek said to me "It's not really assur (not dancing); it's not really muttar (public mass event). Go if it is ?important to you." ... But is that satisfactory?? The fundamental issue is deeper than the technical definition of ?music?, dancing? etc. In truth, ?I was going as part of my Yom Haatzmaut experience, as a celebration of life in Israel, of a people ?revived. This was not simple entertainment. Having participated in Koolulam, it was incredibly ?uplifting. My wife has described the evening as ?tefilla betzibur,? as the song?s words are essentially ?a prayer! - Just watch the "kavanna" in the video of the event! This was not merely a fun night out, although it was great fun. It was for us a Zionist ?expression, it touched a far deeper chord; it reflected faith, national unity, pride, hope, and so much ?more.? On the one hand, I see Halakha as embodying values which we aspire to imbibe. As such, I fully identify with the mourning of the ?Omer. It recalls Rabbi Akiva?s students who did not regard or interact with one another respectfully. In Israel ?today, we desperately need to be reminded annually about the need for a sensitive and respectful ?social environment and public discourse. The Omer contains a critical message. We wouldn't want to be without it. The mourning of the Omer, especially for Askenazi kehillot, also marks ?massacres and Crusades throughout the ages; another important feature, (although they may have tragically been eclipsed by the Shoah.?) But here is the problem. These practices totally fail to absorb the huge historic shift that is Medinat ?Yisrael. There is a gaping dissonance between the traditional Omer rhythm and our Israel lives. The ?traditional Omer rubric doesn't match the modern days of commemoration. For example, one ?does not recite Tachanun on Yom Hashoah because it falls in Nissan. If there is one day to say ?Tachanun, it is Yom Hashoah (I wrote about my struggle with this here ?http://thinkingtorah.blogspot.co.il/?/davening-on-yom-hasho?). And is Yom ?Haatzmaut merely a hiatus in a wider period of mourning? Moreover, in general, on a daily basis, ?as I read the Siddur, I wonder how we can ignore the huge chessed of HKBH in our generation of ?Jewish independence and the restoration of land and nationhood. How can my Siddur be the same ??(excluding the prayer for the State) as my great-grandfather? ? In this period of the year, we should be thanking God, celebrating our good fortune, revelling in ?the gifts that we feel as we move from Yom Haatzmaut to Yom Yerushalayim. Fundamentally, the ?Omer is a happy time; Ramban perceives it as a ?chol hamoed? of sorts between Pesach and ?Shavuot where we mark ?the love of our youth, our marriage with God, how we followed God ?through the wilderness? (Jeremiah 2) as we followed God from Egypt to Matan Torah at Mount ?Sinai. Where is the joy? ? So, I felt that this was a sort of Yom Haatzmaut event which yes, contravened the traditional Omer, ?but in some way lived up to our new reality. I keep the Omer - not shaving; watching how I speak ?to others and how I interact in a positive and respectful way - but we are not in the terrible era of ?Bar Kochba when the Romans massacred Rabbi Akiva's talmidim, and we are not in the period of ?the Crusades. We are in Medinat Yisrael, our thriving sovereign State, and I want to praise Hashem and celebrate my people for ?the ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ????, ?? ???????? ????? ?????? ??????? - and so I went to Kululam. ? I don't know how to square the two systems.? Later I saw a post by an amazing Rav, Rabbi David Menachem, whose post reflected similar sentiments, going even further than my thoughts. See his post here: ?https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=963243270498844&id=276752372481274 ?(h/t Yael Unterman) I?m sharing these thoughts without the ability to articulate a solution. Maybe time will change ?things. Maybe we need to push these questions to halakhic authorities and thinkers greater than ?myself.? From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 17 12:56:42 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 19:56:42 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> There have been many many posting recently about the desirability of secular education, but no one has, so far, mentioned an exceedingly important point. Bammaqom sh'eyn anashim hishtaddel lihyoth ish, so I have to step in and point it out. We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have. `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater". This is preposterous; someone who knows xokhma yvanith knows that "epi" means "above" and "tropos" means to move, or to act. An epitropos is someone who acts above someone else, i.e., a guardian, who acts above, and on behalf of, his ward. `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Posqim, especially, need to have a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages. Any poseq who is not willing to be `oqer a din in the Shulxan `Arukh is no poseq (you may attribute this quote to me). But ordinary Jews also need to know this. It is always dangerous to believe things that are untrue. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 17 15:00:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 18:00:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >: Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a >: bdieved. > >Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up by Shearith Israel in the 18th century taught secular as well as Torah subjects. The day school set up by Rabbi Avraham Rice did the same. While it is true that the level of Torah subjects taught was low, still there were secular subjects almost from the beginning. Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects and so did RJJ that was founded around1902. The high school that Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started in the second decade of the 20th century taught secular subjects as well as Torah subjects. The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. Please see my articles "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 "Bringing Torah Education to Baltimore" The Jewish Press, October 3, 2008, pages 57 & 75. >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? >: Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, >: "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." > >So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of >secular studies. The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. >Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of >secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. He knew in detail how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, he did value mathematics. Once he moved to NY he enrolled his children in yeshivas that gave its students a secular education. He received special permission not to send his eldest son to public school in Chelsea, MA, since there was no other alternative at the time. (His eldest daughter did attend public school in Chelsea, MA.) Lazar Miller, his eldest son, told me when he was sitting shiva for his mother that his mother used to help him with his math. However, she used Hebrew terminology for fraction, numerator, and denominator, since she had studied at two Yavneh schools in Lithuania where everything was learned in Ivrit. >: How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? > >Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat >haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. > >I would stick to discussing financial crimes: ... >But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding >of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the >am hanivchar means. What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal. I will take Erlichkeit with aberrance to mitzva practice over Frumkeit any time. >I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, >have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does >not produce people less prone to these things. I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to those who possess it. Originally, higher education in America was tied to religious education, and there was an attempt to instill morality in the students. Today, there is no such attempt. Indeed, if anything, higher education is in many cases anti-morality from a Torah standpoint. Parents contemplating sending their children to a secular collage should keep this in mind. YL From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 18 13:05:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:05:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:00:38PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: :> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a :> : bdieved. :> Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. : This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up : by Shearith Israel in the 18th century ... : Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects ... : The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. None of which led to the dayschool movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? .... :> So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of :> secular studies. : The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member : behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. But you haven't shown a connection between the lack of limudei chol and the extent by which people are not living according to some derekh's understanding of "true Torah values". :> Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of :> secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how : science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. ... And yet would have felt a student who studied science as a full time endevor to be a cause fo a cheshbon hanefesh. And consequently, due to his own lack of formal study, much of the science he uses in his examples is just plain wrong. (And similarly, someone who knew the then-latest theories of cosmogony, geology and evolution would not have found is arguments for Creationism very convincing. If you don't know what the other side of the debate believes, you end up knocking down strawmen.) : how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is : true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, : he did value mathematics. Leshitakha-- Why aren't you asking how R' Miller could ignore RSRH's paean to Schiller? :> But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding :> of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the :> am hanivchar means. : What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on : externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal... Frumkeit is about ritual and a drive to satisfy one's need to be holy. Ehlichkeit is about wanting to do G-d's Will. A frum "baal chessed" wants his gemach to be the biggest in town. An ehrlicher one is happy those in his town in need have so many sources of help. See Alei Shur vol II pp 152-155 A translation of an excetp by R' Ezra Goldschmiedt My blog post on the topic . And if that's not your definition, it's the one I intended when I said that the main cause of the chilulei hasheim you raised (and the mindset that least to them which is in-and-of-itself un-Jewish) is frumeit. :> I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, :> have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does :> not produce people less prone to these things. : I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to : those who possess it... So then why bring up immoral behavior as proof that there are problems with a lack of secular education? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 18th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 balance? From driceman at optimum.net Wed Apr 18 13:30:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:30:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > RAM: >> On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat >> before Biur Chametz? > Burning hametz is a b?dieved. In an ideal world we would eat all of our hametz before zman issuro. So Hazal gave us time to eat hametz in the morning, and instituted biur hametz soon enough before noon that we wouldn?t violate any issurim, but not much before that. Otherwise why not do the biur right after bedika? David Riceman From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 18 16:25:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:25:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95.6C.08474.004D7DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: None of which led to the day school movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Etz Cahim had secular studies in the late 1880s. see below. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started a high school with secular studies around 1915. . R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? This is not true. > From my article "The Founding of Yeshiva Etz Chaim" The Jewish Press, May 2, 2008, pages 48 - 49. From the amount of time allocated to secular subjects, it is clear that the directors of the yeshiva considered these far less important than the students? limudei kodesh studies. Abraham Cahan, who would eventually become the editor of the Jewish Daily Forward and a prominent figure in the Socialist movement in America, became one of the first teachers in the English department in 1887. Cahan records that the curriculum was loosely drawn to provide for the study of grammar, arithmetic, reading, and spelling ? all within the ?English Department.? But because the directors of the school had no clear idea of what should be taught, the English Department functioned haphazardly, more out of a perfunctory acknowledgement for these subjects than a sincere desire to ?provide the children with a modern education.? The English Department was divided into two classes. The first was taught by a boy about fourteen, who had just graduated from public school and the second was taught by Cahan, who was a little less than twenty-eight years old. The students ranged from the ages of nine or ten to fifteen and many were exposed to the formal study of secular subjects for the first time. One of the native students received his first lessons in the English language when he entered the Yeshiva after passing his thirteenth birthday. The young immigrants presented an immense challenge to their devoted teachers. The students drank up the instruction with a thirst centuries old. Cahan frequently remained long after the prescribed teaching hours to tutor his pupils, who were uniformly poor in reading and mathematics and who regarded grammar as an exquisite form of torture. On these occasions, the directors would ask Cahan why he ?worked so hard,? saying that the students ?already knew enough English.? And from my article "The Founding of the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School" The Jewish Press, September 5, 2008, pages 26 & 66. Setting The Pattern For Future Yeshivas The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was unique in that it was the first elementary parochial school that taught basic Jewish studies as well as Talmud. Yeshiva Etz Chaim, founded in 1886, was an intermediate school that enrolled boys at least nine years old who already were somewhat proficient in Chumash and Rashi. Yeshiva Etz Chaim?s goal was to give its students a thorough grounding in Gemara and Shulchan Aruch. In addition, it provided some limited secular studies in the late afternoon. The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was different in that in addition to providing a first rate religious education, it sought to provide its students with an excellent secular education at least equivalent to that offered by the public schools of the time. Nonetheless, limudei chol (secular or ?English? studies) was considered much less important than limudei kodesh (religious studies), and this attitude was clearly displayed in the constitution of the school. It required that there be two principals, one for each department. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 18 17:35:48 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:35:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> R? Jay F, Shachter wrote: ?We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have.? To this I respond: First, I certainly would not wish to set myself up as one who is capable ?to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us,? despite having some modern math and scientific knowledge. I think such a broad statement goes much too far. Not having any significant knowledge of Greek, I will refrain from commenting on your second example. However the first example you cite regarding Pi and the Rambam is one that I am willing to challenge. You are of course correct about the dating of the formal proof[s] (there are more than one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_%CF%80_is_irrational), date to modern, post Rambam times. However, it is very possible and probably likely that the Rambam intuited this on his own, even if without the benefit of a formal proof, that Pi had to be or was most likely to be irrational. I know I did so and probably most reasonably good students of math do so as well, long before they are aware of any formal proof for that fact. One reason for this is the well known method to approximate the value of Pi to any precision desired (even if very slow to converge) that requires little more than the knowledge of how to analyze a triangle. Simply inscribe a polygon of N equal isosceles triangles in a circle and calculate its perimeter and then divide by twice the length of the long side (= diameter of the circle). then do the same for N+1, and N+2 etc. a process in theory you could do infinitely many times for greater precision. So to intuit irrationality is very plausible even if not proven in our modern sense. Practically, note, that no matter how far you carry this exercise you will not get a repeating decimal that is the mark of the rational number. So I think you are far from ?judging the credibility? of the Rambam based on this example you cited. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 18 15:33:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:33:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . R' Ben Waxman wrote: > I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth > of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real > need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know > about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." > > The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika > anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant was that once you sell your chameitz there is no *d'Oraisa* need to do a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, and that's why we say the bracha. This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the only reason. Mishneh Brurah 431:2 writes: "Also: Because people are used to chometz all year long, if there is still some in his house and his possession, they made a gezera because he might forget and eat it." Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of the chometz that we found. But this is an error, in my opinion, because the concern raised by the MB was that one might happen to come across some chometz, and thoughtlessly eat it. Mechira will NOT prevent this. Mechira will ONLY remove the chometz from one's ownership, but it will not help against forgetfullness. I would like to close by showing that Bedikah and Mechira BOTH have strengths that the other lacks, and that is why people should do both: Mechira removes all chometz from ownership, regardless of where it might be, and (I think) regardless of my sincerity, but if I didn't clean the house well enough I may have left some around. Bedika removes (or greatly reduces) the chance that I might come across some chometz accidentally, but the chometz that I didn't find is still in my ownership. A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had intended to type!) Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 00:09:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 03:09:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> Message-ID: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day. In his day it was considered acceptable to say "Look, pi is obviously an irrational number", and nobody would lift an eyebrow, because it *is* obvious. Only later did mathematicians start to say, well, yes, it is obvious, but let's see if we can actually prove it. And eventually they did so, and guess what, they confirmed what everyone including the Rambam already knew. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 18 23:13:45 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 08:13:45 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Ben On 4/19/2018 12:33 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant > was that once you sell your chameitz there is no*d'Oraisa* need to do > a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, > and that's why we say the bracha. > > This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do > Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 03:27:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:27:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam and Pi In-Reply-To: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180419102714.GA11722@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:09:29AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a : rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state : it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day... I fully agree. But there is an irony here. When it comes to theolgy, the Rambam holds the chiyuv is to know, ie to believe because they had proof -- not tradition, not pur faith, etc... I think the Rambam believed he had a proof that pi was irrational. However, he had a differnt definition of the word proof. Continuing on this tangent... I think the definition of "proof" and therefore of "Rationalism" changed so much since the Rambam's day, the Rambam really wouldn't qualify as a "Rationalist" in our sense of the word. For example, science wasn't invented yet. The things the Rambam believed about Natural Philosophy were not backed by anything comparable to the rigor of scientific process. (Which itself is only rigorous at narrowing down the search space. Actual theories are constructed inductively, patterns found from a number of examples, and only have Bayesian levels of certainty. There can always be a black swan out there that, once found, requires replacing the theory with a new one. But *disproving* theories? That black swan does with certainty. Jumping back to before this parenthetic digression...) Similarly in math. The Rambam didn't have a modern mathemetician's definition of proof in mind. Even though he knew Euclid. But he did and always expected knowledge to be backed by some kind of proof. Archimedes spent a lot of time trying to "square the circle", i.e. come up with a geometric way of constructing a square with the same area as a circle. Numerous people tried since. This is the same thing as failing to find the rational number that is pi. Say the square they were looking for had sides of length s. So, the are of the square would be s^2. To "square the circle" would mean to find a square whose sides, s, are such that the ratio between s^2 and r^2 is pi, so that the areas s^2 (the square) and pi * r^2 (the circle) are equal. Repeatedly failing to find s by geometric construction eventually led people to conclude it was a fool's errand. By the Rambam's day, it was taken as a given that geometric construction could not find an s, and therefore that the ratio between them, pi, was irrational. (Weirdly, there still could have been a "black swan", the geometric construction that hadn't yet been found. The level of confidence the Rambam had would parellel that of a scientist believing the results of repeated experiment, but not that of a modern methematician.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Apr 19 08:04:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:04:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day >schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a >post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied >began, but initially, it didn't have to. I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was never separate from the study of Torah. He emphasized the importance of unifying Judaism and secular studies. Often speaking of the, "harmonious union of culture and spirituality," he believed that knowledge of the liberal arts would broaden one's understanding of Torah. However, Revel's dedication to Orthodox Jewry was undisputed. For instance, he forbade the use of a female vocalist in the 1926 Music Festival, as a female singer is a violation of Orthodox Jewish law. He did not allow Reform Jews to serve on Yeshiva College's national board of directors. He was also staunchly opposed to mixed seating in synagogues. "He wrote: 'Yeshiva aims at unity, at the creation of a synthesis between the Jewish conception of life, our spiritual and moral teaching and ideals, and the present-day humanities, the scientific conscience and spirit to help develop the complete harmonious Jewish personality, once again to enrich and bless our lives, to revitalize the true spirit and genius of historic Judaism.'" From https://goo.gl/hbRw8S "Rabbi Revel's first step as the new head of RIETS was the creation of an affi liated high school. The high school, Talmudical Academy, had its fi rst entering class in September 1916." Regarding Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin please see "Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin, Torah Education Pioneer in America" The Jewish Press, April 4, 2008, pages 42 & 91. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 03:19:45 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:19:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> References: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <81715a05-f9f9-f57e-95b1-03dc5240cb96@sero.name> On 19/04/18 02:13, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there > is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Nor is there an issur in having hefker chametz sitting in your property, but you have to search for it and put it away or get rid of it, for fear that if you come across it during Pesach you may absentmindedly eat it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Apr 19 07:45:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:45:48 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . I just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this permission? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:33:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:33:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180419153325.GA3724@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:04:09AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. : : From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b : : "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was ... Before the wave in question, but not the cause of the day school explosion. I do not know why this is so hard of a point to get across. Being around first but not starting a trend does not make something the source of the eventual trend. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is flawed reasoning. In fact, he didn't run a day school. And for that matter TA wasn't fully seperate from REITS. It wasn't a HS model that caught on anywhere. The model of day school and HS that actually catches on across American O through the middle of the 20th cent was the product of compromises between R ("Mr") SF Mendolovitch and his parent body. When TA evolved into MTA and BTA, it was because other schools have already created different expectations of what a HS was. Being in the same track as the eventual college degree, so that going from TA to any other college but YC was more like a transfer, was not sellable. (Although it did make AP courses moot; just take a college course in your 3rd year, if you were ready to.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Apr 19 04:25:17 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:25:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach Message-ID: The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately precedes the Amidah. I gave the following response: Soncino gives a very poignant explantion. ?O Lord, open Thou my lips; and my mouth shall declare Thy praise.? David?s lips had been sealed by wrongdoing, because praise of God would then have been blasphemy. If, then, God opened his lips and he was again enabled to offer Him praise, it was a sign that he had been granted pardon. What a profound thought before one of the most prominent and central prayers of our entire liturgy. We are all sinners and hope for the same pardon that King David was granted. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:59:45 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:59:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180419155945.GA30717@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:25:17AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately : precedes the Amidah. Technically, it is part of the Amidah. That's why we say it between ge'ulah and tefillah in Shacharis and Maariv. Unlike "Ki sheim H' eqra", which is only said before the Amidah of Minchah and Mussaf, because there is no Birkhas Ge'ulah, and therefore no problem of interruption. This is particularly relevant to a Chazan, as Chazaras haShatz should begin with "H' Sefasai Tiftach", not Birkhas Avos. Tangent, since we're looking at what the pasuq is about. Safah is at the edge. The word is not only used for a lip, but also for the seashore (sefas hayam). The peh is what stands behind the sefasayim. So, when I say this pasuq, and when I have the time and yishuv hadaas to think about what I am saying, my thoughts are about Hashem removing the externalities that block me from expressing my real inner self. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 09:23:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20180419162328.GB30717@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:56:42PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: : We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct : judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. : ... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. : He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although : he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater"... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge to that we know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon am? Mind you, I believe in the value of secular knowledge in-and-of-itself. Not just what you need to increase the likelihood of paying the bills. But I just don't see this particular argument. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 09:25:22 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> On 19/04/18 10:45, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I? just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, > then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no > longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). > > But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I > MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is > no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not > destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this > permission? It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 11:55:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahMusings] The Best Charity Message-ID: <20180419185537.GA11736@aishdas.org> People who both know my own proclivities and read this to the end will understand why I just HAD to share this post by RGS. >From https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/04/the-best-charity/ Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings The Best Charity Apr 19, 18 by R. Gil Student My friend, Rav Shlomo Einhorn, is once again attempting a superhuman feat of Torah teaching. A little over two years ago, he taught Torah for 18 live-streamed hours to raise money for the yeshiva he heads. This year, on Lag Ba-Omer, he will be attempting to break that record by teaching for 19 straight hours. This is a cause worth supporting -- or is it? I. Which Charity? Many people in the Jewish community have achieved varieties of financial success, allowing them the privilege of supporting many charities. This raises questions of communal and philanthropic priorities. Others have limited charity funds but still want to allocate them effectively. The issue is a blessing but also a complex problem, with multiple angles. Rav Hershel Schachter discussed this with me a few years ago in [48]Jewish Action. I would like to explore a specific subject that I have seen discussed in the responsa literature -- what is the best charity if you have to choose only one? In mid-sixteenth century Turkey, a wealthy man passed away without leaving instructions for the disposal of his charity funds. The local rabbis decided that some of that charity money should be given to the deceased's poor brother but the sons of the deceased objected that they should inherit the money and decide what to do with it. The question was brought to the Maharshdam, Rav Shmuel Di Medina of Salonica (Responsa Maharshdam, Yoreh De'ah 158). Maharshdam says that we have to try to determine the deceased's desires for the charity fund. Since in this case we do not know his intentions, we should give the money to the highest level of charity. The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 259) quotes his father, the Rosh, as saying that a town may reallocate to a study hall money that was donated to a synagogue or cemetery. Maharshdam argues that if in a case in which we know with certainty that the donor intended for the money to go to a synagogue we can use it for a study hall, then certainly when we do not know the donor's intention we can use the money to support Torah study. If we give the money to a lesser charity, we risk misusing the donation. II. Higher Torah The question then becomes which Torah study organization receives higher priority. Maharshdam quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 119b) that the world survives because of the Torah study of children, who due to their age are free of responsibility from sin. Additionally, more people doing a mitzvah together has greater merit than fewer people. Therefore, concludes Maharshdam, the money should be given to ththe highest charity -- a large elementary school. Similarly, Rav Ephraim Navon in early eighteenth century Turkey addresses a related question (Machaneh Ephraim (Hilkhos Tzedakah 11). A man donated money to establish in a small town a part-time kollel of ten men studying Torah. However, the town could not find ten men willing to enroll. The donor wished to change the endowment from a kollel to a full-time elementary school teacher. Rav Navon permitted this reallocation for technical reasons but adds that this new purpose is higher than the original because the Torah study of children sustains the world. III. God's Place However, Rav Yosef Eliyahu Chazzan challenges this argument (Ma'arkhei Lev vol. 1 no. 25). He quotes the Gemara (Berakhos 8a) which states that nowadays God only has the four cubits of halakhah. Therefore, He loves the distinguished gates of halakhah more than all the synagogues and other study halls. According to this passage, high-level Torah study merits higher priority than any other study. This seems to contradict the earlier passage, which gives priority to children's Torah study. This question gains greater strength when we note that the priority of high-level Torah has practical implications. Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Tefillah 8:3) rules, based on the above Gemara, that it is better to pray in a study hall than a synagogue. Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 90:18) rules likewise. Since the two passages seem to contradict and the latter is quoted authoritatively, it would seem that an elementary school should not be given priority over adult Torah study. Rav Chaim Palaggi (Chaim Be-Yad nos. 64-65) favors the interpretation of Rav Chazzan. However, he struggles with the many authorities who side with the Maharshdam. Rather than taking a minority view against the majority, in an impressive act of intellectual humility Rav Palaggi adopts a middle position that gives due weight to the majority with which he disagrees. IV. Jewish Behavior Perhaps a reconciliation of the two passages lies in the Rambam's interpretation. Rav Chazzan and Rav Palaggi follow Maharsha's interpretation that the Gemara is praising high-level study of halakhah. In the introduction to his commentary to the Mishnah (ed. Kafach, vol. 1, p. 21), Rambam sees the passage about the four cubits of halakhah as a general declaration about the uniqueness of true loyalty to the letter and spirit of halakhah. Synagogues and study halls may be full of people studying Torah but not enough of those students apply these teachings properly to develop a faithful Torah personality. Only someone who internalizes the messages of halakhah can reach out fully to God. If so, the distinguished gates of halakhah may overlap with elementary schools. Schools that teach proper character traits seem to qualify as remaining within the four cubits of halakhah, whether for adults or children. An elementary school that trains its students to follow the law, to embrace and internalize the messages of Judaism regarding behavior and thought, serves in the same capacity as a high-level kollel. Both types of institutions are distinguished gates of halakhah. Elementary schools have the additional benefit of purity, discussed above. If this is correct, the highest charity would be an elementary school that emphasizes proper behavior and attitudes, a mussar-focused cheder that directs pure children on the proper path. About Gil Student Rabbi Gil Student is the founder, publisher and editor-in-chief of Torah Musings. From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Thu Apr 19 18:08:35 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 01:08:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> ?When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah?? One thing I learned in my years as an attorney is that a rhetorical question is not an argument. I, of course, do not know what Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue to be observant in a work environment. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Fri Apr 20 11:40:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:40:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> References: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20180420184026.GA7707@aishdas.org> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 01:08:35AM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : I, of course, do not know what : Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very : proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates : and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue : to be observant in a work environment. Historical (and hagiographical) accounts portray the request for secular education that would make college and professions possible options came from the target audience, a majority of the parents of Brooklyn, not R "Mr." Mendlowitz. His launching of the HS was by convincing 8th grade parents to keep their sons in TvD "just one more year", as the parents wanted their boys to go to Public HS. That was the importance of getting a real American education had to his customer base. Then, it was another "just one more year" into 10th grade, until he had his first graduating class. There wasn't an issue for him of getting secular education into TvD, it was an issue of getting parents to agree to commit time to limudei qodesh! So of course TvD made a big deal about the quality of their secular studies. The whole point their marketing had to make was that the son can learn Torah without parents feeling afraid their boys would be held back. Getting back to the main conversation: What R-"Mr"-SFM thought is more of a historical issue. My point was that the push for limudei chol in day schools at the time the movement (not the first day school!) was getting started came from the parents, not the idealogues. There is no indication the decision was lechat-khilah, as this wasn't a lechat-khilah situation. Limudei qodesh without a guarantee of pre-college quality education wasn't a vaiable option in most communities, not a choice on the table. Meanwhile, the big voice in American O Rabbinate of the time was the East European Rabbi, and not an ideological immigrant who had a pull to America, but someone who came fleeing either progroms or Nazism. We know the majority of them considered limudei chol an assimilationist force. Or is that too under question? (I used the name "R 'Mr.' SF Mendlowitz" [or misspelled as per the usual pronounciation "-olovitch"] because he asked people to call him "Mr." and therefore I thought it respectful to acknowledge it. Even though here, "R" is the default title for men. Then I was afraid people who didn't know the history would think insult was intended, so I am adding this parenthetic explanation.) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 20th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Tifferes: What role does harmony Fax: (270) 514-1507 play in maintaining relationships? From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:54:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:54:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Some thoughts on the passing of a teacher and friend Message-ID: <5f552137ab7f4015af43f057f925c5ae@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> With the greatest trepidation I will share a few thoughts. I knew (to the extent one can know someone) R'Ozer Yeshaya Glickman Hacohain Z"L for 40 years. In the early years we learned together. He certainly was far more able than I but we did discuss many tum issues over the years. I don't think he would be happy being held up as a unicorn even though his blending of both worlds was the reason he felt he was asked by the Yeshiva to be "on the road" so much. I believe he felt that anyone could do what he did at their own level. When the hurley burleys done the question the yeshiva needs to ask itself imho is have they encouraged (or perhaps should they-my uninformed sense is that RIETS looks at the separate mountain approach as a vision -a la r'ybs) broad lives( a la r'hutner) in any of their best and brightest? do they seek out role models of that nature or only exceptional examples in specific accomplishments (e.g big TC or big $ but not a balancer)? Balancing priorities is a big challenge in life, if one wants to honor R'OYG Z"L imho one might start with some cheshbon hanefesh looking at his balance and its message for us (no two of us will likely reach the same conclusions but that's what is to be expected-it's the process not the results) yhi zichro baruch KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:53:20 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:53:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?R=92YBS-Feminist/Talit_Story?= Message-ID: <9fc9dd88e16649d48fc183b298bbfe74@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I believe this version of the story told by R? S Mandel in Jewish Action-not the ?gotcha? version I?ve heard. When a group of feminists visited him and demanded that he permit them to wear tallitot, he listened to them, showed he understood their reasoning, and proposed that there first be a trial period during which they would wear colored cloaks as tallitot, but without tzitzit and without reciting a berachah. He asked them to note how they feel wearing them and to come back after two weeks and confer with them again. After two weeks, they reconvened, and when the Rav asked these women how they felt, they told him how inspired they felt when wearing the cloaks. The Rav replied that that was excellent, that they should definitely continue wearing the cloaks and praying with kavannah, and that there was no need to wear the tallitot with tzitzit that men wore. Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 22 11:27:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:27:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah is Not Religion Message-ID: We are counting towards Shevuous which commemorates the giving of the Torah. The question is "What is Torah?' The following is from RSRH's essay Sivan I that I have posted at Sivan I (Collected Writings I) The Torah, however, did not spring from the breast of mortal man; it is the message of the God of Heaven and Earth to Man; and it was from the very beginning so high above the cultural level of the people to which it was given, that during the three thousand years of its existence there was never a time yet during which Israel was quite abreast of the Torah, when the Torah could be said to have been completely translated into practice. The Torah is rather the highest aim, the ultimate goal towards which the Jewish nation was to be guided through all its fated wanderings among the nations of the world. This imperfection of the Jewish people and its need of education is presupposed and clearly expressed in the Torah from the very beginning. There is, therefore, no stronger evidence for the Divine origin and uniqueness of the Torah than the continuous backsliding, the continuous rebellion against it on the part of the Jewish people, whose first generation perished because of this very rebellion. But the Torah has outlived all the generations of Israel and is still awaiting that coming age which "at the end of days" will be fully ripe for it. Thus, the Torah manifests from the very beginning its superhuman origin. It has no development and no history; it is rather the people of the Torah which has a history. And this history is nothing else but its continuous training and striving to rise to the unchangeable, eternal height on which the Torah is set, this Torah that has nothing in common with what is commonly called "religion." How hopelessly false is it, therefore, to call this Torah "religion," and thus drag it by this name into the circle of other phenomena in the history of human civilization, to which it does not belong. This is a fundamentally wrong starting point, and it is small wonder that it gives rise to questions such as the following, which have no meaning so far as the Torah is concerned: "You want Judaism to remain the same for ever?" "All religions rejuvenate themselves and advance with the progress of the nations, and only the Jewish 'Religion' wants to remain rigid, always the same, and refuses to yield to the views of an enlightened age?" See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 22 04:12:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 07:12:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav Message-ID: . Tumas meis and sheretz, for example, are supernatural phenomena. If someone has been in contact with tumah, and is infected with that tumah, there is no physical evidence of this infection. We are aware of the tumah if and only if we know about the events that took place, and the status of the things in those events. Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses. But they are spiritual illnesses, not medical ones. And in fact, Torah Sheb'al Peh is chock full of spiritual reasons why a person would become a metzora - Lashon Hara being the most famous of these, miserliness and others being mentioned less frequently. My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve myself in general." (Please note: This post is NOT an attempt to categorize all the many kinds of tumah. The first two paragraphs are designed only to show a similarity between tzaraas and zav, and then to highlight a difference.) Akiva Miller From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:02:03 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:02:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Re: R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 RYL quoted R? Yonasan Eybeshutz: --quote-- For all the sciences are condiments and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impure and how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. ?end quote-- >>>>> ? Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual, or even for every member of the Sanhedrin, to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry.? It is not necessary for all these subjects to be part of the standard yeshiva high school curriculum.? It is only necessary that there be in the world mathematicians, zoologists, chemists, doctors, astronomers and so on.? It is not even necessary that they be Jewish.? It is only necessary that their expertise be accessible when needed.? It is not uncommon that poskim confer with physicians, for example, when they need certain medical information in order to posken shailos in specific situations.? The poskim don?t first have to go to medical school.? ? Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. ?It is necessary that they exist in the world. ?It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies. ? If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:55:19 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:55:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> ? In a message dated 4/9/2018 RYL wrote: ? >> ?There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf --quote-- R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. Hayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, ?through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash?. By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy?. R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): ?. It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. ?.He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. ?. ? --end quote-- To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw from this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL ? >>>>? ? ? To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn: ? [1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ? [2] If you can master the ?seven branches of secular wisdom? before your bar mitzvah, that?s fabulous!? Because after your bar mitzvah you have to be mindful of ?vehagisa bo yomam velayla.???But before your bar mitzvah, you can play ball, roller-skate, and memorize the encyclopedia to your heart?s content. ? [3] Funny you should quote R? Chaim of Volozhin.? The famous Yeshiva of Volozhin did not include any of these seven branches of wisdom in its curriculum.? Anyone happen to remember why and when the Yeshiva of Volozhin closed its doors? ? Let me add a passage written by Rabbi Dr. David Berger (who, BTW, was my Jewish history professor for four wonderful semesters in Brooklyn College): ? --quote? ? Although various Geonim were favorably inclined toward the study of philosophy, it is clear that the curriculum of the advanced yeshivot was devoted to the study of Torah alone?.The private nature of philosophical instruction in the society at large [early medieval intellectual Islamic society] made it perfectly natural for Jews to follow the same course; more important, the curriculum of these venerable institutions [the yeshivot] went back to pre-Islamic days, and any effort to introduce? a curricular revolution into their hallowed halls would surely have elicited vigorous opposition.? ? --end quote? ? [Above is from R? Berger?s essay ?Judaism and General Culture in Medieval Times,? in the book *Judaism?s Encounter with Other Cultures* edited by Jacob J. Schachter.] ? Please note these words:? ?the private nature of philosophical instruction.?? The Vilna Gaon studied secular subjects on his own, as many yeshiva students have done over the years. ? Elsewhere RYL has indicated his desire that the NY govt require chassidishe schools to provide a good secular education to their students. ? You don?t have to impose your preferences on others, or get the government involved to force changes in school curricula. ? I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 01:06:16 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:06:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <6b2084c852a745458c68c6f7836e4477@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn:[1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ================================== IIUC, the Gaon?s theory of limud torah was that there was no such thing as spare time (any time one does not have to be doing something else must be spent learning) Thus assumedly he felt time spent on secular studies was required. Unless one posits that he had a need for ?recreation? which was study of secular studies or that he really only studied them when Torah learning of any sort was forbidden. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 23 05:39:50 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:39:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halacha Yomis - Hafrashas Challah, At Large Factories Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. How does the OU separate Challah at Jewish owned factories that manufacture bread and related items that require Challah separation? Is there a mashgiach separating a piece of dough from every batch? Isn?t that impractical? A. For OU-certified restaurants and caterers, the mashgiach separates Challah from every batch of dough. However, in factories it is not practical to have a mashgiach present each time a batch of dough is made. Instead the OU uses what we call the ?Tevel Matzah system.? Open boxes of matzah that did not have Challah separated from them (i.e. tevel) are placed in these factories next to the mixers. The mashgiach declares that each time a batch of dough is made, a designated piece of the matzah should become Challah and exempt that batch of dough. Even though the matzos have already been baked and the mixer contains unbaked dough, we have already seen that one can separate from baked matzah on raw dough when both are obligated in Challah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Mon Apr 23 06:34:22 2018 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 13:34:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. On Sunday, April 22, 2018, 11:29:56 PM CDT, Toby Katz wrote: > Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. It is necessary that they > exist in the world. It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student > take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. > I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female > physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. How > fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn > Torah day and night that men have! ... > If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") > are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and > potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. Not that this is optimal, Those that have the ability, and desire should spend as much time as they want/need to achieve the Torah knowledge we all rely on to live our lives. We all need Gedolim that these kinds of people become to naser the difficult Shaylos that constantly arise as we progress through time. For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah. This that misdirect those strengths - being urged to use their strengths to learn Torah are in my view shortchanging them. They are discouraging Jews from serving God and his people in the best way they can. Where their strengths where they really lie. More to say - no time. HM Want Emes and Emunah in your life? Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/ From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Mon Apr 23 01:26:05 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:26:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 From: Micha Berger > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us > they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon > am? What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, and what they are teaching us, whilst simultaneously utilising our understanding of the era's terms and sciences to better probe the intentions of the original statements. Dovid Rubin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 08:15:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 11:15:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423151544.GD1065@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 08:26:05AM +0000, D Rubin wrote: : > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, ... : > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon : > am? : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) ... Just to clear up the word, I meant non-posqim. I needed something that meant someone who wasn't "from LOR on up", and therefore shouldn't be pasqening for themselves. : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper : understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, : and what they are teaching us... Yes, as I said, I too believe in a role for limudei chol beyond the utilitarian study of things that will eventually help you pay the bills. I was addressing what I thought was a flaw in a particular argument. There is enough Torah to keep one busy for a lifetime without topics that require a formal secular education. The question is what to do when "Mah shelibo chafeitz" is something like hil' qidush hachodesh. Which brings me to a totally new aspect of this discussion: formal vs informal education. Secular study in one's spare time was the norm in places like Volozhin and Slabodka. (Although Slabodka students were more likely to be reading Freud...) To the extent that RSRH thought Volozhin were "fellow travelers on the path of Torah im Derekh Eretz" and described them as such to his followers when fundraisers for the yeshiva approched Frankfurt aM. And yet the same Litvisher rabbanim and RY would campaign against university and formal education. Perhaps their primary concern was leaving the bubble prematurely leading to assimilation, rather than expecting their talmidim to define away the concept of "free time" or afraid of which ideas their students might be exposed to. Although the Alter of Slabodka would make a case-by-case diagnosis and give each student different guidelines, at least we could say there were stduents for whom he thought secular study on one's own was appropriate. And apparently the norm. Remember, these are the same bachurim for whom the leading pass-time when not learnig was chess. Yeshiva wasn't for everyone; the guys who went were a bunch of intellecturals. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From t613k at aol.com Mon Apr 23 09:33:07 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:33:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <162f35a0504-c8b-11ca6@webjas-vab001.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Mon Apr 23 12:43:36 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:43:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: << I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies.>> And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of science the women should pasken the question -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:00:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:00:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423210037.GA8959@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:43:36PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of : science the women should pasken the question Except that it's arguable that pro forma women can't pasqen. It means a poseiq needs to know enough to ask intelligent questions of the expert. Even if the experts would end up being women, BTs who studied the subject before accepting ol mitzvos, unobservant Jews or non-Jews. Which is a good deal of knowledge, but doesn't require years of formal education. When I brought this thread over from Areivim to Avodah, my intent was not to have a bunch of pro-secular education posts. Rather, my focus was on the eilu va'eilu of saying that even though I believe in the value of secular education, I cannot say it's the One True Derekh. For example, the gemara only says that many tried to follow Rashbi's Torah-only derekh and failed. Not that R Yishmael was right. But that pragmatically, one worked for the masses and the didn't. And if the context changes, so that the welfare state makes it possible for more to succeed toing things Rashbi's way? The gemara says nothing against it. Assuming they don't bankrupt the state that way or other Modern Israeli political, governmental and economic issues, but again, that's the balebatishe problem of the system failing. Even if it were chilul hasheim issues (just to pre-empt that line of reasoning), that's not about eschewing secular studies. I would say the gemara leaves both options open. And for today... For every kid who leaves chareidi life going OTD because they feel hobbled by the lack of secular education, or the lack of worldliness in general, or just plain constricted by the paucity of their choices of how to live as adults there is a Mod-O kid who leaves because of too much opennees, a lack of structure, an attraction to the other lifestyles they're exposed to, a feeling that their parents are fooling themselves with compromise... To survive, we need all our options. That said, I find it interesting that none of the arguments in favor of limudei chol actually involved what I consider their real value: There is too much we can't learn from Torah. Not that it's not there, just that we don't know how to extract it. Like when RALichtenstein saw the Chevra Qadisha try to rush the aveilim at one levayah through so that they could begin another, he commented that had they read Hamlet they never could have acted that way. Not that such middos aren't in Torah sources, but they're more accessible sometimes in literature. And for all the awe one may get from the Wisdom of the Author when learning Torah, it hits harder when you see Chokhmas haBorei in the physical world, outside the context of "religious studies". Also, by studying other topics one learns other modes of thought, and becomes more able to think in other ways, reach other conclusions. Mathemeticians, programmers and lawyers all learn a precision of thought and attention to detail that helps in real-life problem solving as well as learning. Vekhulu for other displines. In short... The value I find in limudei chol only starts with knowing more and having more data to put into the Torah and the parnasah mills. They change how one thinks in ways that improve both Torah and life skills. Simply by having more tools in the toolbox. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 11:08:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. When I was a kid, it was a big deal that we couldn't buy chameitz from Walbaum's, including the supermarket whose parking lot was directly across the street. It means that for a couple of months, I couldn't be sent to the store on Fri for many of those last-minute purchases. I presume (given who my parents would have asked in that era) that was R' Fabian Schoenfeld's pesaq. But as the broohaha over beer this year indicates, there is a machloqes. We could view the sale as valid, and the Jew wrongfully selling merchandise that belongs to someone else. Theft, rather than chameitz she'avar alav es haPesach. Which would imply that in our case, where bi'ur chameitz is done later than the rav's mechirah, we would view it as wrongfully destroying someone else's chameitz. Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? I would think the latter. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 14:07:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:07:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> On 23/04/18 14:08, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. > > With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim > who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) > that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to > treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But here your actions show that you were completely serious about the mechira, but you didn't intend this to be included in it. The shtar you signed doesn't specifically say this *is* included. Its description of what's included very much depends on your intentions as revealed by your actions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend to include ANY item? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 23 14:51:13 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:51:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <07.CD.29097.DC55EDA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:31 AM 4/23/2018, RN Toby Katz wrote: >I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a >reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I >never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would >never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the >option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? >? >? >? >--Toby Katz I find your terminology "normal Orthodox schools" somewhat surprising in the context of Chassidic yeshivas. What exactly do you mean by this terminology when contrasted with Chassidic schools? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 21:57:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:57:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/04/18 17:49, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be > : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from > : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a > : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. > > But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when > the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions > showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or > burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend > to include ANY item? Again, you are conflating two questions, one of which depends on your intentions and one which does not: 1) Is the mechira valid? Yes, regardless of your intentions. 2) What is included in the mechira. Certainly anything explicitly included in the shtar. But the shtar's language is vague; does it apply to *this* piece of bread? Only if you meant it to. That which you've set aside for breakfast is clearly not included, even if the mechira happened early in the morning. Ditto for that which you set aside to burn. Did it include an item on your store shelves, which you ended up selling just 20 minutes later? We can approach this two ways: a) It did, because you intended it to. Your intention was that your inventory should not become treif; this is inventory, you don't want it to be treif, therefore it's included. b) I bo'is eima, fine, let it be as you say, and the act of selling an item -- whether 20 minutes after the zman or 20 minutes before the end of Achron Shel Pesach -- shows that it was not included. Even if we were to accept this proposition (which I do not), whatever remains on the shelves that you did *not* sell remains included. Not only did you do nothing to indicate an intention to exclude it, you clearly did intend to include it, since your whole purpose was that it should not become treif. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 22:18:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:18:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name>, <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore > guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is > still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between > chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or > moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? > > I would think the latter. > ?????- Iiuc they sold the whole business, not just the stock Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 24 04:53:01 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 07:53:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira. There have been conjectures that the person's actions might reveal his intentions, or maybe not. But it seems to me that the starting point should be that which has been mentioned in writing. And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser degree of detail. In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this thread. But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other details. It seems to me that the "stam daas" of this person would be that he is selling only what is on the list, and the bittul is on everything else. Akiva Miller From hankman at bell.net Tue Apr 24 06:15:47 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:15:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: <0401042908D24434A2102FDD03A26A7A@hankPC> R?n T. Katz wrote: In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz I would go well beyond that and possibly suggest that when done ?the right way? that certain limudei chol? (read math and natural sciences) could be a better and more efficient way of attaining emunah including drosh vachakor and yiras harommeimus and the goal of understanding ?beHai? boro osom, or the gevuros of masseh bereishis, the intricacies of the olam koton and the actual vast olom not to mention the numerous sugios in shas and halacha that require knowledge of the real world and it science (its understanding). I propose a thought for consideration, that while for some yechidim their level of Torah learning is sufficiently high that Torah is the best and most efficient path to attain these goals. Unfortunately for many (most) of us, our level of Torah havanah is not even close to that level and as a practical fact a more direct path to getting a start on these Torah goals is through studying the briah and its science put there by G-d in the maseh beraishis. Someone like the GRA whose level of Torah study most of us can not even begin to imagine would relegate his study of science to only when it was not in opposition to his limud of Torah (such as the B?HK etc) as the best manner (for him) of achieving this goal was through his limud of Torah. But for most of us to take this as also applying to our situation is wishful thinking. As many times as I learn parshs Bereishis, my havana of ?beHai? boro osom has not really grown very much nor my level derosh vachakor. For us it may be a lekatchila outside the B?HK to set times for scientific study if done with the appropriate approach in support of our Torah understanding and growth in yira and emunah even when not just for parnasa. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 24 08:12:26 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:12:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Some_FAQs_about_the_OU=92s_=93Tevel_Mat?= =?windows-1252?q?zah_system=94?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Here are some FAQs about the OU?s ?Tevel Matzah system? that were described in yesterday?s Halacha Yomis. Q1. What would happen if the box of tevel matzos that was left in the factory was accidentally discarded? A1. If the matzo is discarded, the Tevel Matzah system becomes in-operative. Because of the concern that the tevel matzos might be lost, the OU also arranges a backup Hafrashas Challah each day in the OU offices to cover any factory that did not have a proper Hafrashas Challah done on premises. Q2. Is there any special reason that the OU chooses to use matzos for their tevel system? Couldn?t plain dough or bread be used instead for this purpose? A2. The main advantage of using matzos for Hafrashas Challah is that they have a very long shelf-life. A matzah can easily last from one year to the next and still be edible. Another obvious advantage of using matzah is that it can remain in the factories on Pesach. Q3. From how many batches of dough can one separate Challah using one box of tevel matzos? A3. When the mashgiach places the box of matzos in the factory, he declares that 1/5 of a gram of matzah should become Challah for each subsequent batter that will be produced. Considering that a box of matzos contains approximately one pound of matzos (454 grams), this means that a box of matzos will cover the Challah for more than 2,200 batches of dough. Even if a factory makes ten batches a day, a single box of matzos will last for over 6 months! Q4. Given that a box of matzah can be used to separate Challah for over 2,000 batches of dough, if a factory only makes one or two batches of dough a day, could a single box of matzos be used for several years? A4. No. One cannot take Challah from dough made from wheat that grew in one year on a batch of dough made from wheat that grew in a different year. The cutoff for determining which year the wheat grew is Rosh Hashanah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 24 08:24:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:33pm EDT, R Akiva Miller wrote: : This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do : Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer : to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the : only reason. I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? The MB's other reason (gezeira) and discussion thereof, elided. : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of : the chometz that we found... "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? ... : A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my : chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already : removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for : me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had : intended to type!) Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? A shade over 6 days later, on Tue, Apr 24 at 7:53am EDT, RAM wrote: : I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone : referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira... : And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two : major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person : who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller : must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser : degree of detail. I thought there are so many versions, referencing "the text" or even "a text" is meaningless. I therefore viewed the issue when you raised it last week (?) morein terms of: Does your LOR address this issue, and if so, how? : In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, : I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must : take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual : intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this : thread. Bitul and "all my chameitz" are mutually exclusive sets. It it's hefqeir, it's not mine. (BTW, in Israeli Aramaic the word was "hevqer", which I kept on reading as though it was "the cattle.") Espectially is we allow later actions as evidence of what was intent at the time of the sale. : But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that : he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", : and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other : details... Without "and any other chameitz which may be"? That version would solve all your problems, but affords less protection against issur. Since all the mechirah is belt-n-suspenders with bitul anyway, no big deal. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony? From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 24 09:03:23 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:03:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> References: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1df6ecc6-8417-7966-0620-412e6633fa66@sero.name> On 24/04/18 11:24, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of > hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? Yes, I think it is. Hefker, especially when the item is still in your property, depends on your willing renunciation. If you still regard it as yours then it's not hefker, regardless of your declaration. Either because the insincere declaration is defective, or because the moment you think of it as yours you regain it through kinyan chatzer. > : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point > : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) > : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of > : the chometz that we found... > > "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? Bedika != Bittul. By definition Bedika cannot get rid of what is not found. > Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? I don't see why not. If you inherited an unspecified estate you can surely sell it as a lot, sight unseen, and leave it to the buyer to discover what exactly is included in it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Tue Apr 24 23:26:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 06:26:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hand washing Message-ID: The gemara (Shabbat 62b) states that being derogatory (mzalzel) concerning ntilat yadaim(hand washing) causes poverty. Rava then clarifies that this is only talking about the case where one doesn't wash at all. The gemara then rejects Rava's interpretation based on R' Chisda saying that he had washed his hands with a lot of water and got a lot of good (in return?). As part of a broader shiur, I was wondering : 1. Is it possible that water was not as readily available then and so this focus on the amount of water might not be applicable today? 2. Why would the gemara accept a rejection of Rava without a more specific refutation source? 3. How is R' Chisda's statement a source of rejection? (Rava could well agree that using more than the minimum is praiseworthy but still hold poverty only comes for those who don't wash at all) That's enough to start :) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Tue Apr 24 10:57:13 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:57:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed during the Rav?s lifetime. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 24 05:30:39 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Apr 22, 2018 09:28:10 pm Message-ID: <15245910390.9bBE36.37982@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge [s]o that we > know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto > explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we > question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with > emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? > > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the > metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) > that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such > things. But the hamon am? > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- correction. At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that requires supernatural explanation. Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass them. There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 06:05:39 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:05:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <23688d43-325f-1109-9d85-fcb94a75b7e7@aishdas.org> On 4/24/2018 1:57 PM, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit > and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav's talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav's lifetime. The one that Rabbi Mayer Twersky quotes is in the name of an impeccable source, Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, who was personally involved. KT, YGB From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 07:25:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:25:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425142550.GB15047@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:57:13PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit : and others tell a different version. He believes one... Actually, you can go see RSM's version for yourself. No need to mix RJR into this. From the current Jewish Action: https://jewishaction.com/the-rav/observing-the-rav > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav?s lifetime. Actually, the "a woman" version was. I remember the discussion in shul, because I thought that the story as told belittled the woman too much. (Unlike RSM's impression, "Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances.") Tamar Ross (2004) records R' Meiselman and the Frimer Brothers telling the story https://books.google.com/books?id=vkvNNioH--4C&lpg=PA91&pg=PA91#v=onepage I found R' Meiselman (published Fall 1998) here (near the bottom of pg 9 [5th page of the PDF]): http://bit.ly/2HQBwHm And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 They say they were told the story by Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, former rabbi of the YI of Brokline, and that it happened in the mid-70s. Remember (unlike RSM) your "several of the Rav's talmidim knew the NY RY, not the Rabbi of Boston. There is really enough detail in R' Meiselman and R's Frimer version to rule out the story being legend. I would attribute RSM's version to memory drift; it has been some 40 years since the events, after all. 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? From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Apr 25 07:37:22 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:37:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Translation of Makkos / Binfol oyivcha al tismach In-Reply-To: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> References: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> Message-ID: Revisiting an issue that comes up repeatedly--do classical sources support the approach that we should feel sorrow for / not rejoice over, the suffering of our persecuting enemies. Yeshayahu (15:5) declares, ?My heart cries out? over the destruction of Israel?s wicked enemy, Moab. TargumYonason (and Radak and Metsudos) take this as the prophet quoting the enemy. But Rashi takes it as the prophet expressing his own heart?s thoughts, and he writes, ?The prophets of Israel are unlike the prophets of the umos ha-olom. Bilaam sought to uproot Israel for no reason. But the prophets of Israel [who had good cause to wish for their persecutors? destruction, nevertheless] mourn over the punishments coming upon the nations (miss-o-ninnim al pur-annos ha-ba-ah al ha-umos).?? (Artscroll cites both explanations, but adds a commentary by ''Sod Yesharim (I could not find it on HebrewBooks.org) who, like Rashi, takes the prophet to be referring to his own grief, but contra Rashi declares, ''The prophet had no cause to grieve over the downfall of the wicked nation of Moab, or of other unworthy nations. However, every nation had its own type of impurity that tempted the righteous and was a challenge that they had to overcome. When they did so successfully, they grew in stature. Now, with the demise of Moab, that particular challenge disappeared, and with it the potential for growth.) Also, I did have occasion to directly ask Rav Dovid Feinstein what he meant in the Kol Dodi Hagadah by ''shofchim l'eebud ha-makos and we don't drink them.'' Did he mean we pour out the wine out of sympathy for the Egyptians' suffering the makkos (as I had translated it), or did he mean that after taking the drops of wine out of the cups, we throw them (the drops of wine representing the makkos) out as waste, rather than drinking them (as R. Zev Sero insisted). And how that relates to the issue of ''al tismach.'' Sorry, but he did not commit to either way, comfortable with both approaches towards rejoicing over the downfall of Israel's enemies. Nevertheless, by my request, the next printing of the Kol Dodi Haggadah should have the translation changed to R. Zev's. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 08:32:13 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:32:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". Does _anybody_ here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? Perhaps a bar mitzvah boy the first time his tefillin "counts", or, perhaps the first time one dons a tallis at shul after marriage, or the first time one does birchas hachama? (As a baal teshuva, I have had a plethora of opportunities to do a mitzvah for the first time, and sometimes I get a spiritual high. And it's quite possible that I didn't do all of them correctly the first time, and that sometimes I wasn't even yotzie b'deived. No, I don't check my tzitzis every time I put on my tallis). Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce inappropriate? The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an inappropriate thought? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 25 13:03:11 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 16:03:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages Message-ID: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:26 AM 4/25/2018, Jay F. Shachter wrote: Let me begin with Daas Torah. Some years ago Rav Zelig Epstein, ZT"L was describing how the Mir Yeshiva left Vilna and got to Japan. He pointed out that almost all of the yeshivas were at this time located in Vilna and that almost all of the hanhalla of the yeshivas were opposed to leaving Vilna, because they feared that the Russians would arrest the yeshiva boys for trying to leave the "Communist paradise." However, several yeshivas boys were strongly in favor of leaving. The following is from my article Rabbi Aryeh Leib Malin And The Mir Yeshiva Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 154 The Jewish Press, February 2, 2018. "Rabbi Malin [a top Mir student] felt it was a matter of life and death that the Mir Yeshiva students leave Vilna. He is reported to have said, "I will get a gun and shoot anybody who tries to stop us from leaving!" (This was verified for me by Reb Zalman Alpert, who served as a librarian at Yeshiva University for many years and told me he heard it from two former Mir Yeshiva students.) " When one of the boys heard that the yeshiva students went against what the hanhalla said, he asked, "But what about Daas Torah?" Reb Zelig replied (and I do not know if he was serious or kidding), "This was before Daas Torah was invented." I was told that Reb Chaim Shmuelevitz, who was against the yeshiva leaving, later apologized to Reb Leib with tears in his eyes. The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. Regarding asking and following what a rov tells you, I am convinced that when they ask in the World to Come "Why did you do this or that?" and someone replies, "I asked a Rov and he told me to do this." the response will be, "You were given free will and expected to exercise it." Certainly one needs to ask a rov difficult halachic questions, but need one ask about most things in daily life? A friend of mine who is a therapist told me that some of his patients are afraid to do almost anything on their own. How sad. Even the Avos were not perfect and RSRH points this out. See his essay Lessons From Jacob and Esau (Collected Writings VII) where he points out that Yitzchok and Rivka made errors in educating Eisav. See also his commentary on what Avraham did when he said that Sarah was his sister. He follows the RAMBAN who says Avraham made a "big" mistake when he did this. Sadly there are some who do believe that whatever scientific assertions Chazal made must be valid. Rabbi Moshe Meiselman is one such person. His book Torah, Chazal and Science takes this position. It is hard for me to understand how a nephew of RYBS can hold this view. Regarding believing things that are not true, see my article "My Mind Is Made Up. Do Not Confuse Me With The Facts!" The Jewish Press, August 25, 2004 pages 7 & 77. YL >It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > >Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what >you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when >you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages >have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same >moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- >correction. > >At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the >moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the >dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on >yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, >the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and >advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly >caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). > >Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this >mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still >we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on >our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in >matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, >even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in >Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit >when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must >rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. >If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will >increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where >the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same >reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. > >That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know >already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, >and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, >and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take >literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and >you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that >requires supernatural explanation. > >Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, >and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes >you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like >them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a >Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your >abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is >a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some >of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. > >You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different >species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that >every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid >Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all >scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a >vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us >closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different >species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you >will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are >different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do >is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass >them. > >There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original >topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than >bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, >that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education >inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for >all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and >progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some >people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the >Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded >innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There >is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he >is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will >never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that >he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. > > > Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter > 6424 N Whipple St > Chicago IL 60645-4111 > (1-773)7613784 landline > (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice > jay at m5.chicago.il.us -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 14:03:32 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish Message-ID: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> >From The Jewish Press , by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev [literally, "the fish of the sword"] is kasher. Why is it widely considered to be not kosher, then? Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different consistency - or something like that - from those of other fish. So he decided it was a treife fish. But that's absolutely not correct. The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag hacherev is kasher. Professor [Shlomo] Sternberg, a big genius in learning and math, published an essay maybe 20 years ago in which he writes that Rabbi Soloveitchik asked him to conduct research on the status of swordfish. He did. He showed Rabbi Soloveitchik the scales of a swordfish and Rav Soloveitchik said, "It's a kashere fish!" Professsor Sternberg writes that he still has the envelope with the scales he showed Rav Soloveitchik in his Gemara Chullin. If the commentaries on the Shuchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev is kosher, how can Rabbi Tendler claim it isn't? Rabbi Tendler claims "dag hacherev" is a different fish. It's not true. But Rabbi Tendler did a service to the Orthodox Jewish community because at the time there were Conservative rabbis who were giving hashgachas, so he laughed them out of existence and said they don't know what they're talking because [they were giving swordfish a hechsher when] swordfish is really treif. So the Orthodox realized you can't rely on the Conservatives. L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue, but Rabbi Tendler accomplished his goal. Well, that's a lot of egg (roe?) on my face after what I said repeatedly in the 1990s in soc.culture.jewish[.moderated] O/C/R Wars... But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. "L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! There is a tie in here to what R JFSchachter posted here yesterday (? no time zone) at 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) under the subject line "Judging The Credibility Of The Sages": > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what > you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when > you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages > have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same > moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- > correction. I was okay attributing ignorance to Chazal, but not violating epstemic virtue like "making up an answer". I would think that by the end of the period, subconsious biases wouldn't have made it into the final result. > At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the > moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the > dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah... Except that daas Torah only requires belief that one is obligated to listen to halachic leadership on social and personal issues where the unknowns are not halachic (or even aggadic). Not that they are necessarily right, nor even that they are more likely to be right. (Infallibility was never Agudah doctrine; but you do find it among the population.) And I am not sure that when it comes to halakhah Chazal *can* be wrong. It's like saying that the house john built is inconsistent with the house John built. Pesaq is constitutive, not truth finding; expecially when you are the nation's authoritative halachic source (eg the Sanhedrin or shas as keSanhedrin, depending on when you think the Sanhedrin actually closed its doors). A pesaq made by CHazal based on incorrect science may still be correct halakhah because they define correctness. We would need to revisit our recurring tereifos discussion. But in any case: 1- I refuse to believe Chazal "made up answers" of had other epistemic moral failings (as a group, including peer review, what made it into shas, etc...) And I wonder how emunas chakhamim would work without that kind of assertion. 2- And yet, that may have happened here, among our contemporary posqim. No one is interested in fixing the science error (among those who believe it is in error) because C loses this way. 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? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 12:49:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 15:49:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425194944.GC6722@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:32:13AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 : > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 : : Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav : concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of : 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" : and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". ... : The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is : *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is : doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an : inappropriate thought? I think it's more that the high isn't from the halachic aspect of what they're doing. Rather than it having to be halkhah qua halakhah. I am not sure that "one is doing ratzon H'" is different than "being mequyam a mitzvah" anyway. As for "getting closer to H'", Litvaks would talk more about sheleimus than deveiqus. IMHO this is part of RYBS being, fundamentally, a Brisker. Here's a quote I feel is on a similar theme, from "The Rav: The World of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik", starting on pg 54: Judaism must be explained and expounded on a proper level. I have read many pamphlets that have been published in the United States with the purpose of bringing people closer to Judaism. There is much foolishness and narrishkeit in some of these publications. For instance, a recent booklet on the Sabbath stressed the importance of a white tablecloth. A woman recently told me that the Sabbath is wonderful, and that it enhances her spiritual joy when she places a snow-white tablecloth on her table. Such pamphlets also speak about a sparkling candelabra. Is this true Judaism? You cannot imbue real and basic Judaism by utilizing cheap sentimentalism and stressing empty ceremonies. Whoever attempts such an approach underestimates the intelligence of the American Jew. If you reduce Judaism to religious sentiments and ceremonies, then there is no role for rabbis to discharge. Religious sentiments and ceremonies are not solely posessed by Orthodox Jewry. All the branches of Judaism have ceremonies and rituals. This is not the only reason why we must negate such a superficial approach. Today in the United States, American Jewish laymen are achieving intellectual and metaphysical maturity. They wish to discover their roots in depth. We will soon reach a point in time where the majority of our congregants will have academic degrees. Through the mediums of white tablecloths and polished candelabras, you will not bring these people back to Judaism. It is forbidden to publish pamphlets of this nature, which emphasize the emotional and ceremonial approaches. There is another reason why ceremony will not influence the American Jew. In the Unitesd States today, the greatest master of ceremony is Hollywood. If a Jew wants ceremony, all he has to do is turn on the television set. If our approach stresses the ceremonial side of Judaism rather than its moral, ethical, and religious teachings, then our viewpoint will soon become bankrupt. The only proper course is that of Ezekiel's program for the priests: "And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and the common, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean" [Ezekiel 44:23] The rabbi must teach his congregants. He must deepen their appreciation of Judaism and not water it down. If we neutralize and compromise our teachings, then we are no different than the other branches of Judaism. By RYBS's standards, being moved by music at a kumzitz is "ceremony". Meanwhile, Chassidus, Mussar, RSRH, Qabbalah-influenced Sepharadim (following the Chida and Ben Ish Hai) and numerous other derakhim have no problem with ceremony. For that matter, before it became minhag, specifying specific patterns of hand washing (RLRLRL or RRLL) was also ritual once. And many of those Academics that RYBS foresaw want their Nesivos Shalom, Tish, kumzitz.... Neochassidus is a big thing in YU. This idea that ceremonies that aren't defined by halakhah are inherently empty and its sentimentalism is cheap rather than reinforcing the cognitive and halachic, is, as I said, only something a Brisker would write. Even within Brisk... RYBS went further in this direction than did the Brisker Rav (R Velvel, his uncle). The BR holds that one makes berakhos on minhagim that have a cheftzah shel mitzvah (eg lighting a Chanukah menorah in shul), and that the Rambam and Rabbeinu Tam don't argue about that. What they do argue about is whether Chatzi Hallel is close enough to Hallel to qualify for a berakhah. This is a non-started for RYBS, who requires minhagim have a cheftzah shel mitzvah or else they're ceremoial. RYBS even fit the minhagim of the 3 Weeks and 9 Days to fit this shitah by insisting they must follow what was already established aveilus and sheloshim, respectively. Oops. I just notied I'm repeating something I worte a decade ago. See . At least the berkhah-in-minhag part was posted in 2011, so that this post had the value of combining the two earlier ones. Beqitzur, I don't know of two many people (aside from our mutual rebbe-chaver) who would agree with RYBS on this one. 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? From zev at sero.name Wed Apr 25 14:37:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:37:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish In-Reply-To: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 25/04/18 17:03, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish > because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with > scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is > young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are > elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) > So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question > seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify > as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. There can be no question that a fish does *not* have to keep its scales to remain kosher. The posuk says fish only have to have their scales in the water, not when they leave the water. A fish that sheds its scales when caught is kosher, and no rabbi has the right to say otherwise. And I don't see a difference between shedding when caught and shedding on reaching adulthood. As I understand R Tendler's claim, it was that swordfish never have true scales, that even the ones they have as juveniles are not kaskasim. And this seems not to be true. BTW R Ari G and R Ari Z dispute the claim that adults swordfish (or landed swordfish) lose all their scales. They claim that this is the result of not examining adult landed fish closely enough, and that if one does one finds kosher scales still attached to the skin. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Apr 25 16:33:33 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 23:33:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: <06705270-E689-4937-BAAF-0C7AE035E469@tenzerlunin.com> I simply note that (a) all the stories were published after the Rav died and (b) all appear to be least first degree if not more hearsay. (It?s unclear how R. Mandel knows the story. His article doesn?t say if he saw it, heard it from the Rav, or heard it from someone else.) But the difference between the two ways the story is told is striking and, I believe, calls it into question. But I guess we?ll never know. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 26 05:25:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:25:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sifrei torah Message-ID: <6fef9ae673744a11a2ede85a210fb782@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Can anyone point me to information concerning the history of the difference between the physical element of Ashkenazi (atzei chaim) and Eidot Hamizrach (containers) Sifrei Torah? The differences in the timing and physics of hagba and glila ? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Apr 26 10:06:01 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 17:06:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Unknown Days of the Jewish Calender Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NZ9BN1 This coming week, an unsuspecting person wishing to catch a minyan, who walks into a random shul in many places around the world, might be in for a surprise. After the Shemoneh Esrei prayer on Sunday there will be no Tachanun. On Monday there will be Selichos; and on Thursday there again won?t be Tachanun! Why would this be? No Tachanun generally signifies that it is a festive day[1]; yet, no other observances are readily noticeable. As for the reciting of Selichos on Monday, they are usually reserved for a fast day; yet no one seems to be fasting! What is going on? See the above URL for more about this. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 19:43:43 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 22:43:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> On 4/25/2018 11:32 AM, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: >> And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at >> (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav > concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense > of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something > else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". > Does anybody here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? ... > Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah > was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce > inappropriate? > The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he > is thinking that he is being mekayum a mitzvah?... For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a problem. KT, YGB From meirabi at gmail.com Thu Apr 26 15:58:32 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 08:58:32 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach Message-ID: Yeshayahu (15:5) My heart cries out over the destruction of Israels wicked enemy, Moab. Rashi understands, the prophet is expressing his own agony - The prophets of Israel, unlike the prophets of the world, like Bilaam, seek to destroy us without provocation. Our prophets however, mourn for our persecutors when they suffer Divine punishments. As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness, that is certainly more of an intense and personal loss than the millions of Egyptians who perished - but we mourn them all from the perspective of lost potential, lost opportunity to be loyal to HKBH, and HKBH's failure to successfully persuade them to open their eyes and do what is right. That is why we spill wine from the cup we use for Hallel - HKBH's praise is incomplete, He was not fully successful - the gift He gave humanity, free choice, can, and was, used against Him. Obviously the cup should not be topped up. Each plague was a lesson and a plea from HKBH to all who witnessed these astonishing events - do the right thing, reconise that I am the King of all kings, The Master of the universe. Every Yid deserves 600,000 to attend his funeral. The Gemara explains - As it was given So it is taken away. Every Y, even the most Poshut or unlearned, is a potential recipient of the entire Torah and we must visualise their departure as the loss of that tremendous potential. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 26 18:35:26 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:35:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2499630f-df1d-04ef-9897-ef18103da093@sero.name> On 26/04/18 18:58, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of > descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness Where is this written? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri Apr 27 01:04:10 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 10:04:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> References: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> Message-ID: When I was in yeshiva, one of my rabbanim told us that we should dance when we "get" a Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Ben On 4/26/2018 4:43 AM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: > For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a > problem. > > KT, > YGB From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 29 07:49:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 17:49:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: A while ago we had a discussion about farfetched ukimtas. In yesterday's daf (Zevachim 15) the Gemara made a very startling statement about farfetched ukimtas. The Gemara has a question about whether Holachah without walking is Pasul or not. The Gemara brought a proof from a braisa If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher (even though when it spills, some if it spreads out towards the Mizbeach, i.e. Holachah without walking). The Gemara answered that none of the blood spread towards the Mizbeach.The Gemara then asked, surely, it spreads in all directions! The Gemara gave 3 answers 1: It fell on an incline. 2: It fell in a crevice. 3: The blood was very thick, and almost congealed. It did not spread at all. Then the Gemara made the following startling statement to reject these answers: It is UNREASONABLE to say that the Tana taught about such unusual cases The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? I brought an example from Bava Basra 19-20 which had at least as farfetched ukimtas and yet the Gemara didn't think they were unreasonable. Here is the example that I quoted from Bava Basra A Baraisa states that the following block Tumah, grass that was detached and placed in a window, or grew there by itself; rags smaller than three fingers by three fingers; a dangling limb or flesh of an animal; a bird that rested there; a Nochri who sat there, a (i.e. stillborn) baby born in the eighth month; salt; earthenware Kelim; and a Sefer Torah. The Gemara then proceeds to ask questions on each one that it is only there temporarily and the Gemara gives ukimtas, qualifications, for each thing to explain why it is not there temporarily. 1. Grass The grass is poisonous. The wall is ruined (so the grass will not destory it) The grass is 3 tefachim from the wall and does not harm the wall but bends into the window 2. Rags The material is too thick to be used for a patch It's sackcloth which is rough and would scratch the skin. It's not sackcloth, it's just rough like sacklocth 3. Dangling limb of an animal The animal is tied up and can't move. It's a non-kosher animal. It's a weak animal. 3. Bird The bird is tied down. It's a non-kosher bird. It's a Kalanisa (a very lean bird). It's not really a kalanisa, it's just lean like a kalanisa. 4. A non-Jew He is tied up. He is a ?????. He is a prisoner of the king 5. Salt The salt is bitter. There are thorns in it. It's resting on earthernware so it does not harm the wall. 5. Sefer Torah It's worn out. It's burial will be in the window. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 29 22:24:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 05:24:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? -/////---- One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the already known outcome. Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon Apr 30 01:22:56 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:22:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched >> ukimtas? ...` > One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition > as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the > already known outcome. It doesn't sound that way from the Gemara, The Gemara goes as follows: 1. Ula makes a statement that Holachah without walking is Pasul. 2. The Gemara brings a proof against him from a Mishna (where the blood spills, etc.) 3. The Gemara answers for Ula with an ukimta for the Mishna which doesn't contradict his din 4. The gemara says the ukimta is unreasonable Nowehere does it sound like we are reconciling sources with a known outcome. It sounds like a typical give and take found all over shas where ukimtas are simply accepted. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 29 18:59:29 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 21:59:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Question from the Book of Yechezqeil Message-ID: In Yechezqeil, 44:31, he writes that a Kohen shall not eat nevayla (or T?refah). Nobody can eat it so why is there a prohibition for just the Kohen? I?m aware of what Kimchi and Rashi say, but it seems to be a weak explanation. To say the Kohen needed a special warning is stretching it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:55:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:55:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:24:19AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition : as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with : the already known outcome. I don't know if that works here. I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and there are no counterveiling issues involved. Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish case. Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the floor of the azarah and not spread. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:51:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:51:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215105.GB12997@aishdas.org> My first thought was somewhat off topic but feel like it should be related... R' Yirmiyah's banishment from Bavel was over his habit of checking shiurim by posing implausible edge cases. He ends up in EY, and succeeds in the Y-mi. The final question (BB 23b) before his expulsion was whether we assume owned a bird that had one leg within 50 amos of the dovecote (ie within the shiur for the chazaqah for assuming that's its origin) and one leg outside? But there is also when he questions tevu'ah growing at least 1/3 before RH if harvested on Sukkos. Veqim lehu lerabbanan? How can you measure such a thing? (RH 13a) And his question on hashavas aveidah of 1/2 qav in 2 amos, or 2 qav in 8 amos? We assume yi'ush if we find less than 1 qas scattered across 3 amos. Is that a ratio? (BM 2a) How can you say that a revi'is is the amount of mayim chayim that the blood of a metzorah's birds would be niqar within? Wouldn't it depend on the size of the bird? (Sotah 16b) What if a kohein becomes a baal mum while the dam is in the air between his hazayah and it landing on the mizveiach? (Zevachim 15a) According to R' Meir, a miscarriage that was developed enough to have the shape of a beheimah causes tum'as leidah. (As opposed to saying it must be human shaped.) So, R Yirmiyah asked R Zeira, according to R Meir, what if a woman gives birth to such a baby, a girl and the father was meqadeish her to a man? R' Zeira points out that the child wouldn't live 3 years anyway, so bi'ah isn't an issue. R Meir asks: but what about marrying her sister? This one may or may not count, as R' Acha bar Yaaqov says that R Yirmiyah's point was to get R Zeira to laugh. (Niddar 23a) But it does reflect what kind of thing would come to his mind. (Tangent: There are a number of stories that indicate R Zeira needed chearing up. Like the golam Rava sent him. RMMS tied this to "Rav shachat lei leR Zeira".) But when he gets to EY, the Y-mi accepts his question. (Not that the Y-mi ever answers questions that involve guessing what the tanna / amora would have said...) A picker can eat a snack (quantity discussed) before tu"m was taken from the crop. As long as he is holing them. R Yirmiyah asked whether a picker can eat an olive he was juggling -- and thus didn't put down but also isn't just picked. (Maaseros 3:4, vilna daf 17b) Maybe the issue in the OP is about this time rejecting an absurd -- R Yirmiyahu-like -- oqimta is just the difference in styles in different batei medrash? Too haskala-ish to be satisfying? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Mon Apr 30 20:47:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:47:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tuesday, May 1, 2018, Micha Berger wrote: > > > I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is > the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and > there are no counterveiling issues involved. > > Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish > cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish > case. > > Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's > that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the > floor of the azarah and not spread. And it?s easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn?t seem more unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 06:47:36AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is :> the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and :> there are no counterveiling issues involved. :> Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish :> cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish :> case. : And it's easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a : prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn't seem more : unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. I suggest exploring if the distinction is between a din that could only apply in the farfetched case and dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from the distcussion. This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See . (He offered to send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. In a different post, I suggested another line to explore, if you prefer it. Diffierent batei medrash had different tolerances for R Yirmiyahu's questions, and those too also used farfetched cases. And if so, maybe there was one beis medrash during the course of the ccenturies of amoraim that simply had no patience for odd oqimtos; even though they were atypical that way. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 31st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Hod: What level of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 results in harmony and balance? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 1 03:34:33 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 13:34:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > > But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. > > I suggest exploring if the distinction is between > a din that could only apply in the farfetched case > and > dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated > in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from > the distcussion. > > This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought > in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See > . (He offered to > send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta > serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in > this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. > The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without walking from the equation. It would seem to be a perfect example to apply R' Michel Avraham's thesis and yet the Gemara rejects the ukimta as being unreasonable -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue May 1 04:40:42 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 11:40:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: Please see https://goo.gl/ESJERH for two links to a talk given by Rabbi Dr. Shnyer Leiman titled The Strange History of Lag B'Omer. Please see https://goo.gl/s2KHAVfor [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] The Spreading Fires Of Lag Baomer: Tempting Quick & Easy ?Spirituality? vs. Enduring Ruchnius goo.gl In the past we have discussed at length (5771, 5772, 5773A, 5773B, and 5773C) how Lag Baomer is marked in minhag Ashkenaz, and contrasted it with other, more recent customs, that have become popula? See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) No less an authority than Chasam Sofer was strongly opposed to Lag B'Omer celebrations. He argued that one should not make a new Yom Tov that is not based on a miraculous event, that has no basis in Shas and Poskim, and that is based on the death of someone. (See here for links.) See https://goo.gl/Zma8pS [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] No ? No ? No ? No ? No ? Minhag Ashkenaz & Recent Lag Ba?omer Innovations ? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ?????, ??? ?????, ??????, ?????, ??? ???? goo.gl Yes, it is that time of the year again. Lag ba?omer is almost here. And with it, all the hype and solicitations for trips to Meron, Chai Rotel Mashkeh donations, upsherin, bonfires, and the l? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:54:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:54:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:34:33PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter : (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that : blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The : ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without : walking from the equation... I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Tue May 1 04:25:47 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 14:25:47 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the > stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. > And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's > not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. The Gemara starts with Ula stating a din that holacha without walikng is pasul. The Gemara then brings down the following statment from a Mishna If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher. The Gemara then asks on Ula from this Mishna, namely that the blood must have moved towards the Mizbeach, e.g. holacha without walking and it is kosher. The Gemara then answers with the implausible ukimtos to explain the Mishna. In other words, it seems that the ukimtos are there to explain the Mishna namely that the Mishna provides a principle that blood that falls on the floor is kosher and the ukimtas are there to remove any extraneous factors such as holacha without walking. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 1 15:57:50 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 18:57:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ahava Eternal Message-ID: <2060439B-6A01-4D14-AC06-6D6675AC6381@cox.net> I heard a beautiful d?rash by Rabbi Yosef Shusterman (Chabad of Beverly Hills). He said the following: If you ask 20 people the definition of ?LOVE,? you will get 20 different responses. However, the best definition of love is the Jewish definition. He uses gematria. The gematria of Ahava is 13 and the gematria of Echod is 13. ?Love" is when you are at ?one? with whomever or whatever. Theologically, the love of God is when you are at one with God. Sometimes it takes an entire lifetime to reach that madreiga. I am in you and you in me, mutual in divine love. William Blake (18th c. poet, painter and printmaker) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 2 01:33:44 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 08:33:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of?= =?windows-1252?q?_Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/W49XHX Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. See the above URL for more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 07:10:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 10:10:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <64a22eb4-af1e-fab5-373f-889b1083cd08@sero.name> On 02/05/18 04:33, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From https://goo.gl/W49XHX > > > Toras Aba ?just put up an interesting post > discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to > similarity with ancient practice of idolators. > > See the above URL for more. And yet your precious Minhag Ashkenaz was to (have a nochri) make a bonfire and dance before it (or around it) on Simchas Torah. R Wosner was asked about doing so in camp, stam on a Wednesday, not on Lag Bo'omer when it is, at least in Meron, Chevron, and a few other places in Eretz Yisroel, a long-established minhog practiced by tzadikim and chachomim who were much greater than R Wosner or anyone else you can cite. I don't believe it occurred to him that someone might apply this teshuvah to those fires, and it's dishonest to do so. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 09:04:58 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:04:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:33:44AM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : From https://goo.gl/W49XHX : Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. Most of us have little problem with Israel's Moment of Silence on Yom haZikaron and Yom haSho'ah, at least not Derekh Emori problems. And we wear ties. There are limits to invoking Derekh Emori. To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last days too. And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah kekhol hayom". At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled later than the norm, this evening.) I don't know the origin. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 09:45:50 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:45:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> On 02/05/18 12:04, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag > baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) > and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas > simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo > velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than > waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the > Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last > days too. > > And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo > you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I > have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah > kekhol hayom". > > At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I > know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled > later than the norm, this evening.) > > I don't know the origin. The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. A cessation of mourning, such as the last day of shiva, obviously begins in the morning. Nor is it an occasion for joy; when one gets up from shiva one doesn't go dancing and singing. Thus the restrictions are lifted only after daybreak, and tachanun is said at mincha on the previous day, just as it is on the other three days whose observance begins in the morning, viz Pesach Sheni, Erev Rosh Hashana, and Erev Yom Kippur. But the celebration of Rashbi is a positively happy occasion, so it starts immediately at nightfall, and no tachanun is said at the previous mincha. The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and relies heavily on the Magen Avraham. (He later expressed regret over his over-reliance on the MA, which is one reason why he wrote a second edition, only a few chapters of which are extant.) So it's not surprising that this is the psak found there, however it is not the psak that was followed in Chabad, which means in practice he paskened differently. (Sometimes it means he changed his mind, but sometimes he never paskened in practice as he wrote in the SA, for the reasons I mentioned above.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 10:53:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 13:53:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : >I don't know the origin. : : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain how or when the older minhag was changed. And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. ... : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 11:25:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 14:25:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> On 02/05/18 13:53, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : >I don't know the origin. > : > : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the > : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of > : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the > : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. > > That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain > how or when the older minhag was changed. It follows that the minhag changed when the significance of the day changed. In other words, the minhogim of the day when R Akiva's talmidim stopped dying did not change, but on top of them came a whole new layer of minhogim for the new holiday that occupies the same day on the calendar. For a similar example, the significance of 3 Tammuz in Lubavitch changed dramatically in 5754. The earlier significance of that day and whatever practices it had did not go away, e.g. those who did not say tachanun on 3 Tammuz before 5754 still don't say it, while those who did still do, but the new significance, and the host of practices that came with it, overwhelmed the earlier significance and observance. > And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" > is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. Doesn't the Idra Zuta say that Rashbi asked for his hilula to be celebrated rather than mourned? > You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, > after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, > in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) > that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, > Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. Whether it's the correct explanation of the Pri Etz Chaim or not, it is the one held by the people actually doing the celebrating, and thus fully explains their practices. > ... > : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which > : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and > : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... > > I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to suppose they didn't exist in his day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 15:57:53 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 18:57:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> Message-ID: <4b464085-efab-7164-2d33-7726eba6a069@sero.name> On 02/05/18 14:25, Zev Sero wrote: >> >> : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which >> : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and >> : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... >> I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. > They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to > suppose they didn't exist in his day. PS: Indirect evidence that in the AR's day the night of Lag Baomer was already considered part of the simcha is that in his siddur (as opposed to his SA) he wrote that tachanun is not said at mincha of erev Lag Baomer. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 3 07:01:56 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 03 May 2018 10:01:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?iso-8859-1?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= References: Message-ID: At 12:04 PM 5/2/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag >baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) >and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas >simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo >velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than >waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the >Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last >days too. > >And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo >you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I >have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah >kekhol hayom". > >At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of Aveilus on the 34th day? If so, how can Sefardim go to Meron on the night of the 33rd? I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at Tzeis and who started it. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 3 06:04:34 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:04:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tzedaka priorities Message-ID: The S"A in O"C 152:1 codifies a prohibition against tearing down a synagogue before building a new one (one must build the new one first). The M"B (4) gives the reason for this prohibition as a concern that if one had not built the new one first, a case of pidyon shvuyim(captive's redemption) might arise requiring funds to be diverted from the new construction. 1. Why couldn't the chachamim make a takana in that case? 2. Why would the chachamim work around required priorities? 3. Doesn't 152:6 says you would sell a synagogue anyway in a case of pidyon shvuyim? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 09:03:10 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 12:03:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on the > night of the 33rd? The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve either of those things. (There is no issur on music during sefirah; that seems to be a modern invention, presumably because in modern times we've become lenient on the prohibition against music at any time, so we need to impose a restriction during sefirah, whereas earlier generations who were strict with the general prohibition didn't feel a need to strengthen it now.) > I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at > Tzeis and who started it. As I wrote earlier, it seems associated with the adoption of the Rashbi's celebration on top of the earlier marking of the end of the plague among R Akiva's students. Thus it would probably have started in Tzfas in the late 16th century and spread into Europe in the 18th century together with the AriZal's kabbalah. (Note that according to the AriZal, not cutting hair is not connected to avelus, and applies on Lag Ba`omer as well, except for upsherenishen. But not having weddings is because of avelus, so if we're celebrating Yom Simchas Rashbi they should be permitted.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 10:13:07 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:13:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on : >the night of the 33rd? : : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve : either of those things... An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 10:17:41 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:17:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> On 03/05/18 13:13, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on > : >the night of the 33rd? > : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are > : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve > : either of those things... > An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. For children, who are not obligated in aveilus anyway. But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and the answer is the same way they go by day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 11:56:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 14:56:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and : the answer is the same way they go by day. The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both Ashk and Seph? Yes, if the party happened to be during the day, I would have the same question WRT Sepharadim (only). So how does pointing out that fact help me any in answering it? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 33rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total Fax: (270) 514-1507 submission to truth, and what results? From simon.montagu at gmail.com Thu May 3 16:36:11 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 02:36:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 > > > Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is > > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did that before the 16th century. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 12:08:37 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 15:08:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> On 03/05/18 14:56, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and > : the answer is the same way they go by day. > > The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > Ashk and Seph? And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do so from nightfall. (b) The Meron celebrations, which the question was about, don't violate the sefira observances anyway. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 05:04:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 08:04:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer Message-ID: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:24 AM 5/4/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > > > >I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings >Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did >that before the 16th century. In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to show that it was not really part of the davening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 05:14:32 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:14:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Bow_and_Arrow_on_Lag_B=92Omer?= Message-ID: >From http://www.collive.com/show_news.rtx?id=50532 A 4-year-old son of a Shliach in Florida was hit in his eye by an arrow on Lag BaOmer. Please pray for Baruch Shmuel ben Chana. I do hope he has a refuah shleima. This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. >From https://goo.gl/kumYeX One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn?t even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a break from their Torah studies. It is also surprising that they should pass the time with such a martial activity, seemingly out of character with the day devoted to the man of peace. Rav Menachem Mendel of Rimanov, one of the early Hasidic Rebbes, explained that the custom is based on the Midrash which states that all the days of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, the rainbow didn?t appear in the sky. (Ketubot 77b the same is said there of Rebbe Yehoshua ben Levi.) Rashi explains that the rainbow is the sign of the covenant that the world will not be destroyed, and if there is a perfect tzaddik in the world there is no need of such a sign. (Cited by B?nei Yissachar on Lag BaOmer.) See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 07:58:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:58:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both :> Ashk and Seph? : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do : so from nightfall... You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something aggadic. But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from what I was raised to believe on that. I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and rishonim couldn't have known about? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 07:05:58 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:05:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Mysterious Origin of Lag Ba-Omer Message-ID: Please see http://www.hakirah.org/Vol20First.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 4 09:57:47 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 18:57:47 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Bottom line: They do it or they don't? Ben On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time,? and I > was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to > show that it was not really part of the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:41:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:41:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Let me begin with Daas Torah. ... : The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a : result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this : was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. So what are those formulations? Here are 3 I know of: 1- Given how the gadol's mind is shapeds by his learning, he is a useful resource for advice. He could be wrong, but aren't your odds better by asking? 2- Asking a gadol will get you the answer Hashem wants you to act on, whether it is the truth or not. E.g. the error of advising agaisnt fleeing the Nazis was because that was what Hashem wanted of us. But it was still pragmatically in error. I also see hints of this model in RALichtenstein's "Im Ein Daas, Manhigut Minayin?" but with the added caveat that RAL didn't expect to find daas Torah in practice. (Not since RSZA.) Again, just implications; I could be reading too much into the essay. 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, they are supposed to lead. RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like the same model. Notice that all advocate listening to gedolim even on non-halachic matters, but not because of any guarantees about accuracy. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:52:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:52:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180504165212.GC13247@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 07:12:36AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They : have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye : (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so : much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses.... The relationship to a kohein is trickier than that, as their is no tum'ah until after the declaration. He is more parallel to an eid qiyum than an eid birur. For example, Vayiqra 14:36 tells a person to remove all the items from his home before the kohein comes to inspect a potential nega in it. Even even if the kohein sees the same unchanged splotch and declares it a nega, those itsems are not tamei. It wasn't a nega until the declaration. ... : My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would : become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate : some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just : another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve : myself in general." Tum'as leidah isn't because something is spiritually awry with the mother. So I am not sure we have to assume that zivah is like tzara'as. Lefi RSRH, tum'ah comes from things that could make us overly identify with our bodies -- death, birth, the kinds of sheratzim that share our homes (in EY), niddah... Zivah and leidah would fit that pattern. So would tzara'as, because it too feels like the body is rebelling against the will. The difference is that chazal is saying the body really is rebelling (or made to show rebellion) against a tainted will. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From zev at sero.name Fri May 4 11:15:17 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:15:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 04/05/18 10:58, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > :> Ashk and Seph? > > : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in > : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus > : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't > : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do > : so from nightfall... > > You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, > nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new > information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. Nothing is being uprooted. Something new has come. Just as when a local "Purim" or lehavdil a fast is declared. > If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a > comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something > aggadic. > > But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind > the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous > revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from > what I was raised to believe on that. > > I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence > of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation > anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take > over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in > this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and > rishonim couldn't have known about? They didn't know about the Zohar, let alone the Idra Zuta and R Shimon's request that people rejoice at his "hilula". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 11:51:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 14:51:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:57 PM 5/4/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >Bottom line: They do it or they don't? > >Ben >On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >>Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and >>I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it >>to show that it was not really part of the davening. > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the beginning are said responsively. The Shatz stands at the table where leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 12:06:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 15:06:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <7E.8C.04381.0DFACEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:41 PM 5/4/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Let me begin with Daas Torah. >... >: The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a >: result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this >: was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. > >It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the >popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues >speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are >infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. Please see the article To Flee Or To Stay? at http://www.hakirah.org/vol%209%20bobker.pdf At the end of the article it says, "This article is excerpted from Joe Bobker's "The Rabbis and the Holocaust," to be published by Geffen Books in the summer of 2010." However, to the best of my knowledge this book was never published, and I have always wondered why. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 5 11:45:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 05 May 2018 20:45:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1ed3f3d3-7cb6-927c-da0f-e22d19aa3a4e@zahav.net.il> Bseder. We are all agreed that even Frankfurt changed their seider Tefilla sometime in the last few hundred years. Many shuls have someone, even a child, say (sing) the tehillim from the bimah. Ben On 5/4/2018 8:51 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the > beginning are said responsively.? The Shatz stands at the table where > leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over > he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun May 6 01:53:37 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 11:53:37 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: Yesterday's daf (Zevachim 22) has another wild ukimta that seems to just be there to answer a question on an amora and not provide a sterile environment to learn out a new principle. Here is the gist of the Gemara: R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina states if the Kiyor does not contain enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim, it is invalid - "v'Rachatzu Mimenu Moshe v'Aharon u'Vanav." The Gemara asks a question from the following Baraisa: One may be Mekadesh from any Keli Shares, whether or not it contains a Revi'is of water (this is much less then the water needed for 4 people) Rav Ada bar Acha answers: The case is, the Keli Shares was carved into the Kiyor (so the water comes from the Kiyor, which contains enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim). I don't see any way that you can say here that the ukimta is to remove extraneous dinim etc. The ukimta here seems to serve one and only one purpose, explain the Barisa that it is not a question on an Amora. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From saul.mashbaum at gmail.com Sun May 6 06:41:09 2018 From: saul.mashbaum at gmail.com (Saul Mashbaum) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 16:41:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: RYL >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. Saul Mashbaum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 05:28:41 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 15:28:41 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire Message-ID: << And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. >> Fore details about the printing error to give rise to the idead that Lag Baomer is Rashbi's yahrzeit see http://seforim.blogspot.co.il/2011/05/ changing subjects one of the weirdest experiences I had was a bunch of black coated Chevra kadisha dancing about a grave in Bet Shemesh at 12 midnight with just a flashlight for light -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 07:21:11 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 17:21:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: <> OTOH there is the gemara that when there was the dispute in Yavneh between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. This story took place many years before talmidim of R. Akiva (who was junior at that time) died. If so Rashbi was a known talmid many years before R. Akiva revived Torah . As an aside other taananim survived the bar kochba wars including talmidim of R, Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at mail.aol.com Sun May 6 11:22:13 2018 From: t613k at mail.aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 14:22:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bow and Arrow on Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16336b09884-c88-1c19@webjas-vaa039.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 5/6/2018 7:51:35 AM EST, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org writes: From: "Professor L. Levine" > This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. > From https://goo.gl/kumYeX >> One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is >> less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows >> and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe >> Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn't >> even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a >> break from their Torah studies..... Torah sages and their students learned Torah secretly in the woods, hiding from the Roman soldiers. They took bows and arrows with them and if they were found in the woods, they would say they were out hunting. That's what I was told when I was a little girl. I don't know if this is associated with R' Akiva and his talmidim, or with R' ShBY. As a child I thought the story was about young children and didn't realize until later that it must have been adult students with bows and arrows in the woods. (Yes I know Jews don't hunt for food or for sport, but maybe the Romans didn't know that. Or the Jews could plausibly say they hunted for hides and fur.) PS All my Areivims and Avodahs lately are deformed by great quantities of question marks. If anyone knows how to stop this from happening, please let me know. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com -- From driceman at optimum.net Sun May 6 17:58:21 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 19:58:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> RMB: > 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus > stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the > Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act > as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make > gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on > personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, > they are supposed to lead. > > RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before > RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who > carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the > names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked > questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like > the same model. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? David Riceman From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sat May 5 12:17:25 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 5 May 2018 22:17:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Sacrificies Message-ID: Question: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat had to bring the animal to as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result in hundreds -- Eli Turkel From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 7 04:19:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 14:19:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices Message-ID: R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he was permanently a Kohen; From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:37:00 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:37:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 06/05/18 10:21, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > This story took place many years before talmidim?of R. Akiva (who was > junior at that time) died. On the contrary, R Akiva was very senior at the time of these disputes. In the mishna in Rosh Hashana he was one of the two who counseled R Yehoshua to obey R Gamliel's order, and in Berachos when R Gamliel was deposed he was one of only three candidates considered to replace him. > If so Rashbi was a known talmid?many years before R. Akiva revived Torah > .?As an aside other taananim?survived the bar kochba?wars including > talmidim?of R, Yishmael What have Bar Kochva or his wars got to do with any of this? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:45:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:45:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> References: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> Message-ID: <44c411ba-2fee-9ae7-82d6-de3850c6417a@sero.name> On 06/05/18 20:58, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus >> stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the >> Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act >> as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make >> gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on >> personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, >> they are supposed to lead. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim who are to guide them. There need to be askanim because the chachamim have no time for klal work; they're busy learning and will neglect it. So those who lack either the head or the bottom for full-time learning can be the administrators, and when they need guidance they will consult the chachamim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Wed Apr 25 14:17:16 2018 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:17:16 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5AEFEEE1.1030601@biu.ac.il> Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: >>From The Jewish Press >, >by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): ... > Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if > he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi > Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called > up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different... ... >"L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! The attached has lots of relevant information. [Attachment stored at -micha] From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 08:00:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 11:00:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 07/05/18 07:19, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen > even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes > in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was > considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen > only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); > others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he > was permanently a Kohen; Thank you. Note the context: Rav stated outright that Moshe was a cohen gadol, and the gemara cites this braisa to show his source, that he was ruling like the Yesh Omrim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 8 12:40:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 15:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 3000 Year Old Mansion Implies a Sizable Malkhus Beis David Message-ID: <20180508194052.GA19392@aishdas.org> >From . What struck me is what appears to be the weakness of the objection -- some of the results are from a poor source, and even though they converge with other results, we'll question the whole thing? Does This 3,000-Year-Old House Confirm King David's Lost Biblical Kingdom? By Owen Jarus, Live Science Contributor | May 3, 2018 02:50pm ET Archaeologists have discovered a sprawling, possibly 3,000-year-old house that suggests a biblical kingdom called the United Monarchy, ruled by King David and later Solomon according to the Hebrew Bible, actually existed. The archaeologists who excavated the house, at a site now called Tel Eton, in Israel, said in an article published online March 13 in the journal Radiocarbon that the date, design and size of the house indicates that a strong organized government existed at Tel Eton around 3,000 years ago. They added that this government may be the United Monarchy. The site is located in the central part of Israel in a region called the Shephalah. ... In their paper, Faust and Sapir argue that evidence supporting the existence of the United Monarchy is often not studied because of a problem they call the "old house effect." The site of Tel Eton, including the massive house, was destroyed by the Assyrians during the eighth century B.C. As such, the house held a vast amount of remains dating to that century, but relatively few remains that date to 3,000 years ago when the house was first built. This "old house effect" is a problem commonly seen in Israel and at archaeological sites in other countries, the archaeologists said. "Buildings and strata can exist for a few centuries, until they are destroyed, but almost all the finds will reflect this latter event," wrote Faust and Sapir, noting that archaeologists need to be careful to dig down and find the oldest remains of the structures they are excavating so they don't miss remains that could provide clues to the United Monarchy. Israel Finkelstein, a professor at Tel Aviv University who has written extensively about the United Monarchy debate, expressed skepticism about the results. Two of the four samples used for radiocarbon dating are olive pits, which pose a problem, he said. "The single olive pits come from fills [material that accumulated on the surface of the floor before the floor broke apart]. They have no importance whatsoever [for] dating the building. At Megiddo, my dig, samples like this, single items/fills, are not being sent to the lab to be dated, because they enter bias into the dating system," Finkelstein said. "There is no connection whatsoever between the finds at Tel Eton and the biblical description of the United Monarchy." Faust told Live Science he expects that some archaeologists would be critical of the use of material found in the remains of the floors for radiocarbon dating. He noted that all the radiocarbon dates, those from the olive pits and from the charcoal, converge around 3,000 years. "The convergence of the dates suggest that we are on safe grounds," Faust said. He also noted that one of the charcoal samples is not from the floor but from the foundation deposit (the chalice), strengthening the conclusion that the house was built around 3,000 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 38th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Yesod: How does reliability Fax: (270) 514-1507 promote harmony in life and relationships? From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue May 8 13:05:25 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 23:05:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer Message-ID: >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag in the places I have seen -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Tue May 8 15:31:28 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 01:31:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 11:05 PM, Eli Turkel via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > >>> > In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some > places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is > leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. > This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. > >>>> > > This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> > > Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. > In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag > in the places I have seen > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Tue May 8 17:28:19 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 20:28:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Me > >> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? RZS: > > Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those > doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim > who are to guide them. Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. David Riceman From eliturkel at gmail.com Wed May 9 00:33:02 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:33:02 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: A while ago there was a debate about gebrochs while some condemned the minhag others defended it. I suggest reading an article by Brown https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 (4th on the list) It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those practices that can be traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a select few don't count. He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of elitism that only gedolim count. OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at most) His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in terms of protecting their communities from modernism. I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. Again see the above article for more details -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Tue May 8 21:46:46 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 14:46:46 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer & Rashbi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2700442c-cb3b-4267-b4bc-7e47e0d3efc8@yypwn-sl-yzhq-hkhn-blbyn> See also From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 02:53:57 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 05:53:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 01:31:28AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but : parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or : by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and : acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only : at Kaddish before Barechu At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night (in the US, mostly Syrian), everyone chants everything together. No shatz, and no one taking the lead even section by section. As per the first clause above. Somoene takes the lead for Bameh Madliqin from their seat. Chazan starts at pre-Qaddish material for Arbit. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:12:47 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:12:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 18:31, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: > > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but > parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together > or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing > up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame > Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu In other words, the same as pesukei dezimra, or the ashre and uva letzion before mincha. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed May 9 10:59:33 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 19:59:33 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> References: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At the Yemenite place I go to Friday night, everyone chants Kabbalat Shabbat together (same tune, every week, for the whole thing). An elderly person will get the kavod of saying the first line of Lecha Dodi out loud, but the rest is sung together. After Lecha Dodi, they say four lines from Shir HaShirim and then one person leads them in a "Bar Yochai" song (this kavod is auctioned off). After that, all together for BeMah Madlilin and Mizmor L'yom Hashabbat. On 5/9/2018 11:53 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night . . . From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:21:40 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:21:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 20:28, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: >> Me >> >>> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? > > RZS: >> >> Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those >> doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim >> who are to guide them. > > Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not the rav who guided him. Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. But at any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to do their job properly they can't be learning all day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:27:09 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 03:33, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 9 12:54:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 19:54:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation Message-ID: Many years ago when my two oldest grandsons were in elementary school in yeshiva, they began to speak in a derogatory manner abut non-Jews. They had heard these things from their fellow students. Their father, my oldest son, and I made it clear to them that this was not the appropriate way to speak about human beings who were created by Ha Shem with a neshama. Fortunately, they listened to us and changed their attitude. No one is saying that one must be "buddy buddy" with gentiles, but they are to be treated with proper respect. I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/letter_11.pdf While I suggest that everyone read the entire letter, below are some excerpts from it. MISHPATIM. All these insights, however, are of value only if you truly live your life according to what you, as man and Yisraelite in God's world, with your God-given powers, have recognized. The first requirement is, therefore, that you practice justice: -Respect every being in your surroundings, as well as everything within yourself, as a creation of your God, -Respect whatever is theirs as given to them by God or as having been acquired according to Divinely sanctioned law. Let them keep, or have, whatever they are entitled by right to call their own; do not be a source of harm to -others! -Respect every human being as your equal. Respect him, his inner self as well as his outer garment-his body-and his life) Respect his property, too, as a legal extension of his body. Respect his claim to property or services that you have to render to him, 1 properly measured or counted, as well as his claim to compensation for harm done to his body or property. -Respect his right to know the truth and his right to freedom, happiness, peace of mind,P honor and a peaceful existence. -Never abuse the frailty of his body, mind or heart/ and never misuse your legal power over him. The Chukkim require of you: -respect for all that exists, as God's property: do not destroy anything! do not misuse it! do not waste! use everything wisely -respect for all the species: their order was established by God-do not intermingle them;u respect for all creatures: they are servants in the household of Creation; v respect for the feelings and instincts of animals;w respect for the human body, even after the soul has departed;x respect for your own body: maintain it, as it is the repository, messenger and instrument of the spirit; -limitation of your own instincts and animal-like actions: subordinate them to God's Law, so that, truly human and sanctified, they can help you attain the holy goal of mankind and will not turn you into a mere animal; -respect for your soul, when you nourish its tool, the body: supply the body only with such nourishment that will enable it to act as a pure and willing messenger of the world to the spirit, and of the spirit to the world, rather than giving it food that will induce sluggishness and sensuality; -concealment and sublimation of the animal in you, rather than according it too much respect and attention: only thus will the conflict within you ultimately be resolved, and the animal in you will also aspire only to the truly human; -lastly, respect for your own person in its purest expression-your power of speech. In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources can express a derogatory view of gentiles. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 19:50:36 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 22:50:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 15:54, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters [...] > [...] > In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources > can express a [contrary view] How about because they are Torah sources, and are therefore not required to agree with your favorite 19th-century writer. On the contrary, you should ask how he could contradict Torah sources. (The answer being that he found some contrary sources which appealed more to him, so he adopted their view; that was his right, but nobody else is required to do the same.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From sholom at aishdas.org Wed May 9 08:15:51 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:15:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 20:09:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 23:09:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180510030910.GB2931@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 11:15:51AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : We know Rashi's famous question and answer: that shmita eitzel har sinai : here is to show us that this, too, and all the details, were also given at : har sinai. See my vertl at . That's the Sifra that Rashi is quoting. : My question, however, is: why davka _this_ mitzvah (shmita/yovel)? Other : mitzvos could have been used to demonstrate the point that Rashi mentions. Rashi mentions that shemittah isn't taught in Devarim. The Malbim explains that this is unexpected, since shemittah didn't apply until entering EY, and such mitzvos tend to be the ones introduced in Devarim. : Thoughts? I ran with it... Suggesting that the whole point is that the reductionist approach doesn't work to understanding Torah. This was brought to light bedavqa with a mitzvah that isn't needed to be known yet for its own sake. But the whole picture was given at Sinai, even shemittah, so that we can understand any of the picture. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 39th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliable person? From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 01:57:15 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:57:15 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? >> My apologies. See https://www.academia.edu/36530833/A_translated_chapter_from_The_Hazon_Ish_Halakhist_Believer_and_Leader_of_the_Haredi_Revolution_The_Gaon_of_Vilna_the_Hatam_Sofer_and_the_Hazon_Ish_-_Minhag_and_the_Crisis_of_Modernity_English_?auto=download&campaign=weekly_digest which has several articles besides the one by Brown, Alternatively, send an email to eliturkel at gmail.com and I can send the article -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 02:43:30 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:43:30 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya 3rd line in the widest lines near the bottom and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about 130-135 CE. Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died about 20 years earlier (see eg wikipedia on Gamliel II) It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 07:51:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 10:51:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Me: >> >> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. RZS: > > Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every > Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not > the rav who guided him. No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. > Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a > yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. Again the Reish Galusa determined public policy, the hachamim determined halacha. > But at > any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the > full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to > do their job properly they can't be learning all day. The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his role? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 10 09:08:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:08:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:51:16AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : The claim that "da'as Torah" is derived from din melech is precisely the : claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise : in other fields... That's NOT the way I understood R' Dovid [haLevi] Cohen at all. We want a melekh, separate from the beis din hagadol. Although one person can be in both roles, like when Chazal refer to "Shelomo uveis dino." However, ba'avoseinu harabbim we lost the melukhah. The obligation of obeying the melekh devolved into obeyind the Sanhedrin. (This would have to have been some time between Gedaliah and Ezra, inclusive.) Obeying the melekh wasn't based on the melekh's comptenecy, but the need for order in running a society. (And, I guess some reason(s) why HQBH advised monarchy in particular as the means of getting that order, except according to some readings of RAYK. But RAYK didn't hold of the shitah we're looking at, so ein kan hamaqom leha'rikh.) Then, we lost the Sanhedrin. Today's rabbanim fill in -- either as their shelichim, or . The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. And just as the melekh might not be the expert across all of society, the Sanhedrin or today's rabbanim might not be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 40th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Yesod: When does Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliability/self-control mean submitting to others? From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 10 06:30:06 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93normal_practice=94?= Message-ID: <4ee8a413f67f49da89acceed596b8f72@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I was bothered by the gemara-Megilla 26a where it says Jerusalem apartment ?owners? took ?gifts? by force as ?rental? from olei regal. The Beit Mordechai (2:16), who lived in the early 20th century, raises the same question and says since the normal practice in Israel was for renters to leave something for the innkeeper in addition to the rental payment, so innkeepers in Jerusalem would take it by force since they could not charge rent. He admits that it?s possible that this would be considered stealing but because of this ?normal practice? of leaving something, it?s almost like they had a legal claim and therefore they felt they could take the items. Interesting that I couldn?t find earlier authorities bothered by this but maybe I missed something. Any thoughts appreciated. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 08:15:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:15:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6f2cda5f-ce57-a7a3-36af-3cc0b767dc9f@sero.name> On 10/05/18 05:43, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh >> between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it wasRashbithat was involved. > > I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, > and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > > > Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya?3rd line in the widest > lines near the bottom > and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Thank you. > Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about > 130-135 CE. Why do you suppose he was killed around that time rather than much later? If he was killed then, then he would have been born around 10-15 CE, have started learning Torah around 15-20 years before the churban, and have come back home with all those talmidim 4-9 years after it. Doesn't it seem more likely that his Torah learning started after the churban, and after Kalba Savua had resettled somewhere and reestablished himself, which would mean his death was also several decades after Bar Kochva? > Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died?about 20 years earlier (see eg > wikipedia?on Gamliel II) > > It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the > story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. Why is this at all difficult to believe? What makes it difficult? > So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of > the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant If you assume both that the students died then and that he himself died then, then when did he have time to teach his five new students? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 10 05:57:21 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 08:57:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim Message-ID: At 10:44 PM 5/9/2018, R Eli Turkel wrote: >I suggest reading an article by Brown >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2Fu%2F0%2F%23search%2Fhillel%2F1633fd7c1ed2a4a7&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce7f2ed89c0b04a153b9008d5b61fe896%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C1%7C636615170523842613&sdata=KHDvBEGhAvUsiq8oxUjnwZDX%2Bt0hzpo7D25XR2o0CPA%3D&reserved=0 > > >It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish > >Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent >past >basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those >practices that can be >traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a >select few don't count. >He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that >the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even >communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of >elitism that only gedolim count. > >OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of >the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In >fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their >unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at >most) > >His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in >terms of protecting their communities from modernism. >I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between >litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. I believe you are referring to an article that recently appeared in Hakirah that is at https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjyg6mKmfvaAhVCuVkKHeutBeYQFggtMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hakirah.org%2FVol24Shandelman.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3XZQch0OGem-hvrLpivEHB (I cannot access the link you give above, because I do not have a google account.) I found this article most disappointing and sent the email below to the Editors of Hakirah Subject: The Gaon of Vilna, the Hatam Sofer, and the Hazon Ish: Minhag and the Crisis of Modernity To the Editor: I must admit that the title of this article truly attracted my attention. However, after reading it I was sorely disappointed. The author writes at the beginning of the article, "We have seen that from the 1930's to the 1950's at least, the position of the Hazon Ish remained consistent and unyielding: A minhag has no normative status of its own, and at best can only be adduced as evidence for an actual halakhic ruling, which in turn derives its authority strictly from corroboration by qualified halakhists." He then goes on to point out that both the GRA and the Hazon Ish did not observe many minhagim that most people do observe. However, he does not give us a list of the minhagim they did not observe nor does he give us a list of the minhagim that they did observe. Surely these should have been included in detail in this article. Later in the article the author writes, "These two Orthodox groups [the Hungarian Orthodox and the latter-day hasidic] turned minhag into an endless opportunity for the creation of new humrot. And this only goes to show that it is not always a broken connection with the 'living tradition' that facilitates the creation of a dynamic of humrot. Again, I think that the article should have included a detailed list of these Chumras. In my opinion, this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much substance. What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about nothing." Dr. Yitzchok Levine -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 10 06:58:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:58:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Wild Wild State of Kashrus Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/2bPRtq It was an innovative way of saving money. The municipality worked it out that they would outsource the financial cost of the Department of Health inspectors. From now on, it would be the restaurants themselves that would hire the health inspectors. The restaurants would pay them, they would take out the FICA taxes, the worker?s comp ?? the restaurant would handle it all. The move ?worked wonders? for the state of health in the restaurants. Eateries that were previously designated with a C minus rating were now rated A plus and health violation write ups were down too. The astute reader will detect an obvious problem here. This is what is called a classic conflict of interest. The upgraded rating and lowered violations are probably due to the unique financial arrangement. When an inspector is paid by the people he supervises there is a risk that his judgment and actions will be unduly influenced. The safety of the restaurant consumers has been placed at risk. Indeed, the general public has also been placed in danger. SAME FOR KASHRUS The same should be true in the field of Kashrus. The mashgiach is there to protect the public from eating non-kosher or questionable items just as the health inspector is there to protect the public from anything that can compromise their health and safety. RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN ZT?L Indeed, last generation?s Gadol haDor, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, in his Igros Moshe (YD Vol. IV #1:8) writes that the Mashgiach should not be paid by the facility receiving the hashgacha, but rather should only be paid by the Vaad HaKashrus itself. Indeed, he should have no direct monetary business dealings with the company. See the above URL for more. Keep in mind that when it comes to private hashgachos the person giving the supervision is always paid by the person or organization being supervised. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 09:28:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:28:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <2dd3576d-2d8e-762e-5afc-570ef2dbaa9c@sero.name> On 10/05/18 10:51, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Me: >>> >>> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. > > RZS: > >> >> Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every >> Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not >> the rav who guided him. > > No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert > on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted > on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. But if the rav paskened that they were wrong they had to obey him. >> But at >> any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the >> full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to >> do their job properly they can't be learning all day. > The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the > claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. And indeed it does; how do you see a contradiction from R Akiva? He didn't say TCh don't have the knowledge to run the town, but that they don't have the time. > Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at > all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his > role? Same story: He is qualified, but he has no time, so he will neglect the work and the town will suffer. That's why we need and have askanim to run things, but they have to know that they are not in charge but must defer to the chachamim. Note that not even the biggest haredi calls for the gedolei hatorah to sit in the knesset themselves, let alone to be mayors and city councillors. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 12:43:38 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 15:43:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: RMB: > > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. I already raised the objection of R Akiva?s advice to his son; RZS?s response is conceptually clean, but (a) it doesn?t fit the words of the text, and (b) according to you it is internally contradictory - - if the rabbis who run the city have a din melech how can they be supervised by others? There?s also the sugya of b'nei ha'ir kofin zeh et zeh ?. Naively the authority of the kehilla comes from din melech, but then why b'nei ha'ir, why not the town rabbi? David Riceman From saulguberman at gmail.com Thu May 10 11:51:40 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 14:51:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > RMWillig has a kezayis of 22.5cc, and writes that Middos veShiurei > haTorah pg 277 reports matzah has half the weight of an equivalent > volume of water. So, RMW says a kezayi matzah weighs 11.25gm. (1cc of > water weighs 1gm, by definition. So, the weight of 2cc of matzah is 1gm.) > We buy matzah by the pound, so you can estimate a kazayis pretty > accurately if you know how many matzos are in a 1lb box. (2lb boxes, > divide by 2, naturally.) There are 40.3 or so kezeisim in a pound. > > matzos / lb -> kezayis matzah > 6 -> 2/13 of a matzah > 7 -> 1/6 > 8 -> 1/5 > 9 -> 2/9 > 10 -> 1/4 > > :-)BBii! > -Micha I wish I had remembered to use this at the seder. My rabbi tells me that he got an electric scale this year and had the grandkids make shiurim bags for the sedorim on erev pesach. Has the benefit of having something for the kids to do and moves the seder along. When I mentioned to my Rabbi that I was looking into smaller shiurim,that are smaller than the plastic sheet that is so popular, he was not interested in continuing the conversation. My daughter informed me that one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in the base of their calculation. Saul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:13:50 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:13:50 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1be6e645-8a41-f71b-3d11-7c7d0823c398@zahav.net.il> IIRC the Ramban writes that David took a census because he made a mistake, he thought that the issur didn't apply anymore. I found that Ramban to be shocking. How is it that no one, no rav, no navi, came to David and said "No, you can't do that"?? Answer - David never bothered to ask and no one had the job of being his poseik. Similarly, there are certain acts that the chachamim praised Hezkiyahu for doing and others that they disagreed with him. I read that as meaning "after he made the decisions, the rabbanim weighed in". I don't get the feeling from any navi that they stood by the sides of the kings and told them "yes you? can do this, no, you can't do that". They only weighed in when society or the melucha was totally out of sync. or when they were specifically consulted or when God told them "Go to the king". I admit that there is an incredible tension between even the good kings, the ones trying to rule according to the Torah, and the prophets (forget the evil kings). The former? were not able to live up to the expectations of the latter. From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 11 03:50:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180511105019.GA17192@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:43:38PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : RMB: : > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took : > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. : : The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give : commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us : what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. Not "implies", we are talking about R Dovid [haLevi] Cohen's explanation of Da'as Torah -- it's the thesis he is trying to justify! However, unlike some other versions of DT, it only speaks of rabbis as communal leadership. Not as advisors on personal matters (whose open questions are not halachic in nature). It has this in common with [pre-Mizrachi] RYBS's version of DT, "hatzitz vehachoshen". : I already raised the objection of R Akiva's advice to his son... There is also the historical precedent of the leadership of the Vaad Dalet Aratzos. There is no record of rabbinic leadership on civil issues. They dealt with halachic matters, eg shochetim, batei din, a law to require haskamos on all published sefarim... :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 41st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Yesod: What is the ultimate measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 of self-control and reliability? From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:02:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:02:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The article is one chapter from an entire book. You walked into the middle of a movie, that's all. Ben On 5/10/2018 2:57 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > In my opinion,? this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much > substance.? What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about > nothing." From isaac at balb.in Thu May 10 21:23:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 14:23:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Eli Turkel asked: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, > from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult > for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat > had to bring the animal as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the > cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of > whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result > in hundreds I suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim. [The Ramban in the 3rd Shoresh there isn't happy with this] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 11 01:40:10 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 08:40:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Shiluach Hakein, Performance of Message-ID: >From yesterday's OU Halacha Yomis Q. How is the mitzvah of Shiluach Hakein performed? A. Before sending away the mother, one should have the intent to fulfill a mitzvah. There is a difference of opinion as to how one should send away the mother. According to the Rambam (Hilchos Shechita 13:5), one should grab the mother bird by the wings and send her away. Though the Torah prohibits capturing the mother-bird when she sits on the nest, when the intention of grabbing the mother is to send her away, this is not considered an act of capturing. However, Shulchan Aruch (YD 292:4) rules in accordance with the Rosh and the Tur that one need not grab the mother bird. Rather, one may use a stick or the back of one?s hand to send away the mother. According to these Rishonim, the important factor is not that you grab the mother but that you cause her to fly away. The Binyan Tziyon (Chadashos 14) writes that some Rishonim disagree with the Rambam on two points. They maintain that if one grabs the mother and sends her away, a) the mitzvah is not fulfilled, and b) one transgresses the prohibition of taking the mother-bird (even though the intent is to send the bird away). It is therefore best to use a stick or, as Rav Belsky, zt?l advised, to push the mother bird off the nest with an open hand, the palm facing upwards so that the mother bird is not accidentally caught. Once the mother bird is chased away, one should pick up the eggs or chicks and take possession of them. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Fri May 11 02:25:19 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 12:25:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: Instead of answering Zev's questions directly let me try and describe how I see the events. I fully admit that the sources of dates for Taananim seem very sparse and I welcome any more information >From the chabad site R Yochanan be Zakai dies in 74 The Sanhedrin under Rabban Gamliel moved about 86 Bat Kochba Rebbelion ended in 133 R Akiva put in prison 134 Mishna completed 189 ------------------------------------------ First most historians take the story that R Akiva (along with several others) lived for 120 years as an exaggeration. Typical dates given are 50-135. This also implies that magic split into 3 sections of 40 years each is also an exaggeration This would give his learning under Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua as after the death of R Yochanan ben zakai about the year 75 when he would be 25 years old I again stress that all dates are speculation. It seems unlikely that R Akiva would have 24000 students when so many older teachers were around. Hence, extremely unlikely that this happened while the yeshiva was in Yavne under Rabban Gamliel. The one date I saw for the death of Rashbi was 150. What seems to be clear is that Rebbe compiled the Mishna after the death of all 5 talmidim of R Akiva (of course we know that the compilation was done over a period of time beginning at least with R. Meir and probably R. Akiva and earlier). Pushing off the death of R. Akiva decades later would give little time for the activities of his talmildim after his death before the time of Rebbe who is the next generation. One date I have seen for Rebbe is 135-220 (again approximately) R Sherira Gaon lists the year 219 as the year Rav moved to Bavel The gemara (Kiddushin 72b) states that Rebbe was born when R Akiva died which gives the birth of Rebba as about 135 assuming he died as part of the Bar Kochba revolt (which the Chabad site seems to also assume) As an aside the dates of Rebbe would seem to be connected with the debate over who was Antoninus see Hebrew Wikipedia on Reeb Yehuda HaNasi This post started with my claim that Rashbi was a student in Yavneh years before the plague that kille3d the 24000 students and so he became a student of R Akiva later in life. I note that the other talmidim also had other teachers. Thus, the gemara notes that R Meir also learned with R. Yishmael and certainly with R. Elisha ben Avuyah though R. Akivah was his main teacher 'The students were given semicha by R Yehudah be Buba R Benny Lau claims that R. Yehuda bar Ilai was mainly a talmid of his father and R Tarfon and only secondary by R. Akiva. R Yisi ben Chalfta also learned mainly from his father and then R. Yochanan ben Nuri both of whom stressed the traditions if the Galil. We have no statements of R. Elazar ben Shanua in the name of R. Akiva. R Benny Lau concludes that the two "talmidim muvhakim" of R. Akiva are R. Meir and Rashbi but both of these also had other teachers besides R. Akiva. Hence, we cannot take the story literally that R. Akiva went to the south and found 5 youngsters who became his students. Rather all 5 were already serious talmidei chachamim before R. Akiva. In addition even later many kept up relations with R. Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 14 09:54:07 2018 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 12:54:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel Message-ID: I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential chillul shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:19:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 02:51:40PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : My daughter informed me that : one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even : smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook : It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in : the base of their calculation. But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be invalid anyway? We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more binding than historical reality? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 44th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Malchus: What type of justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 does unity demand? From saulguberman at gmail.com Mon May 14 12:28:24 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:28:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, > the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis > is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does > that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual > olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be > invalid anyway? > > We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai > and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people > causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more > binding than historical reality? > I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:06:21 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:06:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514190620.GC7492@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:33:02AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent : past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those : practices that can be : traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable... So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 15 04:05:47 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 07:05:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . Shemos 12:39 teaches us: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. Various meforshim deal with halachic problems of this pasuk. For example, they were commanded to eat matzah, and being rushed out had nothing to do with it. Or, chometz was forbidden, and being rushed had nothing to do with it. This thread WILL NOT discuss those issues. If you want to discuss those issues, please start a new thread. My questions have nothing to do with halacha. They relate to the sequence and timing of the events of that night. They relate to "lir'os es atzmo" - I try to imagine myself in Mitzrayim that night, and certain parts of the story don't make sense to me. I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: 1) When was that dough made? 2) When was that dough baked? We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for the trip. I find it difficult to imagine that the flour and water were not mixed until the last 17 minutes before morning. Another problem: Given that they DID take unbaked dough out of Mitzrayim, what happened when they finally decided to bake it? Obviously, if they were able to bake it, it must be that they were not hurrying out of Egypt any more. So why didn't they just wait a little longer, and allow the dough to rise? (Someone might suggest that it was only in Egypt that "it did not become chametz", and that they did let it rise after getting out, but the pasuk disproves that, by telling us that "they baked it into matzah", i.e. that the dough never rose at all, at any point.) There are other questions that could ask, in addition to those, but I'll stop here for now. advTHANKSance Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 15 05:11:46 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:11:46 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Issac Balbin wrote: " suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim." There is a fundamental difference between carrying the aron and the avoda in the mishkan. The Rambam writes explicitly there in the sefer hamitzvos that the mitzva of carrying the aron, was given to the leviim in the midbar "v'af al pi shezeh hatzivuy ba laleviim baet hahe". We do not find any such commandment in the Torah regarding avoda in the mishkan. The Torah ONLY commands/allows Aharon and his sons to do Avoda in the mishkan. Therefore there is no room to say that leviim did avoda in the mishkan in the midbar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at yahoo.com Tue May 15 09:53:47 2018 From: gershonseif at yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 16:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know.TIA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 12:31:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:31:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas In-Reply-To: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20180515193110.GB20847@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 04:53:47PM +0000, Gershon Seif via Avodah wrote: : Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked : many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know. The oldest usage Bar Ilan and I could find was the one I had initially thought of -- the AhS. In OC 494:7, RYME gives 3 reasons for not fasting on that day. #2: And more: On that day, Moshe told them to becom qadosh. Uregilin liqroso "Yom haMyuchas" because of this. Which makes me think the AhS was saying it's just mimetic. Otherwise, I would have expected "uregilin le-" to have been replaced by a source. More than that, his vanilla "uregilin" is more typical of his description of accepted Litvisher practice. He tends to report others' practices by saying whom, even if it's a recent import to Litta. For example, se'if 3 mentions that the Chassidim haQadmonim were up all night on Shavuos, as per the Zohar, "vegam agah harbeih osin kein" and in the morning they go to miqvah, all as a zeikher leMatan Torah. Staying up all night gets a "they", not a "we", and is labeled as lower-case-c chassidic / Zoharic custom. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 15 12:39:06 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:39:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bamidbar Message-ID: <24722D2C-AAFF-48C2-A4B0-144A6165528A@cox.net> THEY DID; SO DID THEY DO According to the Sages, not a single letter is superfluous in the Torah. Anything repeated is repeated for a definite reason and with additional meaning. We may not always comprehend the reason or meaning but that doesn't detract from its significance. Also, there may be various interpretations and reasons given by commentators but that is what makes the Torah so profound. This Shabbos we begin the fourth Book of the Torah, Bamidbar. This portion is read the Shabbat before Shavuot, with rare exception. This year it is read immediately before Shavuot. The reason it usually is read the Shabbat prior to Shavuot is because there is a connection between the subject matter of this portion and the theme of Shavuot. There is a verse in Bamidbar in which appears a seeming redundancy. I grappled with it for a while and came up with an interesting chiddush. The verse states (1:54) "The Children of Israel did everything that God commanded Moses, so did they do." The first part of the verse already says "they did everything," etc. Then at the end it again says: "so did they do." Why is it repeated? First, the Children of Israel did "everything that God commanded Moses" because that was what God commanded and they did it as it was a mitzvah. But then, when it states at the end of the pasuk "so did they do," it already had become part of them. In other words, the initial motivation for performing a mitzvah is because God has commanded it, but then after doing it, one does it automatically and out of love and joy (as opposed to being mandatory). It becomes part of the person -- ("so did they do)." Similarly, when the Jewish people accepted the Torah they said "Naaseh v'nishma" (Exodus 24:7) which means "We will DO and (then) we will understand." In other words, we first will do out of duty and obligation since we are accepting the commandments of the Almighty, and afterwards, we will be doing (observing the mitzvot) out of love and joy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 15:45:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 18:45:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos Message-ID: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> R' Mordechai Torczyner (CC-ed) gave 3 shiurim (chaburos?) on koseiv and mocheiq this past march. Including #2, available here . He raises an interesting (to me, at least) question: Catan, formerly The Settlers of Catan, is a game with a board that changes with each play. The board is tiled from hexagons (and played on the edges and corners between them), where each hexagon has a picture on it denoting a kind of terrain, and by implication the reasources one can get from that terrain. This honeycomb is then held in place by a hexagonal frame, which is assembled from 6 pieces, each of which has jigsaw-puzzle-like edges at the join to hold the whole thing together. See RMT cited in shiur SSJ 16:23 (source #5 on the resource page attached to the YUTorah recording). He says you can play a game with letters or pictures IFF one is placing letters or pieces of letters or pictures or their pieces next to eachother. But not if they are made qeva or put in a frame. And only if they do not attach or stick to one another. So, here is RMT's question... Catan's hexagons do not combine to make one picture, but they do combine to make one "message" -- a usable game board. Is assembling a Catan board mutar on Shabbos? And if not, I wish to add: What if the game is played on a pillow, making it hard to keep the pieces interlocked, and the players agree to end the game before Shabbos? If the assembly is neither made to last nor is there intent for it to last, would it then be mutar? Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:11:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:11:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos In-Reply-To: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> References: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> Message-ID: The frame that comes with the newer editions of Settlers is quite flimsy so I don't believe it can be regarded as "fixing" the hexes together in a way that could even raise this shayla. But leravcha demilsa one can simply lay out the board without the frame, as one does with the older editions (my set is close to 20 years old and therefore doesn't have this problem. From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:30:27 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:30:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Further to your question, we've discussed the time of yetzias mitzrayim before, and some have asserted that it was early in the morning, but the Torah says "be'etzem hayom", and Rashi explicitly says this means high noon. At the time of the discussion I couldn't find this Rashi, but it's in Devarim 32:48. So not only did they have all night to prepare food for the journey, they also had all morning. And yet we're to believe they didn't get around to it until just before noon. However, leaving aside the improbability of this timing, my understanding of the actual event is that they started making dough to bake bread, and would have left it to rise but immediately they got the announcement that they were leaving, so they shoved it straight into the oven and baked it there and then, as matzos. Alternatively, given that they had already been commanded not to bake chametz, we can say that because of this commandment they always intended to bake it immediately, but as it happened the command became irrelevant because the announcement came just as they finished kneading it and were about to put it in the oven, so even had they *not* been commanded they would still have had to bake it as matzos. Which of course is why the commandment was given in the first place. Either way, though, my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the perspective of before it was baked. From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 05:55:56 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 12:55:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? A. The Gemara (Avoda Zara 30a) discusses the laws of giluy (beverages left uncovered). Chazal forbade drinking certain beverages that were left uncovered, due to concerns that venomous creatures, such as snakes or scorpions, might drink from the beverage and leave behind some of their venom. Tosfos (Avoda Zara 35a: Chada) writes that in the countries where we live, this concern does not exist, and beverages left uncovered may be drunk. Ordinarily, once Chazal issue a gezeira (decree), the gezeira remains in force even if the reasoning no longer applies. This case is different since the original gezeira was only enacted for places where snakes were common. Accordingly, Shulchan Aruch (YD 116:1) rules that one may drink a beverage that was left uncovered. However, the Pischei Teshuva (116:1) writes that the position of the Vilna Gaon and the Shelah Hakadosh is not to leave drinks unattended. The commentaries to the Maaseh Rav explain that the Vilna Gaon held that there are secondary reasons for Rabbinic decrees that apply even when the primary reason is no longer relevant. Common practice is to follow the position of the Shulchan Aruch, though some adhere to the more stringent opinion -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:26:24 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:26:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me - perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:27:40 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:27:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Designer Babies? Message-ID: Assume that gene editing technology reaches the point that "designer babies" are possible to an extent. Assume that "intellectual acuity" genes can be identified and screened for. Would a Desslerian philosophy allow (require?) mass screening and eventual genetic tinkering to provide a gadol hador material baby? What if there was a clear tradeoff that this gene also resulted in a materially shorter life expectancy? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Thu May 17 08:29:01 2018 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (M Cohen) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 11:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <09af01d3edf3$c8a0bed0$59e23c70$@com> I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul Shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential Chillul Shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before Shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on Shabbos. ..at least 2 major differences between the two. A. the electricity you use is generated in real time, as you demand it (by turning on the switch) B. but the water you use was made and treated in the past, and now simply stored in water towers until you demand it (by opening your tap) (as the water is used, new water is pumped into the tower at intervals. only a gramma). No melacha is done when you use your water C. electricity production in EY typically involves d'orisa issurim of burning fossil fuels, boiling water to create steam etc D. but water production may only be an rabbinic prohibition (electric pumps and filters, adding chemicals, etc) ======= Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2894, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.22240) http://free.pctools.com/ ======= From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Thu May 17 09:00:40 2018 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:00:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: RMB wrote: 'So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here.' I think the point was there was a tendency not to value or keep minhagim, not an absolute rule. And they possibly gave different status to minhagim which clearly originated with gedolim not un-named masses, eg kabalas shabbos. As for the yamulka example, that's got a makor in shas and is mentioned by rishonim, no? Perhaps another example would be Shir hamaalos before bentching which was innovated by the Chida I think. You'd need a whole range of example and a list of who kept what in order to be more certain, I haven't read the rest of Dr Brown's book to know if he does that. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 12:48:18 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 19:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? Message-ID: The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of externalities at all. YL Unfortunately, the term "chasid," meaning a pious person, has become misunderstood because of misconceptions foisted upon us from without. A "chasid" is a person who totally gives himself in love, does not look out for himself but relinquishes his own claims on the world in order to live only for others, through acts of loving kindness. Far from retiring from the world, he lives in it, with it and for it. For himself, the chasid wants nothing; but for the world around him, everything. Thus we find the term applied to David, a man who, from his earliest youth, labored ceaselessly for the spiritual and material welfare of his people and left the shaping of his own destiny, including redress of the wrong done to him by Sha'ul, entirely to God. No doubt you are familiar with the saying shelach shelach v'sheli shelach - -"He who says 'That which is yours is yours and that which is mine also is yours' is called a chasid." Again, a life of seclusion, of only meditation and prayer, is not Judaism. Torah and Avodah (study and worship) are but pathways meant to lead to deeds. Our Sages say, Talmud Torah gadol she'mavi l'y'day maaseh- "Great is study, for it leads to action" - the practical fulfillment of the precepts. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com Thu May 17 13:03:16 2018 From: gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 20:03:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <306356533.2453717.1526587396833@mail.yahoo.com> On Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:48 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that > there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, > speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of > externalities at all. YL Indeed! See Hirsch's commentary to Beraishis 5:24 where he writes very strong words about this. He says that Chanoch lived a life of seclusion after giving up on his generation. Hashem removed him from the earth because "what use is he here" (or something to that effect). From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 17 20:24:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 05:24:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. At one time calling a child a girl did not mean that you were assuming the child's gender? (girl meant a young person of either sex). Ben On 5/17/2018 9:48 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters? I note > that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of > dress,? speaking a particular language,? etc.? Indeed,? there is no > mention of externalities at all. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu May 17 20:51:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 23:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . I had cited Shemos 12:39: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. R' Zev Sero suggested: > ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked > dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. > I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it > has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the > perspective of before it was baked. It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words to have that meaning, that's okay. But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, > their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Fri May 18 14:41:25 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:41:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: See Malbim, who suggests that according to R Yose Haglili, who says that the issur chometz that year was only for one day, that one day was the 14th, not the 15th, but since with kodshim the night follows the day it was from the morning of the 14th till the morning of the 15th. Therefore they started baking bread at daybreak, intending to let it rise, but they were immediately ordered to leave and had no time. Alternatively, since most meforshim understand the one day to be the 15th, he suggests that they mixed the dough intending to bake matzos, but they didn't even have time to do that and had to take the unbaked dough, which would naturally have become chometz during their journey, but miraculously it did not rise and when they got where they were going they baked it as matzos (or, according to pseudo-Yonasan, the sun baked it, which presents halachic problems of its own, since sun-baked bread doesn't have the status of bread). On 17 May 2018 at 23:51, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I had cited Shemos 12:39: > >> They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves >> of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were >> driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare >> any provisions for themselves. > > R' Zev Sero suggested: > >> ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked >> dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. >> I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it >> has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the >> perspective of before it was baked. > > It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the > pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words > to have that meaning, that's okay. > > But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > >> They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, >> their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. > > This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of > Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is > unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff > they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that > the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. > > Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS > for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why > didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. > > The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not > make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then > they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just > before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to > departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water > together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. > > Akiva Miller > _______________________________________________ > Avodah mailing list > Avodah at lists.aishdas.org > http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org -- Zev Sero zev at sero.name From doniels at gmail.com Mon May 21 03:55:24 2018 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 13:55:24 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Generators_on_Shabbos_in_Israel?= Message-ID: R' Ben Rothke wrote: > I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, > AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. Also, apparently, as a form of protest. > With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is > automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the > potential chillul shabbos? R' Israel Meir Morgenstern put out an entire Sefer on this - http://www.virtualgeula.com/Stock/Books/Show/11160 - and regular updates as booklets. According to him, it's not nearly as automated as they pretend. IIRC he did on-site research, not relying on what the Electric Company wants people to believe. > Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before > shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. There are those who do that too. Check the roofs in Charedi neighborhoods - those with huge black reservoirs are doing just that. That said, I asked his father, R' D. A. Morgenstern shlita about getting one of those water reservoirs and he said it wasn't necessary. (I didn't ask him about electricity.) - Danny From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 20 14:10:28 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 00:10:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance Message-ID: <> What effect does this have on shabbat -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon May 21 23:19:20 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 02:19:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 17/05/18 09:26, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) > one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? > What is the source of this practice? (Me ? perhaps the original practice > of only one person saying Kaddish). I assume you mean in a shul where most of the kadeishim are said by multiple people. If so, I have never seen or heard of such a practise until you described it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 03:52:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:52:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Please see Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part I at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FCT8ohf&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=CAO%2FIULzGszY4Io1E7bD7BDzBnrECxpPQX6SlNtHF%2BU%3D&reserved=0 and Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part II at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FKVjQ16&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=RY%2FzL7M3vLMiFdh1MlJcdiMfMVPVPkRXx%2FtVGOhRiWk%3D&reserved=0 If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 05:04:49 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 08:04:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on > a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking > their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me ? > perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). In all the shuls in Elizabeth NJ, the practice is as follows: If no one has yahrzeit, then there are no restrictions on Kaddish. If someone does have a yahrzeit that day, then the Kaddish after Aleinu is said only by him/them (including anyone still in shloshim). As RJR guessed, this is in deference to the original minhag (still practiced in German shuls) that no Kaddish is ever said by more than one person. [A gabbai usually calls out "Yahrzeit!" in addition to the table-banging.] In Shacharis, the other kaddishes (such as after Shir Shel Yom) are said by all kaddish-sayers. After mincha, an additional Tehillim (usually #24) is recited, so that the other kaddish-sayers will have the opportunity to say kaddish. This is done at maariv too, except for situations (such as in Elul) when there's another Tehillim anyway. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:12:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:12:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 06:52:26AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly : going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. But it could still not be worth the learning missed. There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more "nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. micha at aishdas.org Thus excellence is not an event, http://www.aishdas.org but a habit. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aristotle From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 04:01:35 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:01:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Birkat Kohanim Message-ID: 1) The Priestly Threefold Benediction had the following: The first blessing has three words, the second five, the third seven. They remind us of the foundation for all blessings: The tree Patriarchs, the five books of the Torah, and the seven Heavens. Bachya 2) Israel said to God: "Why do you tell the priests to bless us? We desire Your blessing alone!" Said the Holy One: "Although I have told the priests to bless you, I shall stand in their company to give effect to the benediction." Therefore, at the end of the section it states explicitly (verse 27): "I will bless them." Midrash Numbers R. (11:2, 8, end). 3) Why do we ask God first to bless us and then keep or guard us? Because, if He does give us material blessings, we need to be protected from the evil results such prosperity may bring. The Hasidic Anthology P.359 quoting the Tzechiver Rebbe. 4) There is an interesting connection between Parshat Naso, which is the longest parsha in the Torah, comprising 176 verses, and the 119th Psalm (of Tehillim), which also contains 176 verses and is the longest in the book of Psalms. This psalm carries the distinct title, "Torah, the Way of Life." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 03:57:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:57:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Who Sings In This World Will Sing Also In The Next." Joshua b. Levi, Sanhedrin, 91b Message-ID: <37067FE1-055D-4504-A143-8FB433E508DE@cox.net> LA'AVOD AVODAT AVODA VA'AVODAT MASA 4:47... Note the four words in a row with the same root. (Probably the only place in the Torah with four words in a row with the same root). Rashi says the Avodat Avoda (kind of a strange phrase) refers to playing musical instruments. As far as Avodat Masa (Work of burden) is concerned ? the Gemara in Chulin comments that only when there is heavy manual labor involved, then there is an age limit for the Leviyim (as with the others). And it seems that the age limit of 50 was only for the carrying. In other words, a Levi was able to continue serving in the Mishkan after 50, but only for SHIRA and SH'MIRA. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 04:29:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:29:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor Message-ID: We are told that Hashem spoke the words Shamor and Zachor together, and I have presumed that we heard them together as well. But the Ramban (Devarim 5:12) suggests that "He (Moshe) is the one who heard Zachor, and they (heard) Shamor." The ArtScroll Chumash (page 969) quotes Rav Gedalya Shorr as explaining: <<< At the highest spiritual level - the one occupied by Moses - the awesome holiness of the Sabbath is such a totally positive phenomenon that one who understands its significance could not desecrate it. Thus, the positive remembrance of the Sabbath contains within itself the impossibility of violating it, just as one who loves another person need not be warned not to harm that person. This was the commandment that Moses "heard." Lesser people, however, do not grasp this exalted nature of the Sabbath. They had to be told that it is forbidden to desecrate the sacred day; when they absorbed the Ten Commandments, they "heard" primarily the negative commandment *safeguard*. >>> Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue May 22 08:19:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 11:19:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 22/05/18 06:52, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going > there and seeing the falls is not nothing. Not at all. One says a bracha on many things that one would much rather *not* see, and that one would certainly not go out of ones way to see. Also consider the rainbow. If one happens to see it one says a bracha, and quite a positive one, but one still should not tell others to go outside and see it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:27:43 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:27:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet : he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. But AGAIN, no one obligated RAMiller to hold like RSRH. Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim around, etc... : R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or : taken a plane and learned on the plane. : Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the : world as it is, namely, mostly gray. But this isn't about how RAMiller lived now about life in general. It's advice to a school, an institution dedicated to learning. What I am actually taken by is the importance RAM is giving girls' education. Contrast that to the number of seminaries today that are so exclusively focused on inspiring that textual education is limited. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When we are no longer able to change a situation micha at aishdas.org -- just think of an incurable disease such as http://www.aishdas.org inoperable cancer -- we are challenged to change Fax: (270) 514-1507 ourselves. - Victor Frankl (MSfM) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:54:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:54:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522135452.GC14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 07:29:51AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be : understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so : supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", : I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Except that the Rambam believes the Qol had nothing to do with accoustics or physical sound to begin with. That the term is just being used as a metaphor to help those of us who never experienced such things. (Moreh 2:48) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 06:52:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:52:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:12 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >But it could still not be worth the learning missed. > >There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples >of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at >the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. >And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more >"nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. I know that Rav Schwab also went to Switzerland. Many gedolim in Europe went in the summer to vacation resorts, and there are pictures of Mir students at summer camp. See http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rkimble/Mirweb/YeshivaStudents2.html R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or taken a plane and learned on the plane. Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the world as it is, namely, mostly gray. I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:08:39 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:08:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522140839.GD14915@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 05:24:24AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. ... With that in mind as a caveat, let's look at Chazal's chassidim harishonim. Aside from famously spending 9 hours a day (12 on days when Mussaf is said?) on tefillah, Our sages repeated [in a beraisa]: The early Chassidim would hide their thorns and broken pieces of glass in the middle of their fields 3 tefachim [roughly one foot] deep, so that it would not [even] stop the plowing. Rav Sheishes would put them to the fire, Ravan would place them in the Tigres [the large river alongside which his home city of Pumbedisa was built]. Rav Yehudah said: The person who wants to be a chassid [he should take care] to follow the words of [the tractates on] damages. Ravina said: The words of [Pirqei] Avos. Others say in response [that Ravina said]: the words of [the tractate] Berakhos [blessings]. - Bava Qama 30a "Amrei leih" as the end is most ocnsistent with what we normally discuss about them. However, notice everyone else assumes a BALC definition of chassidus. They come up in Seifer Hakabiim I as among the bravest of warriors, and among the last to accept the permissibility of fighting on Shabbos. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:22:35 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:22:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522142235.GE14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:05:47AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about : the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: : 1) When was that dough made? : 2) When was that dough baked? We are talking about 600,000 or so homes. I assume there are a range of answers. And when the Torah says they didn't have time for it to become chameitz, it means that in many or most of those homes... enough that the haste came to characterize how we left. Just trying to aid the imagination by three-dimensionalizing the peopl involved. : We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally : irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as : Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the : Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to : leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for : the trip... Already in this discussion it was raised that in Shemos we're told we left "be'etzem hayom". And yet, in yesterday's leining, we're told "hotziakha H' E-lokekha loylah" (Devarim 16:1) Rashi ad loc (based on Sifrei Devarim 128:5, Barakhos 9a) says that we got permission from Par'oh at night (Shemos 12:31). So there was, as you write, PLENTY of warning. But they also had get their neighbors' valutables, pack, get the animals in hand, find Yanky's favorite bottle, figure out who was getting custody of those kids wandering around that neighborhood that choshekh obliterated... So, little things like what to pack for lunch was rushed, and in most cases, that meant they were left with matzah. (Despite likely promising themselves that if they ever got out of Egypt, they would never eat lechem oni again!) Your 1 mil assumption, BTW, might come from the matzah of the seder they were commanded to make, and that this matzah was not necessarily KLP. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 11:02:42 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:02:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <24.27.04381.9FB540B5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:27 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls >will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. >It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim >around, etc... The question was asked about girls' high schools, not yeshiva boys! Do you really think he was concerned about the reduction in learning for the girls! I think not! He held that Niagara is "nothing" something that makes no sense to me in light of the fact the Falls are one of Hashem's wonders. [Email #2.] Here is what R. Miller actually said in response to a question about going to Niagara Falls. the question was asked about high schools taking girls to the Falls. As you can see, his statement about Niagara Falls being "nothing " had nothing to do with bitul Torah. I find his response baffling to say the least. YL Rav Avigdor Miller on Niagara Falls Q: What is your opinion of the importance of a high school taking their students on a trip to Niagara Falls? A: My opinion is that it's nothing at all. You have to travel so far, and spend so much money to see Niagara Falls?! Let's say, here's a frum girls' school. So they have the day off, or the week off, whatever it is. And where do they go? To Niagara Falls. What's in Niagara Falls?! A lot of water falling off a cliff. Nothing at all. Nothing at all! It's the yetzer harah. The yetzer harah makes everyone dissatisfied. People who are really happy with what they have are almost impossible to find. They may say, "We're happy," but they're not. And therefore, they're always seeking something else. And so, they travel to Niagara Falls. You might say differently, but I'm telling you, that's the reason why people travel to Niagara Falls. It's the yetzer harah that is making you dissatisfied. So you have to go to see water falling off a cliff. But really it's nothing at all. Of course, you yield a little bit to the yetzer harah in order that more girls should come to your school. You have an outing every year to get new talmidos, new students. But really it's nothing at all. TAPE # E-193 (June 1999) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:41:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522184112.GC16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 03:28:24PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to : be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to : area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume : measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they : were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. >From what I posted in the past from the AhS (OC 373:34), is seems the definitions themselves were not constants. A person is supposed to be using their own thumb, fist or forearm when the din is only about them. And standardized numbers are only invoked for things like eiruv where one has to serve many people and "ameru chakhamim denimdod lechumerah" -- use an ammah that covers a very high percentile of the people relying on it. And I tried to discuss what this would mean for shiurim like kezayis, where a person isn't using his own body or something he could only own one of, as a measure. But the discussion went in its own direction. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, micha at aishdas.org if only because it offers us the opportunity of http://www.aishdas.org self-fulfilling prophecy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:33:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:33:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:10:28AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : > By 2025, 10,000 satellites will provide constant Israeli video : > surveillance of the Middle East sufficient to carry out targeted killings ... : What effect does this have on shabbat How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space that has security camteras? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue May 22 16:41:12 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 19:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> References: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 22, 2018, 2:33 PM Micha Berger wrote: > How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space > that has security camteras? No major difference except that some people still avoid security cameras. As they become more common it will be harder to do. It is already difficult to go to many hotels over shabbat. As these devices appear everywhere some argue that poskim will be forced to accept some minority opinions or else we all stay home From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 23 07:53:38 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 14:53:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: From today's Hakhel email bulletin. THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 23 10:12:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:12:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:53:38PM +0000, Professor L. Levine forwarded (from Hakhel, who were forwarding as well): :> THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted :> at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. :> http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg It's very al-menas-leqabel-peras collecting a list of havtachos and segulos.. There is the stretch from the Rambam onward talking about how davening haneitz is better, or how one should daven as soon after as possible. (Which implies kevasiqin is superior, but not actually saying that.) But the general tenor of the list is about mystical rewards; even the references to the gemara. I didn't think it would be your speed. Also, Hakhel pushed my button on a pet peeve. Whomever at Hakhel writes titles knows diqduq better than whomever sent in about the poster. (Compare the subject line of this thread'S "K'Vosikin" with the quoted text's "VASIKIN".) "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. The words are "kevasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. No "the" there to remove; omitting the "ha-" is just wrong. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The meaning of life is to find your gift. micha at aishdas.org The purpose of life http://www.aishdas.org is to give it away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Pablo Picasso From zev at sero.name Wed May 23 10:21:31 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:21:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2f7061f4-8f98-52f7-67af-3204e6dd8b76@sero.name> On 23/05/18 13:12, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. That would be davening *laneitz*. I'm not sure what "davening neitz" might mean, but whatever it is, it's not AZ. I wonder about those who, on a plane going directly to or from EY, daven out the side windows. Are they davening to the Great Penguin Spirit at the South Pole? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed May 23 10:23:14 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 17:23:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <0A36D278-B7B9-4326-9245-B993DE48CB97@tenzerlunin.com> ?I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you?? I am certainly no chassid if Rav Miller. But criticizing anyone, and certainty not criticizing a Talmid chacham, for personal feelings about a family matter, seems to me to be in poor taste. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed May 23 12:42:02 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:42:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin References: Message-ID: At 01:12 PM 5/23/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >The words are "KEvasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, >and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. I use the terminology K'Vosikin, but Hakhel used Vasikin so I left it. I have often quipped that the only people who know Dikduk are maskilim! >:-} (Note the wicked grin.) Regrading segulos, I found the following of interest. From a footnote to letter 15 of the 19 Letters of RSRH "Segulah" denotes a property belonging permanently to an owner, to which no one else has any right or claim (cf. Bava Kamma 87b). YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 05:59:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 12:59:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? Message-ID: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 06:01:44 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 13:01:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life by a community. Do you agree? It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit and then no more rain falls. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 24 10:39:09 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 17:39:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Does_Ru=92ach_Ra=92ah_=28negative_spiri?= =?windows-1252?q?ts=29_still_exist_today=3F?= Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru?ach Ra?ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra?ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra?ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye. Scientists have revealed the presence of numerous invisible forces in the universe, such as gravity and electromagnetic waves. In fact, scientists today theorize that dark matter, which no one has ever seen, accounts for 80% of the matter in the universe. Just as G-d created indiscernible physical forces in the universe which physicists have shown to exist, Chazal identified invisible spiritual forces that potentially impact negatively on both the body and soul (see Teshuvos Vihanhogos 1:8). The Gemara (Shabbos 109a) states that when awakening in the morning, a person must wash his or her hands (three times) to remove Ru?ach Ra?ah. Until one does so, one must be careful not to touch the mouth, nose, eyes or ears so as not to allow the Ru?ach Ra?ah to enter into the body. Also, one may not touch food, since the Ru?ach Ra?ah will spread to the food. Although the Maharshal (Chulin 8:12) questions whether any form of Ru?ach Ra?ah still exists today, the consensus of most poskim is that this is still a concern. The Halachos of removing Ru?ach Ra?ah from one?s hands are codified in Shulchan Aruch (OC 4:2-5). If one touched food before washing in the morning, the Mishnah Berurah (4:14) writes that bedieved (after the fact) the food may be eaten, but if possible the food should be rinsed three times. The Gemara warns us about other forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah (damaging spirits). However, the Magen Avrohom (173:1) writes that there are some forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah that no longer pose a danger. For example, the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru?ach Ra?ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru?ach ra?ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one?s hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Fri May 25 00:10:22 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:10:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were > all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, > a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype > (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and I cringe every time I go past. But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 04:51:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 07:51:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 03:10 AM 5/25/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: >This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards >went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing >towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and >I cringe every time I go past. > >But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" >from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun >"netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There >certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 >in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not found in TANACH, so why not this one? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 06:49:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 09:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 07:51:45AM EDT, Prof. Levine wrote: : Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not : found in TANACH, so why not this one? Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different topic. People are trying to "do halakhah" without understanding the language the categories they're trying to implements are labeled in. Without understanding the language of Chazal, we are missing a lot of subtlety about what they meant. With bigger problems (if less about din) if you don't know the workings of the language of Tefillah, Tehillim or Chumash. Judaism without diqduq is a paler, less nuanced, thing. I expect you have a LOT from RSRH in your cut-n-paste library on this. Earlier, at 10:10:22AM IDT, Simon Montagu wrote the post that Prof Levine was replying to: : But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from : the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the : root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word : meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's : description of his dream and in Hazal. Nitzotz. Yeshaiah 1:31 uses it to refer to a spark, as it's something that starts a fire. Comes up a number of times in Chazal. Most famously to people who daven Ashkenaz, Shabbos 3:6: nosenin keli sachas haneir leqabeil nitzotzos. There is a beis hanitzotz in the BHMQ. Libun requires nitzotzos coming out of the keli. "Nitzotzos ein bahen mamash". (Shabbos 47b) BUT... getting back to that nuance theme... Haneitz is when there is enough light to make things like that sparkle. It's before alos, which is when the first spark of the sun is visible. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, micha at aishdas.org Our greatest fear is that we're powerful http://www.aishdas.org beyond measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anonymous From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 07:38:32 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:38:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:49 AM 5/25/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This >is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. >There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh >and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from >English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different >topic. Sadly, with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and texting, the English language is, IMO, going down the drain. People do not spell properly, write things that are not words, etc. This is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 08:22:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:22:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525152241.GC9702@aishdas.org> This isn't an MO issue, even if the subject line mentions the affiliation of the mechaneikh. For many people in yeshivish minyanim I attend, davening with a tzibbur is something one does between gaps in looking at a seifer. And among the yeshivish-lite (Shababnikim?), minyan is an excuse to get together for the qiddush. We really don't know how to daven. And all the time we spend teaching how to learn contributes to that. Defining religious inspiration in terms of learning, new knowledge, makes it hard to find what the point is in saying the same words yet again. When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. We define it those terms, tefillah won't get anywhere. On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:01:44PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have : the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community : and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that : did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their : prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life : by a community. Do you agree? I think so, because gap year subtlely teaches the message that true spirituality is incompatible with "reeal life". And that's why they need to go to a 1 year religious experience, with no job, no secular studies, no other concerns, not even the usual setting, in order to get inspiration that is supposed to last year the rest of your life. I believe it's an underdiscussed factor (among the many others) as to why so many MO youth go yeshivish during gap year or upon return. That implied message is not fully compatible with TuM or TiDE. That said... There are other factors. Telecom means you can hear from a famous rosh yeshiva regularly, and don't need to "settle" for someone local as a role model. Never mind that you can regularly connect with the LOR, so that he is actually in a position to better model the role. Also, the whole universal post-HS yeshiva thing feeds the RY-centric view (outside of chassidishe admorim) of religious leadership now prevalent, rather than the rabbinate. The shift from Agudas haRabbanim to the Agudah's (or in Israel, Degel's) Mo'etzes haRabbanim. Secondary effects: There is less tie and sense of belonging to a particular qehillah. More and more people daven in a handful of places, because this one is more convenient Fri night, another Shabbos morning, a third for Shabbos afternoon, Sunday, weekdays... Qehillah could be a source of positive peer pressure when inspiration is running low. But only if you feel attached to one. (An LOR mentioned to me this effect as a factor in OTD rates...) As per the famous machgich line: It's chazaras hasha"tz, not chazaras haSha"s! : It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately : go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit : and then no more rain falls. Although it's less that no more rain falls as much as the crops no longer accept irrigation water. Okay, the metaphor doesn't really work. A good rav who one can interact with regularly may be more useful :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals micha at aishdas.org is not as important as http://www.aishdas.org what you become by achieving your goals. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Henry David Thoreau From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 25 08:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos Message-ID: Halacha L'kovod Shabbos - "Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos" According to some Poskim it is prohibited to intentionally tan in the sun on Shabbos. Nevertheless it is permitted to walk or sit outdoors on a sunny day even if there is the probability of becoming tanned (even if one would be pleased that this happened - so long as one is not intentionally tanning) because the tanning is not intentional. One may also apply a thin and pourable suntan lotion for protection against sunburn when walking or sitting outdoors. However, one may not use a cream. S'U Minchas Yitzchok 5:32, Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchasa 18:70, Sefer 39 Melochos YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri May 25 08:56:20 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:56:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Questions on Theologically Motivated Message-ID: <3CB5DF8F-56E4-482D-BA72-9328800F007E@cox.net> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. 1) What is the difference between ?The religious person? and ?the truly religious person?? 2) What exactly do you mean by "cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:11:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:11:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: In this case, the problem pre-dated the smart? (or cell) phone. On 5/25/2018 4:38 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Sadly,? with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and > texting,? the English language is, IMO,? going down the drain.? People > do not spell properly,? write things that are not words,? etc.? This > is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:05:52 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:05:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular Message-ID: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Ever wonder what is the nafka mina of deciding if secular people are tinok sh'nishba or not? Here is a biggy. There is (apparently) a machloket between Rav Kanyevski and Rav Edelstein if it is permitted to donate a kidney if it may end up in someone secular. RK believes it shouldn't be done because he paskens like Rav Elyashiv that no one today has the din of tinok sh'nishba and therefore they shouldn't get this type of help from the religious. RE paskens like the classic Chazon Ish psak that today's secular people do have the tinok din? and therefore it is permitted to donate a kidney to a secular person. See the article (Hebrew) for more details. http://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/558795 From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 09:31:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:31:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? In-Reply-To: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525163124.GF9702@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:59:56PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious : person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are : theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic : inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral : creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a : Supreme Law?" : Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would : be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a : judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? I think it's self-evident. If the gov't is "of the people and by the people" (regardless of "for the people", appologies Pres Lincoln), then the only way to really seperate church and state would be to separate church and people. And "church" here includes not only all religion, but all religious stances. Including atheism, agnosticism, apathy and Sherleyism. A person's vote should be informed by their values. And a person's values by their religious stance -- whether religious, "truly religious", or an atheist. After all, an atheist cannot phrase abortion or end-of-life issues in terms of souls and therefore their etheism will inform their vote when Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice is a key issue. (Looking at you, Ireland!) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man micha at aishdas.org is how he treats someone http://www.aishdas.org who can do him absolutely no good. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Samuel Johnson From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:11:20 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:11:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Professor L. Levine" T >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra'ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra'ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye....? .....the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru'ach Ra'ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru'ach ra'ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one's hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL ? >>>>> ? It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children.? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:05:24 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:05:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398431932-c8d-935e@webjas-vaa194.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Rich, Joel" >From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" ? Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich ? ? >>>>> ? There is no constitutional requirement, no legal requirement, no ethical requirement and no logical requirement for each individual to erect a wall of separation between church and state in his own heart and mind.? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:52:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:52:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> >>>>> It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ============= IIRC R? A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 12:26:01 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:26:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525192601.GC25353@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 05:52:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : IIRC R' A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. It was ruach ra'ah, as per our discussion. Thus, neigl vasr. I think RAS's understanding was that Chazal were using evidence-based reasoning. People were getting sick, and since bad vapors were believed to be the cause of disease, Chazal presumed there was a ru'ach ra'ah. Which means that given that we today attibute disease to microbes, we would transvalue ruach ra'ah to refer to germs. I don't think too many others understand ru'ach ra'ah as a physical threat. Rashi (Taanis 22b "mipenei ruach ra'ah") understands ru'ach ra'ah to be a sheid entering the person -- "mipenei ruach ra'ah: shenichnas bo ruach sheidah..." and then he might drown or fall and die. Perhaps psychiatric illness? In which case, there is no clear transvaluation to today's science, as minds kind of straddle the physica - metaphysical fence. Sheidim /are/ intellects; so how do we map sheidim talk to rationalist psychology talk? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. micha at aishdas.org If you want time, you must make it. http://www.aishdas.org - Charles Buxton Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 09:30:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:30:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2 Message-ID: It is often confusing when trying to determine whether an item is subject to bishul akum or not. This article should help. YL Click here to download "Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2" From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:50:45 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:50:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular In-Reply-To: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> References: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <8849942693d54a55aab7bd43e07dddc7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/901388/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/from-the-rabbis-desk-choosing-a-recipient,-diverting-tzedakah/ Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz-From The Rabbi's Desk - Choosing a Recipient, Diverting Tzedakah Listen to the 1st part-lots to discuss KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 26 12:17:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:17:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Ben On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Toby Katz via Avodah wrote: > >>>>> > > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? > So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their > children. From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 14:07:40 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:07:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? Message-ID: <1639920e25b-c96-3738@webjas-vaa110.srv.aolmail.net> From:?"Prof. Levine" Date:?Wed, 22 Aug 2012 Subject:?Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? One may download this article that appeared in Tradition at http://www.mesora.org/mezuza-gordon.pdf Towards the end of this article the author writes To claim, then, that the Divine inscription, which directs the attention of the Jew to God, is possessed of its own potency, generating protective benefits, perverts a spiritual instrumentality into a cultic charm.... YL >>>> ? I hope I will be forgiven for resurrecting an old, old thread -- from 2012.? But I recently came across something when I was preparing for my Pirkei Avos shiur, and it made me think of this old thread. ? This is from _Ethics From Sinai_?by Irving Bunim.? On Pirkei Avos 5:22 he talks about the difference between the disciples of Avraham and the disciples of Bilaam.? The former have a sense of security; the latter have no sense of security in the world.?? ? ---quote-- Today we have all sorts of insurance policies: fire insurance, flood insurance, life insurance. On one level they represent a wise precaution [but mainly] the man of piety places his trust in the Almighty. When he closes his place of business at night, he knows there is a mezuzah on the door, to betoken His protection. At bedtime he recites the Shema, to invoke His protection. This is his basic insurance policy.... . The Sages tell of Artaban IV, the last King of Parthia, who sent his friend Rav a priceless jewel, with the message, << Send me something equally precious>>; and Rav sent him a mezuzah.? The king replied, <> Answered Rav < >> --end quote-- ? In a footnote, Bunim explains that that last sentence is a pasuk, Mishlei 6:22, and it applies to the mezuzah. This doesn't make the mezuzah an but does say that the mezuzah is protective. . (I am using << and >> instead of quotation marks in the hope of minimizing the number of random question marks AOL strews in my path.? If anyone can help me solve this problem please let me know.) . --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri May 25 13:29:34 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 16:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: . R' Simon Montagu wrote: > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards > went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing > towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", > and I cringe every time I go past. > > But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. ... I used to cringe too. But then I thought of a different limud zechus, and it's not just an excuse. I really believe this: They are not speaking the language that you'd like to think they are speaking. We are in the process of developing a new dialect, or creole, ... I don't know or care what the technical term might be, but consider the following phrases: making kiddush will be davening had paskened was mekadesh Technically speaking, I do concede that "davening k'vasikin" is meaningful, while "davening vasikin" is bizarre. But the truth, whether you like it or not, is that when someone says "davening vasikin", EVERYONE knows what the speaker meant. In this new language, there's nothing wrong with saying "davening vasikin". It is (I think) EXACTLY like the phrase "Good Shabbos", when the first word is pronounced "good" (and not "goot") and the second word is pronounced "SHABbos" (and not "shabBOS"). What language is that???? It's not Hebrew. It's not Yiddish. It's not English. It's something new. (Where "new" can have values of 50 to 100 years. Maybe more.) I am reminded of going to the bakery when I was twelve years old, and the sign by the brownies said that the price was: .10? each (If your computer messed that up, it is a decimal point, followed by a one, and a zero, and a "cents" sign. You know, a "c" with a line through it.) Twelve-year old me looked at the decimal point, and noted that the sign had a cents sign, and not a dollar sign. So I concluded that the price for the brownies was one-tenth of a cent each. I tried to buy ten of them for a penny. It didn't work. And I was pretty upset about it too. I knew I was right. Plenty of people tried to console me, but no one could explain my error. I was right, and everyone seemed to agree. It took about 40 years, but I finally figured out the lesson of that incident: What people SAY is not nearly as important as what they MEAN. Focus on the ikar, not the tafel. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sat May 26 19:46:16 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 22:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <68109a23-b784-405e-60d5-b1c30853273a@sero.name> Think of saying "netz" instead of "honetz" the same way you do about saying "bus" instead of "autobus", "phone" instead of "telephone", or "flu" instead of "influenza". I recently saw "'bus" written with an apostrophe, but that's very unusual. Most people have no idea that these are abbreviations of longer words. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Sun May 27 05:00:54 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 12:00:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is the meaning of Cholov Yisroel? Message-ID: Please see the video at https://goo.gl/S5mPTn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat May 26 18:36:57 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:36:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Behaaloscha YOU CAN'T WIN 'EM ALL Message-ID: <89C443B9-BCD6-4E3D-A485-59F3CF2C7515@cox.net> Both dedications, the dedication of the Mishkan by the Nesiim and the dedication of the Menorah by Aharon were required. The Midrash mentions that Aharon was depressed that neither he nor his tribe was included in the dedication of the Mishkan. This brings to mind the time when I gave a student of mine a part in the family service that he considered inferior and unimportant. Convinced I had the perfect answer, I confindently and proudly informed him about the dedications of the Mishkan and of the Menorah and how God comforted Aharon by saying that his part of the dedication ceremony was the greatest of all, in that he was charged with the kindling of the Menora. I was sure that would make my pupil feel much better but without batting an eyelash, my student immediately retorted: "Yeah, but you're not God!" I ended up being more depressed than Aharon! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:25:32 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:25:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? Message-ID: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and Reuvain claims insolvency. Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an ongoing business for Pesach? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:27:43 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:27:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? Message-ID: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose. (The gemara in b"b is worth looking at-what exactly is the halachic force of "people don't sell their homes"). Two items: 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? 2. What if the other fundraising fails-would the community sell the Beit Knesset? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 31 11:22:30 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:22:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns > beer over pesach), one source quoted is S?A C?M 99:7, which deals with a > case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows > money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din > is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and > Reuvain claims insolvency. > Do you think it?s a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an > ongoing business for Pesach? Not at all, for two separate reasons. First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. So in this case where the Jew sold not the chametz but the entire business, there's nothing to indicate that the sale was anything but serious and effective. Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to "pierce" it in the name of equity. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 1 03:28:46 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 06:28:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra Message-ID: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> With discussed "Higher" Bible Criticism before, we've discussed the IE on the topic before, RGS went the next step -- the Ramban on the IE on Bible Criticism. I am includng the comment, and I would have written something similar. :-)BBii! -Micha Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student R. Avraham Ibn Ezra has long been a controversial figure. R. Shlomo Luria (Yam Shel Shlomo, intro to Bava Kamma) respectfully but strongly rejects his entire approach to Torah commentary. What does the Ramban, one of the classical commentaries whose work serves as a foundation for modern Jewish thought, think of his predecessor, Ibn Ezra? He certainly disagrees often with Ibn Ezra, sometimes sharply. But there may be a more fundamental reason for opposition. At the end of Ramban's commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim, he writes that anyone who says that Ezra the scribe added to the Torah -- such as Gen. 13:6 or Deut. 3:11 -- is a heretic (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 p. 548). Ibn Ezra famously suggests that four verses imply post-Mosaic interpolations -- Gen. 12:6, 22:14, Deut. 3:11, 31:22. Ramban, who shows clear expertise in Ibn Ezra's Torah commentaryn quotes two of these four verses in describing the heretic! Coincidence? R. Betzalel Naor, in his annotated edition of Rashba's Ma'amar Al Yishma'el (Orot: Spring Valley, NY, 2008, pp. 25-27) finds this correspondence convincing. The author of the commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim must have been condemning Ibn Ezra as a heretic. Even though some supercommentaries and scholars dispute the claim that Ibn Ezra ever intended anything other than that Moshe wrote those verses prophetically, many believe he made the more radical claim.[1] If so, this passage from the Shir Ha-Shirim commentary condemns him as a heretic. However, R. Naor points out that Ramban did not write that commentary. R. Chaim Dov Chavel argues cogently in his introduction to that work that it was written by the earlier, kabbalist R. Ezra of Gerona (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 pp. 473-475). If so, we can ask whether Ramban agreed with R. Ezra's evaluation. R. Naor (ibid., pp. 136-143) makes the following points and suggestions: 1- Even in his introduction to his Torah commentary, Ramban expresses his mixed attitude toward Ibn Ezra, which he calls "a public rebuke and private affection." This might be used to describe a commentary that is both brilliant but occasionally sacrilegious. However, Ramban calls him "Rabbi" Ezra, a term of respect. 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him about Ibn Ezra. 3- Ramban unquestionably rejected any post-Mosaic interpolations into the Torah, as seen in his general introduction to his commentary. While hiss attitude toward the level of prophecy of the Torah varies (commentary to Num. 16:5), that is nowhere near the claim that any verse postdates Moshe. 4- Rabbeinu Tam wrote a poem in praise of Ibn Ezra. Perhaps this influenced Ramban to judge him favorably as an inadvertent heretic, which was a status that, according to the Ra'avad (Hilkhos Teshuvah 3:7), even great scholars fell into. 5- The Chida (Shem Ha-Gedolim, part 1, alef 89) quotes R. Binyamin Spinoza, a late eighteenth century rabbi, who deduces from Ramban's failure to argue against Ibn Ezra's radical suggestions that those comments must be late forgeries (interpolations?). Had Ramban seen them, he would surely have objected. In the end, once we determine that the commentary to Shir Ha-Shirim is misattributed, we can only speculate about Ramban's attitude toward Ibn Ezra. Maybe he agreed with R. Ezra of Gerona's condemnation or maybe he felt the belief was wrong but not heretical. Or maybe, as R. Naor suggested, he rejected the belief as heretical but not the person. (Republished from May '13) [1] On this disagreement, see R. Yonatan Kolatch, Masters of the Word, vol. 2 pp. 310-318. ------------------ J. C. Salomon May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late addition to the text. I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 1 08:03:13 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:03:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <70c7cc6f-c870-c610-b592-25a81940172f@sero.name> I find the entire idea that RABE's "secret of twelve" was a secret heresy to be without foundation, and think it more likely that this is wishful thinking by heretics who would like to find "a great tree" on which to hang their heresy. We don't know what the secret was, because it was a secret, but his comment on Vayishlach makes it unlikely to be what the "bible critics" claim it is. On Bereshis 12:6, he simply says: "If it is not so, then there is a secret here, and the intelligent person should be silent". On Bereshis 22:14, and Devarim 3:11 and 31:22 he makes no comment at all, and indeed there's nothing unusual to hint at, no reason to even suppose these pesukim might not have been written at the same time as what surrounds them. The "secret of the twelve" is in Devarim 1:1, on the words "Eleven days out of Chorev", which makes me think whatever this secret is relates to that, and perhaps to a mystical "twelfth day". It's there that he cryptically mentions these four pesukim, with no context or explanation; the theory that he was hinting at a deep secret heresy in his heart is therefore pure speculation and should be rejected. The Ramban's (or whoever wrote it) comment in Shir Hashirim only means that there existed such heretics in his day; there is not even the hint of a hint that RABE might have been among them. These are the same heretics who claimed him; there's no reason to suppose the Ramban agreed with that claim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sat Jun 2 20:49:06 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2018 23:49:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: >From R'Micha (Avodah V36n64): > When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? > We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. < If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; and "vaya'as kein Aharon." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 00:42:20 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 10:42:20 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua Message-ID: In last weeks parsha we have the Torah stating that Moshe's nevua was unique that Hashem spoke to him directly (see Rambam Yesodei Torah for the list of differences). However, I was bothered by the following question. A number of times the Torah writes Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe v'Aharon leimor where certain halachos are given over to both Moshe and Aharon. The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? In Behaalosecha it is clear that Aharon and Miriam dd not know that Moshe's nevua was different then theirs, yet, if Aharon heard these like a regular nevua as a vision not clearly then how did he not realize that Moshe got a clearer nevua then he did? The first thing Moshe did after getting halachos from Hashem was go over them with Aharon and his sons. Also, the pasuk says that Hashem called out to all 3, Moshe Aharon and Miriam to go out, and Rashi comments that it was one dibur something that a person cannot do. If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 01:54:52 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 11:54:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? Message-ID: At the beginning of Bamidbar the Meshech Chochma asks the following question. A Baal keri is prohibited from being in the machane leviya, if so how could the Leviim ever live with their wives (in the machane leviya) and become a baal keri? Ayen sham his answer. Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A Baal keri is prohibited from going there. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Jun 4 11:24:18 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:24:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> Message-ID: On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns >> beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a >> case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows >> money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din >> is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and >> Reuvain claims insolvency. >> Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an >> ongoing business for Pesach? [Zev Sero:] > Not at all, for two separate reasons. > First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones > property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a > going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and > continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected > to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. AIUI there was no change in the business other than the 'titular" ownership > Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get > away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently > made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of > the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that > the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he > still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity > the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the > Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that > he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So > none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not > an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own > chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, > and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that > CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to > "pierce" it in the name of equity. https://headlinesbook.podbean.com/mf/download/reyy6b/headlines_6-2-18.mp3 6/2/18 Owning Businesses in Halacha and Hashkafa: People who are making a difference- Freddy Friedman, Elchonon Schwartz, Rabbi Yosef Kushner, Nesanel Davis, Shimon Webster, Mr. Sol Werdiger The first half deals with a similar type of arrangement for nursing homes-so aiui you're saying it's up to the Rabbis to evaluate the "need" in each case to determine if haaramah is allowable? KT Joel Rich From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 13:46:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:46:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180604204625.GA25546@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:28:46AM -0400, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : : Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student ... : 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, : as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could : agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him : about Ibn Ezra. ... : J. C. Salomon : May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm : Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that : the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, : before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late : addition to the text. : I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that : certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might : have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate : extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight : verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. Except that the tell-tale idiom is "sod ha-12", not 8. From Devarim 1:1: ... And if you understand sod hasheneim asar... Pit stop: the standard text doesn't even say that, it says "(hasarim) [tz"l hashneim] asar". So there is a slight chance it doesn't even say 12. Back to the IE: ... also "Vayikhtov Moshe" (31:22), "VehaKenaani as Ba'aretz" (Bereishis 12:6), "Har H' Yeira'eh" (Bereishis 22:14), and also "arso eres barzel (Devarim 3:11), you will regonize the truth. If it does refer to the last 12 pesuqim (from Moshe going up Har Nevo), then there are 5 quotes in discussion. 4 refer to the future, likely quotes for someone to say were actually written later. But Og's iron bed? And besides, it's the last 8 pesuqim that amoraim argue how and if Moshe could have written them. Now, if Moshe couldn't write "and Moshe died", then it makes sense to argue that he couldn't write "and Moshe went up Har Nevo" if he never came back. But that is more conjecture, that this "12" is "12 pesuqim", and the last 12 pesuqim at that, and that it is related to chazal's discussion of last 8 pesuqim, and all this despite one of the quotes not having this "problem" of not being true when Moshe left us. And for all we know, the secret could be about prophecy. Even if all 5 were about the future, who knows what secret the IE posited to explain them? One of the parts of the Torah that is NOT in this list is the list of kings of Edom "lifnei melokh melekh liVnei Yisrael", Bereishis 36:31. On which the IE qrites: Some say that this parashah was written bederekh nevu'ah. And Yitzchaqi says in his book that this parashah was written in the days of Yehoshafat, and he explains the generations as he wished. This is why his name was called Yitzchaq -- kol hashomeia yitzachaq li. .. Vechalillah chalilah that the matter is as he said about the days of Yehoshafat. His book is worth burning... And he explains that the kings ran in rapid succession, this being warrior tribes of Edom. And the melekh Yisrael in the pasuq was Moshe, "vayhi bishurun Melekh. A lot of work if the IE was okay with later interpolations of narrative snippets of 12 pesuqim or less. In 2002, RGStudent reposed something from Cardozo at . See fn 50: Most enlightening is Spinoza's observation that some texts of the Torah, such as the ones in Genesis 12:6; 22:14, and Deuteronomy 1:2, must have been written many years after Moshe's death, since they reveal information that refers to latter days. Spinoza relies here on the famous Jewish commentator Ibn Ezra (1088-1167), who wrote that these verses were "mysteries" about "which the wise should be silent" (on Deuteronomy 1:2). The traditional understanding of Ibn Ezra, as also confirmed by the modern Jewish scholar Samuel David Luzzatto (ShaDaL) (1800-1865), is that these passages must be understood as prophetic and anticipating the future. .... However, in RGS's own essay on that web site writes: Also, phrases and even verses were added to the texts that perhaps even these prophets could not have written. For example, Ramban explains (Genesis 8:21) "G-d said in His heart" as meaning that this was only revealed to Moshe at the time of the writing of the Torah. See also Ralbag there and Moreh Nevuchim 1:29. Another case is Genesis 32:33, "Therefore the Children of Israel are not to eat the gid hanasheh." According to the Mishna and Gemara in Chullin 101b, as explained by Rashi, this verse was a later insertion by Moshe. See the Radak's commentary to this verse. It is possible that Ibn Ezra, in his "secrecy", believed that many more verses fall into this category and were inserted into pre-existing narrative by G-d to Moshe. His thesis there is that the Torah was redacted from pre-existing scrolls during the Exodus; that it was this redaction that was dictated to Moshe in Sinai. Since such megillos are named in a few places, it's a pretty hard thesis to totally dismiss. The only question is how much was already given in writing in texts like Seifer Milkhamos Hashem (cf Bamidbar 21:13). Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 14:21:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 17:21:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 11:49:06PM -0400, Michael Poppers via Avodah wrote: : If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two : recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; : and "vaya'as kein Aharon." But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. Y-mi Nedarim 9:4 (violna ed. 30b) has the famous machloqes between R' Aqiva and Ben Azai about whether the kelal gadol baTorah is "ve'havta lerei'akha" or "zeh seifer toledos adam". In the version in the introduction to the Ein Yaaqov, he quotes Ben Zoma, attributes Rav Akiva's opinion to Ben Nanas, and then adds a new opinion: Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi says: We have found a more inclusive verse than that, and it is, "The first lamb you shall sacrifice in the morning and the second lamb you shall sacrifice in the evening." Rabbi Ploni stood up and said: The halachah is like Ben Pazi as it is written, "As all that I show you, the structure of the Mishkan and all its vessels: so shall you do." That makes constancy kind of important. FWIW, here is how my discussion (ch 2. sec. 3) of that quote goes: There are two interesting implications to Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi's and Rabbi Ploni's words. First, Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi could be making the point that Rabbi Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov found in Ben Azzai's position -- the role of personal development. After all, there are a number of verses that discuss this offering; Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi chose a verse that discusses its constant and regular nature. In his opinion, this is the most important verse in the Torah -- even in his or our day, after the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash and there are no korbanos. Perhaps the point here is consistency in avodas Hashem in-and-of-itself, not limited to this one mitzvah. Just as service in the Mishkan has its schedule and routine, so too our observance must be a discipline with well-defined structure and consistency. Second, the anonymous rabbi endorses this view by quoting a verse about the Mishkan and its vessels' structure, their composition, not their service. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi statement is about something done in the Beis HaMikdash as part of its daily service, but the proof is about its structure. This rabbi is relating "so shall you do" not only to following the description of that structure Hashem gave us when building it but also to the discipline of the ritual within it. The discipline in avodas Hashem of the previous implication is a taken as fundamental part of what the building is. At least homiletically, we can say this is true of both microcosms -- not only the Mishkan, but also the human soul, as Rav Shimon ben Pazi is giving importance to structure and consistency even in our era, without a Mishkan or Beis HaMikdash. Discipline in avodas Hashem is not only part of the structure of what the Mishkan is, but also our own soul's structure. This homily would be consistent with Rav Shimon's statement ... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search micha at aishdas.org of a spiritual experience. You are a http://www.aishdas.org spiritual being immersed in a human Fax: (270) 514-1507 experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 15:06:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:06:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180604220616.GC25546@aishdas.org> On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Rn Toby Katz Avodah wrote: > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be > bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before > feeding their children. According the Tosafos (Yuma 77b) and the Yam Shel Shelomo (Chulin 8:31) there isn't any ru'ach ra'ah anymore. Unsurprizingly, the Rambam (Rotzeiach 12:5) doesn't mention ru'ach ra'ah when he discusses not putting food under your bed, his reason is "shema yipol bo davar hamaziq". If it is a modern and mundane issue, I would think ru'ach ra'ah is depression, not a physical illness. The day after Shaul learns he lost his throne, "vatilach ruach E-lokim ra'ah el Sha'ul". (Shemu'el I 18:9) On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:17:24PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Actually, you need to do both for neigl vasr, as you need to get rid of chatzitzos. AhS 161:1, MB s"q 7,10. So the question might be... What's the problem with chatzitzos? Can someone make an argument that it's about places where disease can hide? Then why haqpadah? I really don't know what to do with RASoloveitchik's suggestion that ru'ach ra'ah can be things like germs. If it's a saqanas nefashos thing, then pesaqim should indeed be more maqpidim about things like soap than about using a cup, koach gavra, etc... BUT... this is RAS. I am assuming he did indeed have an explanation. Keeping the discussion alive (and CC-ing R Harry Maryles) to see if we can get down to one. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water micha at aishdas.org that softens the potato, hardens the egg. http://www.aishdas.org It's not about the circumstance, Fax: (270) 514-1507 but rather what you are made of. From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Tue Jun 5 19:06:11 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 22:06:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. < Agreed, and both examples I mentioned are examples of doing, not knowing. The point is that not just "v'halachta bidrachav" but also that "v'halachta" in the path of the noted examples, that one should imitate paragons of *derech H'*. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 05:07:43 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah Message-ID: The article below gives many halachas that are applicable to situations where gentile workers are employed in one's home. IMO it is worth reading carefully. YL Click here to download "Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 6 10:49:54 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:49:54 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Why I support the private kashrut initiative of Tzohar rabbis Message-ID: <628e074c-450f-a464-ed95-2eca5d3ed825@zahav.net.il> Placing this article in Avodah because Rav Melamed uses the model of the 70 elders to show how differences in community leadership should be handled. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22250 A few critical paragraphs: But when groups and institutions try to impose their opinion on members of another circle, and abolish the status of their rabbis (and to boycott them from becoming rabbinical judges and rabbis) we are no longer speaking of a situation where the rabbis of Tzohar should also establish a kashrut organization, but rather a situation in which it is almost obligatory for them to establish one, just like other accepted rabbinic organizations, in order to give halachic and Torah expression to their part in the Torah. If they do not, then they are similar to a prophet who suppresses his prophecy, or as our Sages said: ? Yea, all her slain are a mighty host? ? this refers to a disciple who has attained the qualification to decide questions of law, and does not decide them? (Sotah 22a). How Does a Difficult Dispute Develop? At first, there is an argument over a focused halakhic issue. However, when an agreement is not reached, instead of agreeing to disagree and continuing to respect each other, one side thinks that the other has no authority to retain his position, because, essentially, his position is inferior, since he belongs to a liberal circle, or his position differs from that of most rabbis. Then, that same party departs from the particular halakhic issue they have debated, and moves on to a more acute arena, in which the main argument is that the rabbi against whom he is arguing with is not authorized to express a halachic position, for in any case, who appointed him to be a rabbi who can express a position at all? Since this argument is not convincing enough, and the rabbi who is being attacked remains in his position, consequently we are now moving over to a dispute of a different magnitude ? since we are no longer dealing with a person who rules on a matter without authority, but with a person who undermines the foundations of authority as a whole, and thus, it is compulsory to wage an all-out war against him? From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 11:31:07 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 18:31:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: Please see the article at Eretz Yisroel, Zionism,and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH This article is from The Jewish Observer Vol. 23 No. 6 September 1990/Adar 5751 and is available at https://goo.gl/LNRpZZ YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 7 01:06:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 08:06:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra Message-ID: The letter below appears on pages 113 - 114 of this week's Flatbush Jewish Journal. It is not clear to me that all FJJ readers appreciate the gadlus of Rabbi Shamshon Raphael Hirsch when it came to Torah. Indeed, last week MW (whomever this may be) referred to RSRH as "Reb Shamshon Refoel Hirsch" rather than as Rabbi or Rav or even Rabbiner. Therefore, I feel that I should refer FJJ readers to Rav Yaakov Perlow's article Rav S. R. Hirsch - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra that appears in The World of Hirschian Teachings, An Anthology on the Hirsch Chumash and the Hashkafa of Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, Published for the Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer Foundation, Feldheim, 2008. Reading this article will give one a true understanding of how great a Torah scholar RSRH was. Moreover, the following is from page 102 of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, Architect of Torah Judaism for the Modern World by Rabbi Eliyahu Meir Klugman. We also have the assessment of the K?sav Sofer, Rabbi Avrohom Shmuel Binyamin Sofer, Rabbi of Pressburg and leader of Hungarian Jewry. The K'sav Sofer first met Rabbi Hirsch in Vienna, not long after the latter assumed his post in Nikolsburg. On the first Shabbos after his return to Pressburg, a large crowd came to his home for Shalosh Seudos in order to hear his observations about the new Chief Rabbi. Their curiosity was understandable, since, as followers of the Chasam Sofer, the K'sav Sofer's father, they harbored deep suspicions of anyone versed in secular studies, which they considered a potent danger to the Jewish people. The K?sav Sofer described his meeting with Rabbi Hirsch in the following terms: ?We spoke at length on Torah subjects with the new ?Rosh Medinah? and whatever topic we discussed, his reply showed that he had Shas and poskim on his fingertips. We, the rabbonim of Hungary, have to consider ourselves very fortunate that he holds us to be his superiors as scholars, for if he were only aware of the extent of his own scholarship, we would have no rest from him.? Finally, a talmud muvhak of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, ZT"L, told me that Rav Hunter once told him that anything that Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch wrote is Kodesh Kedoshim. Based on this It should be clear to all that what RSRH wrote about one going to see the wonders of nature is to be taken very seriously. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 7 06:02:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 13:02:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? Message-ID: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, how else might the desired result be accomplished? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 7 07:48:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 10:48:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: [VBM] Chassidic Service of God (continued) Message-ID: <20180607144830.GA19716@aishdas.org> This is where our compartmentalization into camps holds us back. The Piaseczner Rebbe (the "Aish Qodesh", R' Kalonymous Kalman Shapiro zt"l Hy"d) is largely reinventing Mussar. Admittedly his goals are different; the elements of the ideal Jew that are emphasized in Chassidus and Mussar differ. But he procedes to build and advocate from scratch a toolset for somthing that another tenu'ah invested the lion's share of their effort on -- self-awareness. To quote RYGB's loose translation of REEDessler (MmE vol 5 pp 35-39), cut-n-pasted from : In our times: The qualities of "Emet" that personified the Ba'alei Mussar [Mussar Masters] are already extinct. We no longer find individuals whose hearts are full with profound truth, with a strong and true sense of Cheshbon HaNefesh [complete and rigorous reckoning of one's spiritual status and progress]... Contemporary Chassidus lacks the component that was once at its core: Avodas Hashem with dveykus... For today's era, there remain only one alternative: To take up everything and anything that can be of aid to Yahadus; the wisdom of both Mussar and Chassidus together. Perhaps together they can inspire us to great understandings and illuminations. Perhaps together they might open within us reverence and appreciation of our holy Torah. Perhaps the arousal of Mussar can bring us to a little Chassidic hislahavus. And perhaps the hislahavus will somewhat fortify one for a Cheshbon HaNefesh. Perhaps through all these means together we may merit to ascend in spirituality and strengthen our position as Bnei Torah [adherents of a Torah centered lifestyle] with an intensified Judaism. May G-d assist us to attain all this! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight, micha at aishdas.org and he wants to sleep well that night too." http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok Fax: (270) 514-1507 Yeshivat Har Etzion PHILOSOPHY > Great Thinkers > The Piaseczner Rebbe > Shiur #24: Chassidic Service of God (continued) Dr. Ron Wacks Ways of Achieving Hitragshut (continued) The Importance of Self-Awareness One of the primary keys for entering the gates of inner service is self-awareness. Remarkably, although a person is generally concerned for his own wellbeing, he is not always aware of what is happening in his own inner world. His psyche is in constant movement, expressing its will and its aspirations, but even though the person may sense something going on, he is not equipped to interpret it and to take the appropriate steps: The hiddenness and imperceptibility of what is happening inside him distances a person greatly from himself. He is unfamiliar with himself and ignorant of what goes on inside him. Even the psyche of the simplest person never ceases its restlessness and writhing, crying out in supplication over its lowliness, and over all the blows and trials and tribulations that he causes it through his foolish actions, speech, and thoughts. The fact that he senses none of this is because he gives no thought to listening to this tempestuous wretch.[1] A person naturally tends to occupy himself with matters external to himself; he is not attentive to his own inner workings. It is easier to engage with the outside world, with its affairs of greater and lesser importance, than it is to listen inwardly. Even when he detects inner movement, he is unable to decode and make sense of it: For that is the way of man: he always strive for that which is extraneous to himself, the affairs of the world, both those that are vital and those that are not. He interests himself in what happens at the end of the world, but he pays no heed to his own psyche, and does not listen and give attention to the business that is within him. Or he may sense it, but since even at the moment that he senses it his desire, his attention, and his thought are turned to the lowly muck of this world, he hears the moaning and its voice only weakly. This may be compared to a person who is asleep and a mosquito bites him on his forehead. If he is a merchant, he dreams that a bag of his merchandise has fallen on his forehead and struck him; if he is a tailor, he dreams that his needle has pricked his forehead, etc. Each individual perceives his inner workings in the guise of his own dreams.[2] The psyche expresses its longings in different forms, but often a person is unable to decode any of these spiritual needs, such as a desire for teshuva and the fear of God. Sometimes, when he feels something oppressive inside him, he goes to the refrigerator and takes out a bottle of sweet drink and some cake, or he tries to distract himself by joking with his friends. Often, a person makes the mistake of thinking that it is his body that is suffering physical hunger, and he believes that he can satiate it by filling his stomach - while in fact it is his psyche that is starved and crying out in distress: Sometimes the psyche of a Jew is animated by regret, teshuva, submission, fear of God, and so on, and the person feels some sort of movement and restlessness within himself, but he has no idea what the problem is. He thinks he may be hungry, or thirsty, or in need of some wine and wafers, or he may think that he has fallen into melancholy, and in order to lift his spirits he chatters playfully with the members of his household, or goes over to a friend to joke and engage in lashon ha-ra, gossip, foolishness, etc.[3] R. Kalonymus's grandfather, author of Maor Va-Shemesh, also addresses the connection between an unhappy psyche and stuffing oneself with food. Attention should be paid to the chain of wrongdoing: Bnei Yisrael complain, convincing themselves of how bad things are for them. This leads them to melancholy, which gives rise to the craving for meat and the punishment that follows: "And when the people complained, it displeased the Lord" - This means that they fell into melancholy... and the Lord's fire burned amongst them, for black bile is detestable and abhorrent, for it is a tinge of idolatry... and for this reason they were punished. And Moshe prayed, and the fire subsided, but it continued through their melancholy, for they felt a lusting and they said, "Who will feed us meat?" For as we explained, the lust for food is drawn from black bile... Therefore, one has to distance oneself far from melancholy, for it brings a person to all sorts of sins. And despondence begins with a growing desire to eat, as we see when a person is mired in black bile, heaven forfend, he eats with lust, ravenously, and very quickly.[4] When a person tries to "quiet" his inner distress with sweets and snacks, not only has his psyche not received what it really wanted, but it is greatly pained by his failure to understand its true needs. Sometimes, after a person continually ignores and steamrolls his inner voice, it simply grows silent: Sometimes, after all of these actions which he has done, he still feels inner discomfort, since with these worthless medicines not only has he not cured the sores of his psyche, nor given it relief from the blows that he has administered to it, but he has in fact added further injury and assault. But sometimes it happens that after these misguided actions he actually feels better, and his spirit is quieted within him, because the blows and injuries and sores that he has added through his actions have rendered his psyche unconscious, or he has piled mounds of dirt and refuse over it to the point that it is completely hidden. Then he will no longer hear even the slightest peep out of it - and he can relax.[5] The psyche also transmits signals of joy, not only distress. A person often misses these signals too, failing to give them expression. For example, when a person fulfills a mitzva or rejoices in his prayer, and his psyche awakens with joy and hitragshut, he will fail to notice this - both because of his general insensitivity to his inner world and because his attention is oriented elsewhere. R. Kalonymus argues that the way to achieve hitragshut and hitlahavut is not by "importing" new feelings from outside of oneself; they are already to be found inside him. However, they must be given more powerful expression and allowed to effect a greater influence on his consciousness: It is not new excitements that you need to seek, nor a heavenly-initiated awakening. First and foremost, the work is required of you yourself, for everything exists within you. You are capable of hitragshut, and you are a person who is able to attain fervor; you simply need to try to get to know yourself and what is going on inside. Your psyche is full of signals, shouts, and supplications, and all you need to do is to provide space within yourself within which it can be revealed and strengthened. Then you will come to know and feel your natural hitragshut, with no need to garb yourself and your needs.[6] R. Kalonymus not only demands self-awareness, but also explains how to attain it. A person has to learn to listen to his own inner world and ask himself questions: Is my psyche happy, and if so, about what? Is my psyche sad, and if so, why? What are the inner feelings that accompany me in this situation, and how did they come about? At first, this work will involve only the major movements of the psyche. It is not advisable to start with weaker movements, since, owing to their delicate nature, their meaning is not always clear. Attention should therefore be paid to the stronger signals, and when one notices them, he should "provide space" and allow them expression. This is facilitated through paying attention to them, strengthening them, and allowing them to reveal themselves through our power of imagination. We will now elaborate on each of these tools individually. (To be continued) Translated by Kaeren Fish _______________________ [1] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 29. [2] Ibid., p. 40. [3] Ibid. [4] R. Kalman Kalonymus Epstein Ha-Levi, Maor Va-Shemesh (Jerusalem, 5748), Parashat Beha'alotekha. [5] Ibid., p. 29. [6] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 30. Copyright ? 1997-2017 by Yeshivat Har Etzion From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 7 21:17:05 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 06:17:05 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <950f4b82-36d2-0f57-abef-73c113119730@zahav.net.il> RSH's third objection to Rav Kalisher is the key one (RSH couldn't imagine that non-religious Jews could be the vehicle for redemption). Once you say that "I can't imagine. . . " than everything else has to fit into that paradigm that you just set up for yourself. The author's conclusions are also strange. To mention all the benefits and great things that have come from the state but to still look at it as if it is a treif piece of meat boggles my mind. I would also add that if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - he should move here. Like I always tell my Reform Jewish friends - If you move here, you get a vote which is 10,000 times (at least) more important than Facebook posts. Ben From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 07:09:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:09:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi Sacks on 'The Great Partnership' Message-ID: <20180608140928.GA11777@aishdas.org> R/L J Sacks on Science and Religion. In short: It's Gould's notion of non-overlapping magesteria -- they can't contradict, the discuss different topics. But RJS says it so well, giving the idea emotional "punch". And sometimes even maaminim need a reminder that the point of religion isn't to fill in the gaps in our scientific knowledge. (I know I do.) Our rishonim offer answers to the question of why an Omnicient and Omnipotent G-d would create a universe that requires His intervention once in a while. His Wisdom inheres more in the things science CAN explain than in the miracles that even in principle can't be studied scientifically. (Pace the Ralbag, whose actual position on nissim is a longer discussion.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LltoUg_WL2k That said, I think this is overstatement, as they do overlap when it comes to discussion of origins. I would instead posit "barely overlapping magesteria" -- they only overlap at the fringes, where no open question can threaten my trust in either. Yahadus explains the "why?" of life to well to question, and many scientific theories do too well at the "how?" I have a question about where they seem to contradict? Nu nu. Scientists believe that quantum gravity has an answer, and don't expect either QM or Relativity to be overturned just because we have a question where their fringes overlap. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 09:19:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 12:19:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? Message-ID: From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) apply only to male Kohanim, or does it also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V?kidashto applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K?Hilchaso 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash. This description applies only to men and not to women. Although the daughters of Kohanim are entitled to eat Teruma and may eat from certain Korbanos that are designated only for Kohanim, they are not eligible to serve in the Beis Hamikdash. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:48:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:48:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? Message-ID: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> I wanted to talk this out here, as this se'if in the AhS appears to use the kind of reasoning that is exactly what I argued for decades with C rabbis (and more recently with one or two of the more innovative OO rabbis) isn't how halakhah should be done. AhS CM 89:2 discusses the reason for a taqanah that if a sakhir and the BhB disagree about whether the sakhir had been paid, the sakhir can make a shevu'ah binqitas cheifetz, and the employer would have to pay. Normally, f two sides make conflicting unsupported claims, the rule would be that the defendent (the nitba) would make a shevu'as heises (which is a less demanding shevu'ah than the shevu'ah BNC) and not pay. A taqanah beyond the usual hamotzi meichaveiro alav hara'ayah to disuade liars. The stated reason for treating the sakhir as a special case is that many times the employer has many workers, and it's more likely he wouldn't remember the details of who he paid what than the employee not remembering the details of getting paid. However, the AhS continues, this doesn't explain why chazal worried more about employers than salespeople. Someone who has a lot of customers is prone to the same parallel likelihood of confusion. So, he explains that the iqar haataqanah is because employees have a lot riding on getting paid, "nosei es nafsho lehachayos nafesho venefesh benei beiso, chasu chaza"l alav..." And therefore even if it's a boss who has only one employee, and he isn't overhwlmed keeping track of vay, lo chilqu chakhamim. Doesn't this sound bad? Chazal really had some social end in mind, so they invented some pro forma excuse to justify their conclusion. I guess that in dinei mamunus, Chazal can do whatever they want -- hefqer BD hefqer -- and therefore on /that/ ground they can force payment of a worker for the sake of social justice. But that's not what the AhS invokes. Thoughts? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 12:15:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:15:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din but a takanah. By definition, takanos are ends-driven; they're made not because this is what we believe Hashem ordered, nor to avoid some issur, but in order to achieve some desirable goal. The same applies to the usual shvuas hesses that Chazal instituted; it's to achieve the two desirable goals of creating a disincentive for defendants to lie, and of assuring the plaintiff that the courts are not biased against him. So I see no problem with Chazal making a special takana for the benefit of employees, since the Torah itself gives their needs priority, and gives the reason that employees often risk their lives for their livelihood. And just as the Torah does not distinguish between those employees who actually do risk their lives and those who sit on comfortable chairs in air-conditions offices and risk nothing more serious than a paper-cut or RSI, Chazal saw no need to distinguish between a lone employee and one among many. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 12:53:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:53:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:35PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din : but a takanah... Not just a taqanah, a taqanah that needs an justification for why they're not following the din deOraisa. And so simply saying "it's a taqanah" doesn't really satisfy me. DeOraisa, the employer would have the right to not pay the money. The usual taqanah for conflicting claims would require he make a shevu'as heises first. Here, we're putting the power to extract the employer's money despite the deOraisa. Had the taqanah not violated the deOraisa, but went "beyond" it, I wouldn't have asked. And as I said, had the AhS invokved hefqer BD hefqer, we would need no excuse for how Chazal can move money despite the deOraisa. But he doesn't. Instead, he says they came up with a justication that isn't real. That opens a whole pandora's box of ascribing hidden "social justice" reasons for legislation that has an explicit explanation already given. And it makes it sound like legal mechanism can indeed be nothing more than a hopp to jump through, rather than justification in-and-of itself. So my question isn't "how did they make this taqanah", but "how can you claim that they wanted to ignore a deOraisa because they thought they had a 'more moral' alternative, and then just found some way to legally justify it?" :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the micha at aishdas.org second time and as if you had acted the first http://www.aishdas.org time as wrongly as you are about to act now! Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 12:15:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 15:15:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:52 PM 6/8/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's >OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: >: A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto >: applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso >: 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he >: offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... > >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to be "honored" like all other Kohanim? I recall that there was a Kohein when I lived in Elizabeth who had a deformed hand. However, I think that he still got the first aliya. However, I do not think that he duchened. He left the shul right before duchening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:52:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:52:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: : A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto : applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso : 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he : offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 13:21:23 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:21:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:09PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to : >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. : : If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability : that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to : be "honored" like all other Kohanim? ... I think aliyah laTorah is different than duchaning because it's not about the kohein as a kohein, but mishum tiqun olam. So, we divy out the kavod according to strict rules, so that society runs smoother. Not based on qedushah. Maybe it's even kavod vs qedushah. Tangents: BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not a kofer. There is also a separate discussion is someone who is wheelchair bound can get an aliyah at all, or if the chiyuv for an oleh to stand is me'aqiev. From the pasuq "amod imadi". The accepted pesaq really only permits calling someone who can't stand if their reason for not being able to stand is obvious or known to the tzibbur. IOW, oneis Rachamanah patrei for his non-standing, but the kavod haTorah is an issue if it looks bad to the tzibbur. I didn't spend the same time researching this tangent, as you can tell by the lack of a single source. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe micha at aishdas.org you can be certain of improving, http://www.aishdas.org and that's your own self. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aldous Huxley From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:41:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9e545852-4e47-2e1a-0f1b-f6fe418d3daa@sero.name> I don't think it's accurate to say that mid'oraisa he doesn't have to pay. If he really does owe the money then mid'oraisa he has to pay, and has an *additional* obligation to pay this debt over all other debts, because of "lo solin". The only question is whether he really owes the money or not. Normally, the way the Torah left things, we can't be sure he owes it, so we can't *force* him to pay; we have to leave it up to his own conscience. But his obligation (or lack thereof) is unchanged. Now Chazal come along and meddle with that setup, for social reasons. In order to discourage defendants from falsely denying their liability, and in order to give plaintiffs a sense that justice has been done, they instituted the sh'vuas hesses. If you don't swear we'll make you pay, despite the Torah saying we can't. According to you, how could they do that? Here Chazal went a bit further: We can't make the defendant swear, because he may honestly have forgotten or got confused, so we tell the plaintiff that if he's willing to swear, not just hesses but binkitas chefetz, then we'll believe him, and once we do believe him the *Torah* says the defendant must pay. Comes the Aruch Hashulchan and asks, what about the exceptional case where the defendant is not confused and unlikely to have forgotten? And what about other defendants who may be confused or have forgotten? And he answers "lo plug" because there's a deeper reason for the takana here. It's not just that we're worried about the defendant inadvertently making a false oath; if he's really worried about that let him pay up, but if he's not worried we won't be. The deeper reason why we've given the plaintiff a slight edge here is that we're emulating the Torah itself, which made the "takana" of "lo solin" for the explicit reason that employees *in general* risk their lives and so deserve extra protection. And just as it did not distinguish between employees, so we won't either. I have a bigger question, though: This takana seems to be biased *against* the employee whose employer is a yerei shamayim. Without the takana the employer would decline to swear because he can't be sure he's right, and he'd have to pay. Now we say no, you don't have to pay until we test the employee, more rigorously than we were going to test you. So mah ho'ilu chachamim betakanasam? It seems as if our real concern here is not for the employee's welfare but to protect honest employers from employee fraud! That's surely a worthy goal, but opposite to the one the AhS posits. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 9 20:19:14 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2018 23:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Korach "There's Good Even In The Worst Of Us" Message-ID: The rabbis saw a hint that while the Korah rebellion ended so tragically, it had the seeds of redemption. In the Shabbos Maariv we recite Psalm 92: Tzaddik katamar yifrach, the righteous will blossom like the palm tree (v. 13). The last letters of those 3 Hebrew words (kuf, reish, chet) spell Korah. Although blinded by anger and envy, Korah's egalitarian vision will indeed be established. Then the "righteous will blossom like the palm tree, and grow mighty like a cedar in Lebanon, planted in the house of the Lord." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:47:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <36fd05b2-e021-0e98-cdcc-6e84353eb84b@sero.name> On 08/06/18 16:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. > Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the > first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not > a kofer. This is not just RMF, it's the plain halacha. A kohen who eats treif and breaks shabbos can even duchen, let alone get the first aliyah. Even if he's living with a nochris he can still duchen. But the moment she converts and marries him he can no longer duchen. And if he can't duchen then of course he can't get the first aliya either. (The baal mum is different. The only reason he can't duchen is because the deformity is in his hand; if it were anywhere else he could duchen. And even so he still has a *chiyuv* to duchen, which is why he has to leave before retzei in order to avoid it. A cohen married to a grusha doesn't have to leave, since he is a temporary chalal and thus has no chiyuv.) It seems to me that "vekidashto" *does* apply to the wives of cohanim, because for purposes of kavod the general rule is ishto kegufo, and a wife who marries up gets her husband's social status. As for his unmarried daughters, it seems to me that they too are included in their father's status for this purpose, since they are called by his name. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 11 08:07:53 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:07:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. There are two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Should the Kohanim be asked to leave the shul during Kriyas HaTorah, so that both Yisroelim will receive aliyos? A. The Mishnah Berurah (135:9) writes that a Kohen may not give up his aliyah because we are obligated to honor a Kohen. This is the case not only on Shabbos or Yom Tov when the Shuls are crowded and it will be noticeable, but even on a Monday or Thursday when it is less obvious. However, many poskim, including Igros Moshe (OC 3:20), write that if there is a pressing need on a Monday or Thursday, a Kohen may be mochel (forgo) his kovod and give up his right to the first aliyah. In such a situation, the Kohen exits the Shul before the Torah reading so as not to cast any doubts on his lineage. In contrast, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt?l held that it is not proper for a Kohen to relinquish his aliyah. Aside from the issue of the Kohen being mochel (forgoing) the honor of receiving the first aliyah, there will also be a deficiency in the Kriyas HaTorah itself. The Gemara (Megilla 21b) states that the three aliyos on Monday and Thursday and on Shabbos Mincha were instituted to correspond to the three categories of Jews: Kohanim, Levi?im and Yisroelim. If a Kohen is not called up for an aliyah, the Kriyas HaTorah is lacking this kiyum (fulfillment) of reflecting the three categories of Jews. Therefore, one should not ask a Kohen to forgo his aliyah, since this would diminish the fulfillment of the mitzvah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Jun 11 19:53:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:23:36 +0930 Subject: [Avodah] Kashrus - Wooden Sticks and Feathers Message-ID: If a wooden stick is used to stir a hot pot of non-K meat, it becomes non-K. It will in turn, render a pot of hot Kosher food non-K, if it is used, whilst fresh, to stir that pot. But, wood is not a food. May one eat the shavings of that wooden stick? Probably yes. Hog hair is not a food and it cannot be deemed to be non-K. Therefore one may sprinkle hog hair on ones food, or cook it in ones soup. Does it get worse if the hog hair is first cooked in a pot of non-K meat? Probably yes. This is an issue faced today by Kashrus agencies regarding food ingredients/additives that are extracted from non-foods, like bird feathers. In order to facilitate plucking, the dead, non-Shechted birds have been plunged into a tank of boiling water. Thus the feathers have absorbed the non-K taste of the birds. Although the feathers are dissolved in acids in order to extract what will be used as food additives, this consideration is not accepted regarding gelatine since gelatine is a 'food' at the conclusion of its processing, and it is similarly not accepted by the Kashrus agencies for feathers. Some suggest that there is a difference between the two. Gelatine is worse because it is extracted from the non-K item itself i.e. the skin and bones, whereas the non-K absorbed in the feathers, is not the source of the extracted food/additive which are derived exclusively from the feathers that are a non-food. Therefore, even though skin and bones do become inedible during their processing, this is just a temporary state, generated by acids and alkali, which are removed from the finished product and the finished product is essentially still the same skin and bones. Whereas the product extracted from feathers is entirely disassociated with the absorbed non-K flavour and is therefore K. Nevertheless, a well known Rav argues that in any case where the chemical is removed, the product returns to its non-K status, even in the case of feathers. It will permitted only if the chemical remains but is camouflaged by other additives. Therefore, feathers and what is derived from them remain prohibited because whatever chemicals are used to process and extract the foods/additives, are removed. Is it possible that the foods/additives extracted from the feathers are permitted because all, or almost all of the absorbed non-K flavour is removed - in other words, just as we can Kasher our wooden stick, so too we can deem the feathers to have been Kashered? Now if we were to actually Kasher the feathers or the wooden stick, we require 60 times the volume of the stick. For example, a 500g stick requires 30 litres [500gX60=30,000g] and 3 tonnes of feathers would require [3,000litresX60=500,000 litres] which we obviously dont have in the normal processing. Now the only reason we cannot Kasher in less than 60 is ChaNaN [ChaTiCha NaAsis Neveilah] This means, Kashering is not a process of dilution of the prohibited component that is absorbed until it is less that 1:60, in which case we could immerse the non-K spoon or feathers in 100 small pots of boiling water and each dip would further dilute the concentration of the absorbed Issur Kasheing is rather a process that MUST revoke the prohibited status. If it is not revoked - i.e. it is immersed in a pot that does not have more than 60, then EVERYTHING becomes non-K and the spoon is just as non-K as it was before it was immersed. In other words ChaNaN applies to Kelim. And yet the Kosher agencies permit the additives extracted from non-K feathers because the feathers are not food but a Keli, and are therefore not limited by ChaNaN. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Jun 11 11:09:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:09:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:19 PM 6/11/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would also add that >if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >he should move here. Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who come here collecting for all sorts of things? What would they do if there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious community of Jews in the US? Indeed, how many religious Jews living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things. Is this not a huge mitzva? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 11 20:48:41 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 05:48:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <4a055873-1dcb-8b0f-2b31-69cec4cbdb81@zahav.net.il> 1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. 2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - what does that mean? Ben On 6/11/2018 8:09 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the > frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who > come here collecting for all sorts of things?? What would they do if > there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious > community of Jews in the US?? (1) Indeed, how many religious Jews > living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things.? Is > this not a huge mitzva? (2) > > YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 12 05:36:49 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah Message-ID: Please see the article at Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah by Dr. Leo Levi This article appeared in the December 1988 issue of the Jewish Observer which is available at https://goo.gl/9JUkt4 YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 11:25:42 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:25:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? In-Reply-To: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <10180612182542.GA32068@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 01:27:43PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a : Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) : but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose... However, when fundraising, pidyon shevuyim comes first, even after the funds were raised and the building materials bought for the not-yet-existent shul. SA YD 252:1. And the Tur says this is the only mitzvah we may sell those building supplies for. : 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities : and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent : in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? Is this distinction more than semantic? You are asking whether the "other priorities" are outside the label "tzedaqah" and therefore "other halakhot", or within the label, and therefore tzedaqah's priorities would be "multivariate". But the word "tzedaqah" has multiple usages. For example, in the sense we have been using it, we've been including pidyon shevuyim and binyan bhk"n. But it could be used to refer to supplying the poor with their needs exclusively. Or to mean their needs and dei machsero. Etc... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. micha at aishdas.org I awoke and found that life was duty. http://www.aishdas.org I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:31:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 10:42:20AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like : Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem : spoke to both? ... : If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would : seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply : they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. Like "shamor vezakhor bedibur echad"? There is no proof they all heard the same thing, never mind in the same way. But that's not where I wanted to go. If we take the Rambam's approach to the uniqueness of Moshe's nevu'ah, then the difference isn't in the "Dibbur" (which didn't actually involve heard words, leshitaso). It's in the shomeia'. Moshe's seikhel was able to accept the nevu'ah unmediated. Others, the same message could only be received via koach hadimyon so that it reaches the navi's conscious mind cloaked in visions and metaphoric sensations. So, if Hashem did make one dibbur to both, Moshe would still receive it Peh-el-peh and Aharon would experience the revelation as a prophetic vision. OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then we are left with two possibilities: - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, and passing Torah down the generations, etc... - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording the kelal, there could be others. There are other potential exceptions, most enigmatically Bil'am (Yalqut Shim'oni 966) on the very pasuq that describes Moshe's nevu'ah as being "Panim al panim" -- "velo qam navi od beYisrael keMoshe", but among the other nations, there was Bil'am. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that micha at aishdas.org a person can change their future http://www.aishdas.org by merely changing their attitude. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:39:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:39:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? In-Reply-To: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180612203937.GB20060@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 01:02:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 : minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority : of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to : reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish : the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, : how else might the desired result be accomplished? Through unofficial norms. It wasn't all that long ago (at most a couple of decades) when speed was left to the chazan watching the rav (or the chazan himself, if the rav is at another minyan), and the norms of the minyan set the chazan's pace without a watch and often without conscious thought. But then, even in those days people were coming late. I think you're dealing with a misdiagnosis. To my mind, the only real way to get people to come on time and to stay for davening and not spend the time learning with breaks for prayer is to offer programming that helps people relate to davening. If you don't cure the problem of boredum, people will come late regardless of the scheduling system, and find excuses to step out, whether physically or mentally. I would suggest the minyan in question explore in that direction, rather than worry about how Yishtabach time is determined. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. micha at aishdas.org - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 12 14:24:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 17:24:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> References: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <233e14ea-9b86-d3dc-f8fc-2d8bb4c8c50c@sero.name> On 12/06/18 16:31, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part > of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah > itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, > and passing Torah down the generations, etc... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording > the kelal, there could be others. Other possibilities: * Moshe told Yehoshua what he should write the next day. * The Rambam says that after a navi's vision a mal'ach explains it to him. I see no reason why the mal'ach in Yehoshua's vision could not have told him exactly what he should write. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Wed Jun 13 06:07:13 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:07:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW SHOULD COME FROM THE LETTER Message-ID: <9D3675F5-16E2-4542-A632-D76A033B1BCE@cox.net> There?s the story of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi who, when studying Torah, heard the crying of his infant grandson. The elder rebbe rose from his studying and soothed the baby to sleep. Meanwhile, his son, the boy?s father, was too involved in his study to hear the baby cry. When R. Zalman noticed his son?s lack of involvement, he proclaimed: ?If someone is studying Torah and fails to hear the cry of a baby, there is something very wrong with his learning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 13 12:29:17 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 21:29:17 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Perhaps there are several aspects of nevuah. One is the hearing, which Moshe did better. Another is the experience itself.? Here, it doesn't matter if Moshe's experience was "better" than Aaron's and in fact the word better doesn't apply. Aaron experienced this totality called nevuah and he did it his way. After doing that, he isn't the same person, or the same cohen. The same would apply to the hundreds of thousands of people who experienced nevuah but didn't have anything recorded. They became different people, and their avodat Hashem was completely upgraded as a result of the experience. Ben On 6/3/2018 9:42 AM, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was > the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 13 12:51:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:51:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah Message-ID: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> >From your friendly neighborhood clipping service. Taken from , with transliteration added for Avodah digest purposes. R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" of "Torah lishmah" means. I intend to reply, once I have time to collect a mar'eh maqom or two. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Tvunah in English Beit Midrash for Birurei Halachah Binyan Zion Under the Leadership of Maran HaRav Asher Weiss Shlita Learning Torah L'Shma Introductory Note Our Sages[1] have greatly commended one who learns Torah Lishmo -- literally, for its own sake.[2] Many times in the Talmud [Pesachim 50b, Nazir 23b, Horiyos 10b, Sotah 22b, Sotah 47a, Sanhedrin 105b, Erchin 16b] they have stated that one should always learn Torah, even if it not Lishmo, for through this one will eventually reach Lishmo. The goal, though, is total Lishmo. Two questions have to be dealt with: Firstly, is there anything negative or positive if one enjoys one's learning? Secondly, what precisely is Torah Lishmoh? Position One -- Enjoyment Is Not Ideal The Agrah D'Kallah[3] states that the disciples of the Ba'al Shem Tov asked their master if there is a problem if one enjoys learning Torah. He answered that since this is the very nature of Torah, as is written in Tehillim[4], "the statutes of Hashem are straight, [they] gladden the heart," Hashem will not act unfairly towards a person[5] and punish him for having had such enjoyment. This statement seems clear that the ultimate aim would be not to derive any enjoyment from one's learning. A similar sentiment seems to have been echoed by Rav Chaim Volozhiner. He seems to writes[6] that one who enjoys his learning does not commit a sin.[7] On the other hand, the Eglei Tal[8] writes that he has heard some people make a grave mistake, thinking that the ideal is for one to learn without enjoyment. He argues vehemently that one must love and enjoy one's learning. The one whom the Eglei Tal was arguing with was the Yismach Yisrael. He writes[9] that the true learning of Torah is only when one learns with no intention of any enjoyment at all. My feeling is that there is room for both the position of the Eglei Tal and that of the Yismach Yisrael to be correct. On one hand, Hashem wants us to enjoy His Torah, and, as we shall discuss in length soon, it is the proper way for one to study Torah. However, there are many instances where one does not enjoy learning, either because one has had a bad day, or because it is a piece of material which really does not grab his interest. In such a case, one needs to recall the words of the Yismach Yisroel that one needs to study Torah even if one does not have any enjoyment. Position Two -- Enjoyment Is Ideal In my opinion, it seems clear from many Rishonim that enjoyment and pleasure in one's learning is an integral part of the process of Torah study. Firstly, the Mishnah in Avos[10] states that when one studies Torah one needs to know in front of Whom one toils. Rabbeinu Yonah[11] explains that just as the Torah was the plaything of Hashem[12], so to speak, before the creation of the world, so too one's Torah should be one's own plaything. This seems to state clearly that deriving pleasure for Torah study is an ideal. Secondly, the general rule regarding commandments is that they were not given for pleasure[13], and therefore the pleasure of having fulfilled a commandment is not Halachikally considered pleasure. For example, if one took a vow not to derive pleasure from one's fellow, one's fellow may still blow the Shofar on his behalf, since the mere fact that one's fellow is enabling the fulfilment of one's commandment is not considered pleasure.[14] However, regarding the commandment of Torah study, Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar writes[15] that the essence of the commandment is to enjoy one's learning. Therefore, says Rabbeinu Avraham, if one forbade one's fellow from using one's Torah scroll, one's fellow may not use it. Again, this is a clear statement that enjoying one's learning is ideal. [A note of explanation is in order. It is difficult to understand how Rabbeinu Avraham can state that enjoyment is the essence of learning Torah. It is understandable how it is an integral part -- but to be the essence? I think his intent is as follows. The Shulchan Oruch HaRav[16] argues that there are two separate commandments of learning Torah. One is to study the Torah, and the other is to know the Torah. In my opinion this particular formulation is difficult, since we do not find that the Rishonim count the commandment of Torah study as two separate commandments.[17] Rather, it seems that these two categories make up the commandment. The commandment is to learn, while the essence and purpose of this learning is in order to know the Torah. The proof to this understanding of the commandment is that the commandment of Torah study is the verse veshinantam levanekha -- "And you shall teach your children,"[18] and our Sages explain[19] that the word veshinantam is to be expounded from the root shinen -- sharp. The words of Torah should be totally clear to oneself, to the extent that if one is asked about a given Torah matter one should be able to answer immediately, without babbling. This teaches us that the essence of the study is to achieve clear knowledge. Since the clarity of Torah knowledge is the essence of the commandment of Torah study, and this clarity of knowledge brings one great pleasure, Rabbeinu Avraham writes that the essence of the commandment of Torah study is to have pleasure from it.] A third proof: If deriving pleasure from the study of Torah is not the ideal state, how could it be that our Sages instituted the words, "veha'arev na es divrei Sorasekha befinu" in the morning blessing on the Torah? However, it could be that this is not a proof. The Avudraham[20] cites two verses to explain the word ????? in this context. The first is from Malachi[21] -- Ve'orvah Lashem minchas Yehudah viYrushalayim kiymei olam ukhshanim qadmonios -- "And the flour-offering of Yehudah and Yerushalayim will be pleasing to Hashem as the days of old and the years past." However, his second verse is from Tehillim[22] -- arov avdekha letov, which the Ibn Ezra[23] explains is the same root as an areiv -- a guarantor -- "Guarantee Your servant for good". Accordingly, the blessing is to be understood as a request from Hashem that He should act as a guarantor that our children should know the Torah, and does not refer to a request for having pleasure from the Torah. On the other hand, Rashi[24] explains that this blessing is a request that the study of Torah be with the tremendous pleasure of loving, feeling loved by, and being close to, Hashem. His interpretation is also cited by the Avudraham.[25] According to this interpretation, there is strong proof that pleasure is an ideal part of the study of Torah. Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind on this thought. 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must learn Torah in order to fulfil it. Support for these Positions All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the Rishonim. 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov. 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Uniting the Opinions However, in my opinion, it seems that these are really three sides to one coin. Before I demonstrate this, I would like to show some indications in this direction: 1. Although Rashi in Brachos[38] writes that Lishmo means in order to find out what to do, however in his commentary to Ta'anis he writes[39] that Lishmo means to fulfil Hashems will. 2. Although the Ba'al Shem Tov seems to be of the opinion that Lishmo means in order to fulfil the will of Hashem, however two of his main disciples[40] write that one must learn in order to act. Therefore it seems to me that all these three interpretations are really three parts of one whole. The first step is that one has to learn in order to fulfil the will of Hashem. However, what is His will? It is that one should learn and know clearly His Torah. What is the purpose of us knowing his Torah? In order that one should know what to do. In light of this, it would seem that we can understand that which we quoted from Rav Chaim Volozhiner in the beginning of the Shiur[41], even though at face value his statement that "there is no sin," seems to contradict that which we quoted later in the Shiur from him.[42] According to my understanding of Lishmo it is not a contradiction. The earlier quote is directed at one for whom part of his motivation to learn is because of his enjoyment. The motivation, ideally, should be purely because Hashem said so. But one should most definitely enjoy one's learning when one is learning. [1] For example, Mishnah Avos 6:1 and Sanhedrin 99b [2] We shall later discuss another manner to translate this word. [3] Agrah D'Kallah Parshas Chayei Sarah d"h BeMidrash BeParsha Zu Kad Damich Rebbe Avahu [4] Tehillim 19:9 [5] Avodah Zarah 3a [6] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [7] We shall return to this statement in the end of the Shiur [8] Hakdamah to Eglei Tal [9] Yismach Yisrael Parshas Bechukosai [10] Mishnah Avos 2:14 [11] Rabbeinu Yonah ibid d"h VeDah Lifnei Mi [12] Mishlei 8:30 [13] Rosh HaShannah 28a [14] Ibid, as explained by Rashi d"h Mutar Litkoah Lo [15] Peirush Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar Nedarim 48a d"h Sefarim [16] [Blank on web. -mb] [17] See, for instance, Rambam Sefer HaMitzvos Mitzvah 11 [18] Devarim 6:7 [19] Kiddushin 30a [20] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [21] Malachi 3:4 [22] Tehillim 119:122 [23] Ibn Ezra ibid [24] Rashi Brachos 11b d"h Ha'arev [25] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [26] Degel Machane Efraim Parshas Vayishlach d"h Ba Na El Shifchasi [27] Yosher Divrei Emes Os 7 [disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch, who was a major disciple of the Ba'al Shem Tov]; Ma'or VeShemesh Parshas Vayetzei d"h Vayomer Eilav Lavan [disciple of the Noam Elimelech, who was a major disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch] [28] Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 2 and 3 [29] Chiddushei Chasam Sofer Nedarim 81a d"h Shelo Borchu [30] Reishis Chochmah, Hakdamah [31] Shnei Luchos HaBris, Chelek 1, Ba'asarah Ma'amaros, Ma'amar 6, Os 187 [32] Yerushalmi Brachos 1:2 [33] Peirush HaRosh Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen [34] Mefaresh (Rashi) Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen. [There is doubt whether the commentary printed as Rashi on Nedarim is actually from Rashi, hence this commentary is commonly referred to as "the Mefaresh (commentator)"] [35] Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah 10:5 [36] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [37] Tosfos Pesachim 50b d"h Vekan [38] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [39] Rashi Ta'anis 7a d"h Lishmo [40] Likutei Amarim of the Maggid of Mezeritch (otherwise known as Maggid Devarav LeYa'akov) Siman??, Sod Yachin U'Boaz Perek 2 [41] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [42] [Ed. Note] According to the later quote, as is clear from the end of Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 4, learning for the love of the pure understanding of Torah is Lishmoh. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 04:22:44 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:22:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How to pour nesachim, major differences between the first and the second beis hamikdash Message-ID: Yesterdays daf (Zevachim 61b) says that the mizbeach in the first beis hamikdash was 28x28 amos and in the second beis hamikdash was 32x32 amos. Rabin explains the difference as follows: In the first Mikdash, Nesachim would flow into Shisim (a pit south-west of the Mizbe'ach) down the wall of the mizbeach. In the second Beis Hamikdash they enlarged the Mizbe'ach in order that the Shisim would be within (under) the Mizbe'ach and they made the corners of teh mizbeach hollow so that they could pour nesachim in the mizbeach. At first (during the first Beis Hmikdash), they learned from the words "Mizbe'ach Adamah" that the mizbeach has to be completely solid. In the second beis Hamikdash they thought that drinking ('consumption' of libations) should be like eating (Korbanos that are burned, i.e. within the boundaries of the Mizbe'ach) and therefore made the holes to pour the Nesachim as part of the mizbeach. Therefore, they understood that Mizbe'ach Adamah" teaches that the Mizbe'ach cannot be built over domes or tunnels (that are not needed for the Mizbe'ach). According to the Rambam in Hilchos Mamrim, this is perfectly standard practice. Any Beis Din can come and darshen the pesukim differently then a previous beis din. However, according to others this is not so simple. For those who hold that there is one halachic truth, this would seem to be very difficult, in either the first or second beis hamikdash they did the avoda of the nesachim wrong. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 05:50:21 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:50:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40a627c0-37a1-a74d-6f72-165b6d6d9469@gmail.com> On 6/14/2018 8:17 AM, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org wrote: > Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 From: Micha Berger > ...who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah? If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah ... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. ... Another possibility: Hashem dictated the last pesukim about Moshe's death to Moshe beforehand, even before Moshe ascended the mountain, and Moshe dictated them to Yehoshua, who did not write them down until after Moshe's death. Thus, all the Torah, to the last letter, was revealed to Moshe, but it was Yehoshua who put the last pesukim in writing. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Jun 14 06:47:54 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: At 08:17 AM 6/14/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you >regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. >2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That >isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >what does that mean? I am going to give you an answer that I know you will not like and will dismiss out of hand, but IMO, it is the truth. Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to Eretz Yisroel. After all, I said, Orthodox Jews are interested in doing mitzvahs, and one can certainly do more mitzvahs in Israel. He responded by pointing out that the additional mitzvahs that one can do in Israel are only of rabbinical origin at this time. Furthermore, he went on, one has to keep in mind the following. The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the right spiritual level before you go." While reciting the Shema twice a day we say, ?Beware lest your heart be seduced and you turn astray And you will swiftly be banished from the goodly land which G-d gives you.? Thus it is clear to me that one must be on the appropriate spiritual level to live in Eretz Yisroel. Encouraging those who are not on this level to settle in Eretz Yisroel was and is perhaps a mistake. This is a radical statement, and many will react strongly to it. However, is it possible that part of the reason for what is going on in Israel today is a result of the fact that the vast majority of Jews living in Israel are not properly observant, and the statement quoted in Shema is being, G-d forbid, fulfilled? I am not the one to judge anyone else, but each person should look in the mirror and ask themselves if they are sure that they are spiritually elevated enough to live in Eretz Yisroel. As Reb Dovid said, "You just don't go to Israel." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:19:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:19:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? Message-ID: We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping that stringency. Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? KT Joel Rich From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:18:14 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:18:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? Message-ID: The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases (each iteration away from the primary source can cloud fine points, or Godel's incompleteness theorem at play?). I also see much more of the implicit sociological assumptions made over time (and wonder how we define the community [e.g., town, city, continent...] and time [every decade, exile...] that we measure). Two examples: 1) S"A O"C 153:12 (MB:76) discusses an individual who had a stipulation with a community to build a Beit Knesset (synagogue), it stays with him and his family but it's not transferable. Why not? "Mistavra" (it's logical) that that's what the community had in mind unless specifically stipulated differently at origination (me -- who measured? How?) 2) S"A O"C 153:18 (MB:95) concerning a private object (e.g., Menorah) used by the synagogue. Originally, the assumption was they became kodesh once used, however, "now" it's assumed that they remain totally private (as if this were the original stipulation). So how, when, and where did this change? Were the first people who acted this way sinners, but enough sinners makes it OK? KT Joel Rich From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:35:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:35:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17593052-ba12-6371-5050-960187b566d0@zahav.net.il> Yes we have heard this answer before, several times. Putting aside its multiple problems, it is basically rejecting the paper you linked, given that the paper's author supports the state albeit with several large reservations. You can't say that the aliya of the vast majority of people to Israel is a mistake and support the state at the same time. Ben On 6/14/2018 3:47 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if > one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the > exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D > forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong > deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be > on the right spiritual level before you go. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:36:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:36:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. ?Ben On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > > Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? > From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 14 15:07:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:07:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, micha at aishdas.org but it's smarter to be nice. http://www.aishdas.org - R' Lazer Brody Fax: (270) 514-1507 From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 14:18:33 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 21:18:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: , <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. > Ben ?1?/??? Which raises a question I?ve been thinking about lately. When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From zev at sero.name Thu Jun 14 15:39:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:39:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <76b76294-55ee-c10b-66b4-858544078685@sero.name> On 14/06/18 18:07, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the > : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to > : Eretz Yisroel... > > : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one > : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact > : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, > : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed > : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the > : right spiritual level before you go." > > This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It's much earlier than that. It's a Tosfos (Rabbenu Chaim, quoted in Tosfos, Kesubos 110b, sv Hu Omer). -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 22:37:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 07:37:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> Message-ID: <1d515cf4-41e6-53ed-9246-feaee76b81cd@zahav.net.il> I'd guess the latter - the Gemara is telling us you have to decide for yourself and that while the Gemara will give values and weight, it? leaves the final choice up to you. On 6/14/2018 11:18 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 15 01:27:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 04:27:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 06:07 PM 6/14/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the >: Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to >: Eretz Yisroel... > >: The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one >: does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact >: same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, >: in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed >: here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the >: right spiritual level before you go." > >This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. If so, then why are there Satmar Chassodim living in Israel? Are they all on a high spiritual level? And could it be that the Satmar Rebbe left Israel, for this reason? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmeisner at mail.gmail.com Fri Jun 15 05:27:58 2018 From: jmeisner at mail.gmail.com (Joshua Meisner) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 08:27:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > Question -- is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? On Jun 14, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Ben Waxman wrote: > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a > bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. The implication of this sugya is that given that one has made a neder, it is better not to keep it than to keep it. Clearly, it is not suggesting that one violate the neder but rather that one be matir it before a chacham. The meforshim provide different reasons why this is the case -- e.g., because the neder was made out of anger that would hopefully subside or because the neder is characteristic of ga'avah -- but a chumra taken on because a person perceives a need for a s'yag or similar reasons (or, for that matter, a neder bish'as tzarah) may not be what the gemara is referring to. Going back to RJR's question, to provide a few data points, while on the one hand offering a korban without making a neder is assur, one tanna used to be makdish his korban only after he brought it to the mikdash to avoid the possibility of stumbling. Not sure if these cases can be translated into nidrei issur. Josh From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 15 12:02:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 15:02:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Referring to "the holy month of Ramadan" In-Reply-To: References: <163fc9b81f2-c8f-124c4@webjas-vaa038.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180615190235.GA17319@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:18am EDT, Prof. Levine wrote on Areivim: : What about referring to the "holy month of Ramadan"? Aren't their : restrictions regarding what a Jew is allowed to do when it comes to : non-Jewish holidays? Interesting question... Yes, if Moslems are aku"m. But Islam is monotheistic. In fact, they're more pedantic about it than the Torah requires. E.g. Many Moslems believe that the Torah's use of "Yad Hashem" et al even acknowledging they are meant as metaphors shows Shaitan's alleged corruption of the text. So, it's not yom eideihem in the normal sense. For that matter, one might even argue that many versions of Ramadan observance are actually qadosh (in our sense of the word). They fast to learn self-discipline and empathy for those who are less fortunate, they give sadaqah to the poor (I'm bet you can guess that Arabic) and there is a point of having a nightly meal, iftar, in fellowship with the broader community, not alone or as a nuclear family. All values the Beris Noach would want them to be fostering. So, the previous intentionally provocative paragraph aside, is there really a problem talking about Ramadan or referring to it as they do, as "the holy month of"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The trick is learning to be passionate in one's micha at aishdas.org ideals, but compassionate to one's peers. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 12:09:48 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:09:48 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? Message-ID: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with whom did the PC disagree? Ben From hanktopas at gmail.com Sun Jun 17 18:49:29 2018 From: hanktopas at gmail.com (Henry Topas) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch Message-ID: Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in a din Torah pls? Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. Thank you and kol tuv, HT Sent from my iPhone From zev at sero.name Sun Jun 17 21:42:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:42:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? In-Reply-To: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> References: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 17/06/18 15:09, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. > In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered > putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim > on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with > whom did the PC disagree? The issue was the way he wrote about gedolei haposkim, especially the Bet Yosef. http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1640&pgnum=250 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 23:10:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 08:10:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] machloquet - good or bad Message-ID: <5c275a89-82ba-3763-db85-3c8663f1b5a9@zahav.net.il> Summary of a talk given on Shabbat and then my commentary: According to the Rambam, machloquet is a fashla, something we don't want. It started when students didn't properly learn from their teachers. Had they done so, Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai would not have had so many disagreements. Rav Kook and Rebbe Nachman had a much more positive approach to machloquet. According to RK, when say that talmidei chachamim bring peace to the world, it is because they know how to argue with someone yet respect him and his opinion. A talmid chacham knows how to be inclusive, how to allow for and even want other opinions. According to RN, machloquet is a reenactment of Creation. God created the world through tzimmzum, allowing space for others. When there is one opinion only, that opinion fills the entire space so to speak. When someone else comes up with a different opinion, the first person has to contract to allow room for the new idea. This in turn allows for even more opinions. Ad kan the class. Today we don't do machloquet very well or at least we struggle with it. We try and either destroy the other side or we say that the other position doesn't really exist. This week a rav made a statement about Rav Lichtenstein tz'l and his position regarding (a very minor) women's issue. The easiest thing to do if one wanted to know RL's opinion about something is to pick up the phone and ask his sons, his daughter, an extremely close talmid. Instead the rav simply heard something and made a conclusion. When he was shown that his conclusion was incorrect, he pontificated that RL really didn't accept the more liberal position, he simply gave in to pressure. Occam's razor says that if RL said something and did something, it is because RL believed that to be the right thing to do. There is no need to come up with any explanation. Simply accept that there is a machloquet in the matter. Similarly, there is a mechina whose rosh yeshiva said things about women's role in society which people in the left wing MO world don't accept. No one says that anyone needs to send their kid there, but to try and work to shut down the mechina? You can't accept that someone, who BTW probably agrees with the LW on a whole bunch of other subjects, differs with you? You want to shut them down? Come on people, get a grip. From yherczeg at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:15:11 2018 From: yherczeg at gmail.com (Yisrael Herczeg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:15:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Re: Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." ::This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It is also in the Tashbetz Kattan. Yisrael Herczeg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:53:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:53:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is One Required To Live In Israel? (Bava Batra 91a) Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NKZ2eR by Raphael Grunfeld. (Note: Raphael Grunfeld is a son of Dayan Dr. Grunfeld who translated the Horeb and other works by RSRH from German into English.) First, it is not universally accepted that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel. Rashi?s commentary on the Torah as understood by the Ramban implies that there is no obligation to live in Israel. Rabbeinu Chaim, one of the Tosafists of the twelfth century, states clearly that following the destruction of the Second Temple and the exile from Israel, there is no longer any requirement to live in Israel. The Rambam agrees with Rabbeinu Chaim and accordingly did not include living in Israel in his list of the positive commandments. In more contemporary times, the Rebbe of Munkatch, in his responsa Minchat Eliezer, endorses Rabbeinu Chaim?s position. The Rebbe of Satmar, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, points out that the Shulchan Aruch does not include the mitzvah of living in Israel in its code of law. The majority opinion prevailing in the halacha, however, follows the Ramban and maintains that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel today. Although it is preferable to live in Israel, there is no obligation to go. However, once you live in Israel, there is an obligation not to leave. In fact, the language used by the Ramban in his supplement to Sefer Hamitzvot is that ?anyone who leaves Israel? ? ?kol hayotze mimenah? ? is like an idol worshiper. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:56:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:56:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In just a few weeks, we will observe Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av. This particular Rosh Chodesh is always only one day long, and this year it happens to fall on Erev Shabbos. This means that when Shabbos occurs, Rosh Chodesh will be over. I want to discuss the ramifications of a person who begins Shabbos early in this situation. Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal. (I know that there are poskim who advise one to eat a kezayis of bread after tzeis, but they don't require it.) In my experience, mealtime goes much quicker when there are fewer people at the table. This past Friday, for example, I went to a very nice minyan, beginning Kabalas Shabbos and Maariv shortly after Plag, I took a leisurely stroll home, and despite our best efforts at taking our time through the meal, my wife and I were still ready for Birkas Hamazon a full five minutes before shkiah. In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? I don't recall ever learning about this particular situation. There is an analogous but very different situation that I *have* seen discussed, namely that of a Seuda Shlishit that begins on Shabbos Erev Rosh Chodesh, and continues into Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos. In that case, the poskim give a wide variety of answers, but (among the poskim who *don't* pasken to say both) it is not always clear whether their rule is to base oneself on the beginning of the meal, or the end of the meal, or the holier of the two days. Further, some of them make a distinction, paskening differently for one who is merely benching after tzeis but didn't actually eat after tzeis, as opposed to one who actually ate [food in general or perhaps bread specifically] after tzeis. All that is a good starting point for my situation, but it is only a starting point. A tremendous difference between the two cases is that in the more common case, the calendar day DID change during the meal, to some extent or another. But in the case that I'm asking about, the calendar day did not actually change, only that the people involved are doing the mitzvah of Tosefes Shabbos. To be more explicit: Imagine a couple that goes to an early minyan on Erev Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Av. They daven Maariv, make Kiddush, and say Birkas Hamazon, all before shkiah. Then, after benching but still before shkiah, imagine that the wife gives birth to a boy. This boy will have his bris milah a week later on *Erev* Shabbos, and his bar mitzvah will be on Rosh Chodesh. Is it possible that his parents should have omitted Yaaleh V'Yavo from Birkas Hamazon? Of course, I understand that the answer may depend on details like whether or not the meal continued after shika, or even past tzeis. But I am most curious about the simple case, where benching was before shkiah. And the other cases will perhaps flow from that one. Any and all sources are appreciated. Thanks in advance. (Disclosure: I have other questions about the calendar and a person who begins Shabbos early, but I'm starting with this one, and perhaps I'll open new threads later about the others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:10:57 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:10:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What to do with old pots Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I found an old set of pots in my parents' basement. They have not been used in many years. No one remembers if they were milchig or fleishig. I would like to use them for milchig. May they be kashered and used for milchig? A. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Commentary on Nidah 27a) writes the pots may be designated for meat or dairy without kashering. The pots have not been used in more than 24 hours. After 24 hours any taste that was absorbed in the pot becomes foul, and on a Torah level the pot can be used for meat or dairy without kashering. Nevertheless, there remains a Rabbinic obligation to kasher pots even after 24 hours have elapsed. However, in this case, we may apply the principal of ?safek d?rabbanan l?kula? (in cases of doubt that pertain to a Rabbinic prohibition one may be lenient). Additionally, Igros Moshe (Y.D. II:46) writes that if a utensil is not used for more than a year, there is an opinion that holds that it does not need kashering. Although we don?t follow this opinion, it can act as an additional mitigating factor. However, since one can avoid the doubt by kashering the pot, it is proper to do so. Although the Magen Avrohom (OC 509:11) writes that the custom is not to permit kashering a fleishig pot to use it for milchig, in this case kashering is acceptable since it is only a chumra (extra stringency). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 04:30:24 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:30:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder Message-ID: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don?t know the exact reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That?s only known by HQBH. However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah that you?ve taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 07:50:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:50:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Learning, Spirituality, and Neo-Chassidus In-Reply-To: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> References: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180618145018.GE28907@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 1:14pm, R Aryeh Stein wrote on Areivim: > Rabbi Shafran's letter to Mishpacha included the following paragraph: >> It's easy to say that a person has a relationship with Hashem wherever >> he is, regardless of what he is doing, but it's not true. Many of us break >> that connection through destructive habits and the like, and sugarcoating >> them doesn't make them any less destructive. "Feeling spiritual" may >> be better than feeling bad about yourself, as quoted in the article, >> but are we to be content with feeling spiritual? I think the real problem with R' Avi Shafran's article was picked up in the replies. It's not an either-or. Rather, people whose core learning is the regular gefe"s or shas-and-posqim aren't getting inspired by intellectual pursuit *alone* and are looking for a better connection to the emotional and experiential aspects of Yahadus. Addition, not replacement. The question is more: Are we content with thinking the right thoughts while being parched spiritually? > Rabbi Moshe Weinberger was very disturbed by this paragraph in which > Rabbi Shafran seems to state that one's relationship with God can be > severed if one engages in destructive behavior. > He didn't discuss this specific point in his response to Rabbi Shafran > that was printed in Mishpacha, but he dedicated two shiurim to > demonstrate that Hashem's love for every Jew is eternal and > unconditional (see links to shiurim below) At 03:59:40PM -0400, Zev Sero via Areivim wrote: : To Hashem's love may be unconditional, but the direct connection a : person has with Him can certainly be severed; that is what kares : means. See Igeres Hateshuvah ch 5-6: : https://tinyurl.com/y9hckn5t : https://tinyurl.com/y6wtghxf But on another level, I don't think a person or even an object can be fully severed from the Borei, because withough Or Ein Sof, there is no such thing as existing. This fits kareis as per the Rambam, that the onesh after misah is ceasing to exist. (Except that we would have to translate the Baal haTanya's "Or Ein Sof" language into the Rambam's chain of sikhliim.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:14:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:14:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180618151454.GF28907@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:49:29PM -0400, Henry Topas via Avodah wrote: : Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in : a din Torah pls? : Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. A to'ein is a plaintiff. Could you ever have a din Torah in CM without a to'ein and nit'an? Ah, just googled. I take it you mean a to'ein rabbani, a modern Israeli coinage in order to avoid calling someone an oreikh din, since the job was defined in a way so as to avoid violating "al ta'as atzmekha ke'orkhei hadayanim" (Avos 1:8). The Yerushalmi, Kesuvos 4:10 and BB 9:4 (same quote; both gemaros are short and it's easy to find the quote), says the issur in the mishnah is telling only one side the law when they're still trying to phrase their claim. See also Kesuvos 52b and the Ritva d"h "asinu". So, while I don't have a maqor for when it became normal to have to'anim rabbaniim, I would think the place to look is the earliest shu"t that explain how they're not orkhei din. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, micha at aishdas.org The end is near. http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Moshe Sherer Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:57:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:57:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms Message-ID: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> See "Hezekiahs Religious Reform -- In the Bible and Archaeology" on the Biblical Archeology Society web site at . Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to get rid of everything hidden in private homes. A large 9th-century horned altar was discovered [in Beersheba] -- already dismantled. Three of its four "horns" [rectangular projections on the four corners of the top of the altar] were found intact, embedded in a wall. Their secondary use indicates that the stones were no longer considered sacred. The horned altar was dismantled during Hezekiah's reign, which we know because some of its stones were reused in a public storehouse that was built when the Assyrians threatened Judah and was destroyed by the Assyrian army in 701.... Next we move to Lachish. The second most important city in Judah after Jerusalem, Lachish was a military and administrative center in the Judean hills.... In 2016, an 8th-century BCE cultic place at Lachish was uncovered next to the main city gate. Archaeologists have called this cultic place a "gate-shrine." In it were found two small horned altars, whose horns had been cut off and embedded in an adjacent wall. Further, a square toilet was found installed in the shrine but was never used. The toilet was more of a symbolic act of desecration (see 2Kings 10:27) -- part of Hezekiah's cultic reforms. The best candidate for the elimination [of these cultic sites and others] is King Hezekiah, who probably ordered the abolition of all official cultic sites. Only the Jerusalem Temple and small, household shrines were spared. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. micha at aishdas.org Life is about creating yourself. http://www.aishdas.org - George Bernard Shaw Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:48:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:48:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder In-Reply-To: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> References: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180618154848.GG28907@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 07:30:24AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don't know the exact : reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That's only known by HQBH. : However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah : that you've taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. To do a mitzvah Hashem obligated you in, yes. But one you've taken on yourself? I don't know. As for untuitiveness, see my 9/8/2001 post at . But it ties together why Hashem would command men in something He didn't command women to that mitzvah likely being of more value to a man, to the greater reward. A line of reasoning that doesn't apply to volunteerism. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten micha at aishdas.org your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, http://www.aishdas.org and it flies away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 18 12:50:21 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:50:21 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? On 6/18/2018 5:57 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's > portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the > archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to > get rid of everything hidden in private homes. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 12:13:52 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:13:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chukas Message-ID: <0955AA8C-8FE3-48BA-A965-3E9AA6A10782@cox.net> 1) Four Torah laws cannot be explained by human reason but, being divine, demand implicit obedience: a) to marry one's brother's widow (Deut. 25:5); b) not to mingle wool and linen in a garment (Deut. 22:11); c) to perform the rites of the scapegoat (Lev. 16:26, 34); and d) the red cow. Satan comes and criticizes these statutes as irrational. Know therefore that it was the Creator of the world, the One and Only, who instituted them. Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 19:8). 2) [Ch.19:1] "Hashem spoke to Moses and to Aaron saying:" Symbolically the cow came to atone for the sin of the Golden Calf, as if to say let the mother come and clean up the mess left by her child. If this be the case, this explains why the commandment was directed to Aaron, the one who made the calf. 3) [19:2] "Zot chukat ha-Torah...." This is the statute (also translated as "ritual law," or "decree") of the Torah......" This unusual expression occurs only once more in Bamidbar 31:21. The rabbis have commented that it should have said ?Zot chukat ha parah.? Why does it sound as if this chok is the whole Torah? There are several explanations such as only Jews can be ritually impure. A non-Jew cannot have tum?ah. Also, since a chok is incomprehensible, it is as if you have observed the whole Torah if you follow an irrational, illogical commandment. 4) The Midrash to this chapter focuses primarily on one paradox in the laws of the Red Cow: Its ashes purify people who had become contaminated; yet those who engage in its preparation become contaminated. I thought of a contemporary example of something that would appear just as paradoxical. Radiation treatment is used to treat many forms of cancer, and yet, the same radiation can cause cancer. For someone who has no knowledge of medicine, this would appear as irrational as the paradox of the Red Cow. In a similar vein, the Midrash notes a number of such paradoxical cases of righteous people who descended from wicked parents, such as Abraham from Terach, Hezekiah from Ahaz, and Josiah from Ammon. The Talmud adds the paradox that it is forbidden to drink blood, but an infant nurses from its mother, whose blood is transformed into milk to become the source of life (Niddah 9a). You won?t go broke if you follow the chok. But if you don?t keep trying, you?ll end up dying. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 12:24:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:24:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180618192417.GC12350@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:50:21PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, : had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real : reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split : with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have : been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira : in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? I dunno. Look at David haMelekh. He had what to do teshuvah for as well. (Yeah, yeah, I know, kol ha'omer David chatah... But let's look at the navi's presentation of David, if not the historical figure.) However, he owned his mistakes, did teshuvah. And indeed, excelled at singing shirah. It seems there is a big difference between someone who errs, but stays connected to the Borei through it all well enough to be moved to song, and someone who doesn't. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, micha at aishdas.org and after it is all over, he still does not http://www.aishdas.org know himself. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Jun 19 00:15:18 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:15:18 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive into a hostile Arab town? Ben From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 19 03:01:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 06:01:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive : into a hostile Arab town? I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, no? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 19 06:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Used Metal Pots Bought From a Non-Jew In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Q. I bought a set of used metal pots from a non-Jew. Do I kasher them first or do I tovel them first? A. Shulchan Aruch (YD 121:2) writes that one should first kasher the pot and afterwards immerse it in a mikvah. If one toveled the pot first before kashering, it is a matter of dispute among Rishonim whether the tevila was effective. The Rashbam (cited in Beis Yosef YD 121) writes that toveling a pot before kosherization is like immersing in a mikvah while holding a sheretz (unclean item) and the tevila is ineffective. However, other Rishonim disagree and maintain that tevila is a separate mitzvah and is not connected with kashering. The Shach (YD 121:5) writes that if one was to tovel a pot before kashering, tevila should be repeated without a bracha because of the uncertainty. Nonetheless, the Dagul Merivava writes if the pot had not been used in the past 24 hours, one may tovel before kashering. After 24 hours, the non-kosher taste that had been absorbed in the pot is ruined. At that point the absorbed taste is no longer similar to a sheretz. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 19 08:17:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:17:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <3cd91821-d660-3a72-164e-c3abb8aaf807@sero.name> On 19/06/18 06:01, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone > : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the > : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the > : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive > : into a hostile Arab town? > > I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, > no? I don't know the answer, and wouldn't dare try to pasken it, but I do see a big question. The person is in no danger now. He will be in danger only if he chooses to drive on Shabbos. Is it permitted to help him do so safely? Does it make you an accomplice to his avera? Does hal'itehu larasha' perhaps apply here? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ydamyb at mail.gmail.com Tue Jun 19 05:19:56 2018 From: ydamyb at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:19:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 6:17 PM Akiva Miller wrote: > Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and > begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal > before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal... > In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a > regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling > Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Akiva Blum From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jun 19 09:44:50 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 16:44:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10d8a9cc4d8f47e593bd2928a907b8fd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. -------------------------- I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you can daven maariv after plag-would he say if you did that you don't say retzeih if you ate later? BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 05:11:06 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 08:11:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some degree or another. Would they pasken the same way if the Seuda Shlishis was earlier, and - for whatever reason - he had davened maariv and said birkas hamazon on Saturday afternoon after Plag Hamincha? I concede that it is a bizarre example, but the boundaries of halacha are defined by exactly this sort of situation. It's not done nowadays, but a person *IS* allowed to daven maariv on Shabbos afternoon after Plag. If someone did so, and did it during seudah shlishis, and then chose to say Birkas Hamazon while the sun was still above the horizon on Shabbos afternoon, perhaps he should indeed say Retzeh? Perhaps not, but I'd love to know what a posek might say. Summary: The question in this thread concerns someone who is benching on Friday afternoon which is Rosh Chodesh but he already said the non-RC maariv. This is VERY analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday afternoon which is Shabbos but he already said the non-Shabbos maariv. It is NOT so analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday night and he already said the non-Shabbos maariv, and the only argument in favor of saying Retzeh is that the meal began on Shabbos. I just thought of another difference between Friday Rosh Chodesh and the situation cited by RAB. If a person davened Maariv during seuda shelishit - and presumably included Ata Chonantanu - then he has verbally and explicitly declared Shabbos to be over, and it would be contradictory to reverse this by saying Retzeh in the benching (even if the sun is still shining on Saturday afternoon). BUT: When someone says maariv on Motzaei Rosh Chodesh he merely omits Yaaleh V'yavo, and there is no explicit declaration that RC has ended, so perhaps he could still include Yaaleh V'yavo on Friday afternoon. [There would still be a problem of including both Retzeh and Yaaleh V'yavo in the same benching, but some poskim do allow that in the Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos situation.] Akiva Miller From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 20 13:47:08 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:47:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi S. R. Hirsch Takes On The Rambam Message-ID: My grandson Daniel Levine who is studying in Yeshiva KBY and I are in the process of reading RSRH's Nineteen Letters with the notes written by Rabbi Joseph Elias. Today we read part of letter 18. While I knew that RSRH criticizes the RAMBAM, I was surprised at how strong this criticism is. Some of what is in letter 18 is posted at https://goo.gl/o3uXdg Below is a sampling. "Pressure of the times demanded more: the underlying ideas of the Tanach and the Talmud were recorded in the aggados, but again, in a veiled form, requiring of the student an active effort on his part in order to grasp the inner spirit, which really can be passed down only by word of mouth." "However, not everybody grasped the true spirit of Judaism. In non-Jewish schools Yisrael's youth trained their minds in independent philosophical inquiry. From Arab sources they drew the concepts of Greek philosophy and came to conceive their ultimate aim as perfecting themselves in the perception of truth. Hence rose conflict. Their quickening spirit put them at odds with Judaism, which they considered to be void of any spirit of its own; and their view of life was in contradiction with a view that stressed action, deeds, first and foremost, and considered recognition of the truth to only be a means toward such action." And so the times brought forth a man of spirit who, having been educated within an uncomprehended Judaism as well as Arab scholarship, was compelled to reconcile this dichotomy within himself. By giving voice to the way in which he did this, he became the guide for all who were engaged in the same struggle. It is to this great man alone that we owe the preservation of practical Judaism until the present day. By accomplishing this and yet, on the other hand merely reconciling Judaism with the ideas from without, rather than developing it creatively from within, and by the way in which he effected this reconciliation, he gave rise to all the good that followed- as well as all the bad. His trend of thought was Arab-Greek, as was his concept of life. Approaching Judaism from without, he brought to it views that he had gained elsewhere, and these he reconciled with Judaism. Thus to him too, the highest aim was self-perfection through recognition of the truth; and the practical, concrete deeds became subordinate to this end. Knowledge of God was considered an end in itself, not a means toward the end; and so he delved into speculations about the essence of God and considered the results of these speculative investigations to be fundamental axioms and principles of faith binding upon Judaism. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ydamyb at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 21:34:54 2018 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:34:54 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, 4:46 p.m. Akiva Miller via Avodah, < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > R' Akiva Blum wrote: > > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. > > Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are > presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and > benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some > degree or another. > > Please see the MB 424:2 where he quotes the MA specifically about where one davened maariv while still day that he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. I wonder about a case where one said kabolas shabbos, then ate and davened maariv later. I would think that too would be sufficient. Akiva -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 21 03:56:40 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:56:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Timeless Rav Hirsch Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/ZEcnxP The writings of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (RSRH) deeply resonate with many people today, as they have since the time he penned them in the middle of the nineteenth century, using them to recreate a community of modern, Torah-faithful Jews in Frankfurt that had all but disappeared. Many find that, ironically, his words seem more suited for our times than when he composed them. He stands almost alone among commentators in dealing with many themes of modernity: cultural evolution; our relationships with non-Jews; the Jewish mission to the rest of civilization; freedom of the will versus determinism; autonomy and totalitarianism; understanding the impact of paganism on the ancient world. Of course, his treatment of symbolism. This web page contains links to commentaries on the parshios by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein based on the writings of RSRH. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 06:00:23 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:00:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: Perhaps the machmirim would say to respond, "It is Shabbat and it is assur to drive, so I cannot tell to how to go. BUT I will tell you this: Do not go on such-and-such a road, because it will take you through such-and-such a dangerous area." That would not be a problem by those who the OP refers to as machmirim, it seems to me. (Of course, personally, I would label Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as the machmir, and would use the response he suggests: "It pains me that you are driving on Shabbat, so to minimize the Chilul Shabbat, I will give you the very best directions...") Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 21:02:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:02:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. And R' Joel Rich asked: > I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent > and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you > can daven maariv after plag - would he say if you did that > you don't say retzeih if you ate later? This situation is raised by Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen in "The Radiance of Shabbos" (ArtScroll). He writes (pg 95?), "If one interrupts a prolonged meal to daven Maariv or recite Havdalah, he does not say Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon afterwards. If one merely said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, he should still recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon. Rabbi Cohen cites MB 263:67 that if one said "Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol" during the meal, it is a "Tzorech Iyun" whether he can say Retzeh. Then he cites Eliya Rabba 299:1, Petach Hadvir there, Chayei Adam 47:24, Kaf Hachayim Palagi 31, and Rav Moshe Feinstein all as saying that one *can* still say Retzeh, but that Shulchan Aruch Harav 188:17 says not to. Personally, I am surprised that so many poskim distinguish between Maariv/Havdala on the one hand, vs. Omitting Shem Umalchus on the other hard. Here is a situation which will illustrate this point: Suppose someone had a long seuda shlishis, and after Tzeis he said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, and then he actually did a melacha. Would those poskim still say that he should recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon? Akiva Miller From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 21 18:01:47 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 01:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Individualism? Message-ID: <6b39dd928de144b0ba94b9a16c4318c5@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Anecdotally, it seems to me I've seen an increase in "individualistic" practices across the orthodox spectrum [e.g., davening at one's own pace with less concern as to where the tzibbur is up to (shma, shmoneh esrai, chazarat hashatz . . .), being obvious about using a different nusach hatfila, wearing tfillin at mincha . . .] I'm curious as to whether others have seen this? If yes, any theories as to why? (e.g., outside world seeping in?) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Jun 22 13:51:26 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:51:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In Avodah V36n72 (to which I'm humming "Chai, Chai, Chai/Am Yisrael Chai" :)), RJR asked: > BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? < Iff we're considering when one ended the meal; but then you're comparing unlike items (BhM vs. Ma'ariv), not to mention that BhM is a Torah-level *mitzva* while Ma'ariv is .... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 23 19:24:37 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 22:24:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BALAK "JACOB'S TENTS, ISRAEL'S DWELLING PLACES, MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD" Message-ID: "How goodly are your tents, O Jacob; your dwelling places, O Israel." [Num. 24:5] Why the repetition? What does each of these terms [tents and dwelling places] represent? And furthermore, why is the first appellation used "Jacob" and the second one "Israel?" In addition to the sensitivity and modesty demonstrated by the arrangement of the tents and camps, the Sages (Sanhedrin 105b) expound that these terms refer to the habitats of Israel's spiritual heritage. Tents (Ohalecha), alludes to the study halls, and dwelling places (Mishk'nosecha), which is related to Shechinah, or God's presence, alludes to the synagogues and Temples (Sforno). Rav Kook has a novel interpretation. He says that the verse, which mentions tents first, reflects a lower level and hence, uses the name Jacob, the first and lesser name. However, the verse which mentions dwelling second, reflects a higher level. Thus, it uses the name Israel, Jacob's second and more elevated name. The reason Rav Kook considers "tents" to reflect a lower level and "dwelling places" a higher level is because the tent is inherently connected to the state of traveling. It corresponds to the aspiration for continual change and growth. The dwelling is also part of the journey, but is associated with the rests between travels. It is the soul's sense of calm, resting from the constant movement, for the sake of the overall mission (sort of a parallel to Shabbos). I delved into the gematria aspect of this and came up with some heavy, mystical stuff. The gematria for "Ohalecha Ya-akov" (your tents O Jacob) is 248. There are 248 positive mitzvot. The word 'Avraham' and 'bamidbar' (In the wilderness) is also 248, as is the phrase 'Kol Adonai Elohim' (the voice or sound of Hashem, God). The word 'romach' (spear) is also 248. Now to tie all this together-- Balaam had intended, in a manner of speaking, to use a 'spear' to harm the Jewish people and curse them 'in the wilderness.' However 'the voice of Hashem, God' caused Balaam to turn the negative to the positive, (symbolized by the 248 positive mitzvos). Thus when Balaam said "How goodly are your tents O Jacob," he was blessing the Jewish people completely right from 'Abraham.' The gematria for "Mishk'nosecha Yisrael" (Your dwelling places, O Israel) is 1,381. As Rav Kook said, this part of the verse was on a higher level. In Gen: verse 25 (last part) and verse 26 (first part) we have: "Vayar Elohim ki tov. Vayomer Elohim na-a-seh Adam b'tzalmeinue" ("And God saw that it was good. And God said: "Let us make man in Our image..."). The gematria for this is also 1,381 as is the word "Ha-ashtaroth" (the principal Phoenician goddess, the consort of their chief male deity, Baal). Though Balaam was steeped in idolatry ("Ha-ashtaroth"), when he pronounced the second part of the phrase, ("mishk'nosecha Yisroel") God 'saw that it was good.' And so, the "image of God" wins out! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 25 07:17:25 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:17:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Waiting After Some Cheeses Before Eating Meat Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I know that we are supposed to wait after eating certain cheeses, before we can then eat meat. After which cheeses should one wait, and what is the basis for this practice? A. The Rama (Yoreh Deah 89:2) writes that the custom is not to eat meat after eating hard cheese. The waiting time for this is equivalent to the amount of time that one waits after eating meat, before then eating dairy foods. (See Taz ibid. 89:4, Aruch HaShulchan ibid. 89:11, Chochmas Adam 40:13.) There are two reasons that one needs to wait after meat before then partaking of milk; these two reasons apply as well to eating certain cheeses after meat. The first reason is that of basar she?bein ha-shinayim ? meat that gets stuck between the teeth ? which takes a considerable amount of time to dislodge or disintegrate, before which one may not consume milk. (Rambam, Hilchos Ma?achalos Asuros 9:28) The second reason for waiting after eating meat is meshichas ta?am ? an aftertaste left in the mouth, due to meat?s fattiness; only after a substantial lapse of time does this aftertaste dissipate, whereupon one may then consume milk. (Rashi in Chullin 105a s.v. ?Assur?) Poskim apply both of these reasons to cheese: Hard cheese, due to its firm and brittle texture, is like basar she?bein ha-shinayim, and is termed gevinah she?bein ha-shinayim ? cheese that gets stuck between the teeth. One therefore needs to wait a considerable amount of time for such cheese to dislodge or disintegrate before then consuming meat. (Sifsei Da?as Yoreh 89:2) Also, cheeses that are very pungent and leave a noticeable aftertaste are like meat that has meshichas ta?am; one must wait for the aftertaste to dissipate before then eating meat. (Taz Yoreh Deah 89:4) Although some classical poskim argue as to whether one or both of the above rationales for waiting apply to cheese, contemporary poskim rule that both apply. The next installment of Halacha Yomis will discuss further details. View OUKosher's list of Aged Cheeses. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sun Jun 24 23:26:22 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:26:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] [Commentary] Rabbi Meir Soloveichik: Why Christians Are Reading the Rav In-Reply-To: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: [RET emailed me this under a subject line that began "Too long for Avodah thought you might be interested..." But I thought his reluctance was missplaced. I just held on to the piece for its own digest. -micha] Jun 20, 2018 The nature of the dilemma can be stated in a three-word sentence. I am lonely. - Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik In 2015, I was invited to a conference held at a Catholic University in Spain, celebrating the first Spanish translation of *The Lonely Man of Faith*, the seminal philosophical essay of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik (my great uncle), reverently referred to by many Orthodox Jews as "the Rav." Published 50 years earlier, the essay contrasts two biblical accounts of the creation of man and teases out two personas, known as Adam the First and Adam the Second. In the first chapter of Genesis, humanity is created in the image of God and instructed by the Almighty to "fill the world and subdue it." Adam the First, Rabbi Soloveitchik suggests, is majestic; through his God-like creative capacities he seeks scientific breakthroughs, to cure disease, to build cities and countries, to advance the health and comfort of mankind. But then there is Adam the Second, who in Genesis 2 is created from the dust of the earth and remains in the sanctity of the garden of Eden, "to work and protect it." This represents the religious aspect of man, man who is ever aware of his finitude, who finds fulfillment not in majestic achievement but in an intimate relationship with a personal God. These two accounts are given, Rabbi Soloveitchik argued, because both are accurate; both Adam I and Adam II are divinely desired aspects of the human experience. One who is devoted to religious endeavors is reminded that "he is also wanted and needed in another community, the cosmic-majestic," and when one works on behalf of civilization, the Bible does not let him forget "that he is a covenantal being who will never find self-fulfillment outside of the covenant." The man of faith is not fully of the world, but neither can he reject the world. To join the two parts of the self may not be fully achievable, but it must nevertheless be our goal. In his letter of invitation to the conference, the president of the Spanish university reflected on how Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings spoke to his own vocation. As a leader of a Christian school, he said he grappled constantly with the challenge of being an *hombre de fe* in a Europe that, once the cradle of Christendom, was now suddenly secular: As Adam the First understandably and correctly busies himself with the temporal concerns of this world, we encourage our students to not lose sight, within their own hearts, of Adam the Second, the thirsting Adam that longs for a redemption that our technological advances cannot quench. We hope that our students, who come to our university seeking degree titles that will translate into jobs, will leave it also with awakened minds and hearts that fully recognize the deep aspirations that lie within their youthful spirits, and which *The Lonely Man of Faith* so eloquently describes. The letter reflected a fascinating phenomenon. As Orthodox Jews mark this year the 25th anniversary of Rabbi Soloveitchik's passing, more and more of his works are being studied, savored, appreciated, and applied to people's own lives -- by Christians. As interesting as this is, it should not be surprising. *The Lonely Man of Faith* actually originated, in part, in a talk to Catholic seminarians, and today it is Christians who are particularly shocked by the rapidity with which a culture that was once Christian has turned on them, so that now people of faith are quite lonely in the world at large. In his essay, Rabbi Soloveitchik notes that though the tension between Adam I and Adam II is always a source of angst, "the contemporary man of faith is, due to his peculiar position in secular society, lonely in a special way," as our age is "technically minded, self-centered, and self-loving, almost in a sickly narcissistic fashion, scoring honor upon honor, piling up victory upon victory, reaching for the distant galaxies, and seeing in the here-and-now sensible world the only manifestation of being." Now that the world of Adam I seems wholly divorced from that of Adam II, people of faith seek guidance in the art of bridging the two; and if, 70 years ago, Reinhold Niebhur was a theologian who spoke for a culture where Christianity was the norm, Rabbi Soloveitchik is a philosopher for Jews and Christians who are outsiders. The Catholic philosopher R.J. Snell, in a Christian reflection inspired by the Rav's writings, wrote that "like Joseph B. Soloveitchik in *The Lonely Man of Faith*, I am lonely," and he tells us why: In science, my faith is judged obscurantist; in ethics, mere animus; in practicality, irrelevant; in love, archaic. In the square, I am silenced; at school, mocked; in business, fined; at entertainment, derided; in the home, patronized; at work, muffled. My leaders are disrespected; my founder blasphemed by the new culture, new religion, and new philosophy which...suffers from an aversion to the fullness of questions, insisting that questions are meaningful only when limited to a scope much narrower than my catholic range of wonder. Yet Rabbi Soloveitchik's thesis remains that even when society rejects us, we cannot give up on society, but we also cannot amputate our religious identity from our very selves. Adam I and Adam II must be bridged. This will not be easy, but a theme throughout Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings is that all too often religion is seen as a blissful escape from life's crises, while in truth the opposite is the case. In the words of Reuven Ziegler, Rabbi Soloveitchik insisted that "religion does not offer an escape from reality, but rather provides the ultimate encounter with reality." Traditional Jews and Christians in the West face cultural challenges to their faith -- disdain, scorn, and even hate -- but if the challenge is faced with fortitude, sophistication, and honor, it will be a religious endeavor worthy of being remembered. And as both traditional Jews and Christians face this challenge, it will often be as compatriots, in a fellowship that we may not have foreseen 50 years ago. After attending the conference, I was emailed by another member of the administration, the rector of the university. He thanked me "for the pleasure of sharing that deep friendship which is a sign of the community inspired by the principles of the second Adam," and added, "[I] really enjoyed the time we passed together and the reading of the book of Rabbi Soloveitchik," which was, he reflected, "so stimulating for a better understanding of my own life and my faith." To be a person of faith is indeed to be lonely in this world. But more and more, lonely men and women of several faiths may be brought together by *The Lonely Man of Faith.* From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:42:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:42:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627194234.GE22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:18:14PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand : the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic : sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's : underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases... This is why the Maharal (Be'er 1, ch 19 or so) says that the Tur is only usable because of the BY, and SA, because it comes with the suite of nosei keilim. Speaking after years of learning AhS daily... There is a strong feel for the flow of the pesaq and how each area of halakhah is reasoned through by going to Tur, BY, SA, nosei keilim, AhS. It could be the Maharshal too would be more bothered by the Yad than by the other codes, IFF once studies the Tur or SA (or MB) with the other texts that explain how we got there. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The worst thing that can happen to a micha at aishdas.org person is to remain asleep and untamed." http://www.aishdas.org - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:36:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:36:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627183655.GC22635@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 11:54:52AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At : the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking : against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi : comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas : keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same : question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A : Baal keri is prohibited from going there. Or to put it less obliquely... The pasuq there (Bamidbar 12:4) refers to their location as Ohel Mo'ed. But the idiom is not necessarily referring to the Mishkan. Moshe went to the Ohel Mo'ed to get nevu'ah *outside* the camp. (Shemos 33) It had a pillar of cloud at the door, not at a mizbeiach. In Bamidbar 11:16 we learn that the 70 zeqeinim, after getting ruach haqodesh at the Ohel Mo'eid, returned to the camp. The Sifrei Zutra where (Bamidbar 11) writes: And he set them round about the tent the tent for speaking which was outside the camp. They made two tents, a tent for service and a tent for speaking. The outer tent had the same dimensions as the inner one, and the Levites served in both with the wagons. Two ohel mo'eds, the mishkan, and the nevu'ah center. The Ohel Mo'eid in this story also has a cloud at the door. So, I would think it was Moshe's place of nevu'ah, not the Mishkan. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and micha at aishdas.org this was a great wonder. But it is much more http://www.aishdas.org wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a Fax: (270) 514-1507 "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:38:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:38:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627193824.GD22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:19:19PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency : greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? It depends why gadol hametzuveh ve'oseh. The accepted theory is that it's because the YhR chimes up when a prohibition -- issur or bitul asei -- is involved (what pop-psych would describe as the attractiveness of "forbidden fruit"), so so one gets greater sekhar for winning the greater battle. Lefum tzaara agra. In which case, the YhR would work against keeping a neder, and so one should get more sekhar for fighting that battle. I argued that it's that someone we are obligated to do is indeed obligated because we need its effects more than someone who isn't. In which case, no one *needs* the chumerah for basic development; because if they did, it would have been obligatory. Then there would be no added value for keeping the chumerah in terms of the substance of what he's doing, but there is added value to keeping a neder. Meanwhile, it's subject to the Chullin 2a: "Tov shelo tidor mishetidor velo meshaleim." (Qoheles 5:4) Utanya: Tov mizeh umizeh, she'eino nodei kol iqar. -- Divrey R' Meir. R' Yehudah omer: Tov mizeh umizeh, nodeir umeshaleim. The gemara then continues by limiting R' Yehudah to nedarim of "harei zu" not shavu'os of "harei alai". Which would appar to include maintaining a chumerah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:07:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:07:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah In-Reply-To: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> References: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180627180708.GB22635@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 03:51:17PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote: : ... : R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" : of "Torah lishmah" means. ... :> Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions :> :> We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing :> opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. :> :> 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion :> of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent :> generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to :> fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice :> was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind :> on this thought. :> :> 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing :> in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo :> [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, :> one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is :> learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] :> :> 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh :> means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to :> learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah :> is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- :> i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar :> with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must :> learn Torah in order to fulfil it. :> :> Support for these Positions :> :> All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the :> Rishonim. :> :> 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara :> in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir :> bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the :> commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, :> that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." :> :> 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text :> reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake :> of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, :> for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out :> of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of :> the Ba'al Shem Tov. :> :> 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] :> and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Along the lines of #3, Yesushalmi Beraikha 1:1 (vilna 1a), Shabbos 1:2 (vilna 7b): One who learns but not in order to do, would have been pleasanter that his umbilical cord would have prolapsed in front of his face and he never came into the world. The Meshekh Chokhmah, Devarim 28:61, explains this in terms of the idea that the soul learns Torah with a mal'akh before birth. Someone who wants to learn as an end in itself would have been better off staying with that mal'akh! And (citing the intro to Qorban Aharon) a soul that was not born is a seikhel nivdal who grasped his Creator. All that is being given up by being born. But, if one is learning al menas laasos, which one can only do after birth, then their birth had value. The other opinion in the Y-mi is that someone who is lomei shelo al means lelameid is better off not existing. Again, the MC, notes, because the point of learning is to bring it into the world. The MC also gets this from Sanhedrin 99b, where the gemara concludes that "adam la'amal yulad" is for amal peh -- speaking Torah. While the gemara doesn't say al menas lelameid is a definiition of lishmah, the transitive property would lead me to conclude that's the implication. Al menas and lishmah... can they be distinguished? And if not 4. Al menas laasos. (I have discussed this MC before. He ends up showing that in terms of priorities, one who is going somewhere to teach doesn't have to stop to do mitzvos maasiyos; but someoen who is actually learning (and not teaching) has to stop even for a hakhsher mitzvah (maasis). This is one of my favorite shtiklach; worth a look! (There is a complete copy with a bad translation scattered among .) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jun 29 11:07:36 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 18:07:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? Message-ID: >From OU Kosher Yomis Q. What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? A. Chazal, the Talmudic Sages, prohibited cheese that is not made under the special supervision of a Jew (Avodah Zarah 29b, 35a-b). Various reasons are advanced for this rabbinic prohibition, but the reason accepted by most halachic authorities is the concern for the use of rennet enzymes from the stomach flesh of neveilah/non-kosher animals. Unsupervised cheese is termed Gevinas Akum. Cheese is only permitted if it is Gevinas Yisroel ? Jewish-supervised cheese (Yoreh Deah 115:2). This rule is unrelated to the rules of Cholov Yisroel (Jewish-supervised milk) and Cholov Akum/Cholov Stam (milk not under Jewish supervision). Therefore, even if a person eats Cholov Stam dairy products, he may only eat Gevinas Yisroel cheese. According to the Rama (Yoreh Deah 115:2) and many other poskim, Gevinas Yisroel is obtained by the mashgiach visually supervising the incorporation of the enzymes into each vat of milk in the cheese-making process; this way, the mashgiach will verify that the enzymes are kosher. According to the Shach (ibid. 20) and many other poskim, the mashgiach must manually add the enzymes to each vat of milk in the cheese-making process. The Vilna Gaon (ibid. s. 14) provides the rationale for this: Gevinas Yisroel is similar to Pas Yisroel (bread with onsite Jewish involvement) ? just like Pas Yisroel means that a Jew actually participated in the baking process, so too does Gevinas Yisroel mean that a Jew actually participated in the cheese-making process. Contemporary poskim rule that the basic halacha follows the Rama, although kashrus agencies typically endeavor to fulfill the Shach?s requirement as well. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:00:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:00:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Game Theory and Bankruptcy Message-ID: <20180629190056.GA23432@aishdas.org> Nobel Laureate R/Dr Robert Aumann famously (in our circles) explained the distribution of funds in the mishnah on Kesuvos 93a. In that mishnah, a man left behind 3 wives -- but the case works for 3 debts in general. Whatever wife 1's kesuvah is worth in the mishnah would be the same as if 1 of 3 creditors were owed the same amount. It is the creditor version that is the topic of AhS CM 104:15. But it only holds in cases where the assets aren't real estate, or if the debts are loans without certified contracts, if all the debts' contracts have the same date -- in other words, in cases where one doesn't pay the oldest loan fast. Creditor A is owed 100 zuz, creditor B is owed 200 zuz, and creditor C, 300. And the debtor has left than 600 zuz to divide. The AhS notes that there is a minority opinion that would have them divide as we today would probably consider more intuitive -- proportionally. A gets 1/6 of the assets, B gets 1/3 (ie 2/6) and C gets 1/2 (=3/6). And in his day this was a common practice. So, while one may say this became minhag hamaqom and thus a tenai implicitly accepted when doing business or lending money, the AhS recommends that if the creditors assume this division, beis din seek pesharah and divide this way. However, iqar hadin is as per the mishnah. Which the gemara tells us is R' Nasan, and R' Yehudah haNasi disagrees. (Stam mishnah, and the redactor of mishnayos doesn't mention his own opinion???) The first 100z has three claims on it and is divided in thirds. The second 100z has two claims on it, and is divided equally between B & C. And whatever is left is given to C. What this means is that whomever has the biggest loan is most likely to absorb the loss. RRA explains this case in two papers. The first, aimed more at mathematicians, invokes the Game Theoretic concept of nucleolus. (R.J. Aumann and M. Maschler, Game Theoretic Analysis of a Bankruptcy Problem from the Talmud, Journal of Economic Theory 36, no. 2 (1985), 195-213.) In the second, written for people who learn gemara, he avoids all the technical talk. ("On the Matter of the Man with Three Wives," Moriah 22 (1999), 98- 107.) The second paper compares this mishnah to the gemara at the opening of BM, and derives a general rule, RAR saying that no other division in Qiddushin would follow the same principles as the 2 person division in BM. Here is an explanatory blog post on Talmudology blog ("Judaism, Science and Medicine"), by R/Dr Jeremy Brown. (The blog would particularly be interesting to someone learning daf who is interested in science or math.) The aforementioned AhS gives two sevaras for R' Nasan's position: The first is that the first division is taken from the beinonis (mid-quality property) of the debtor's or the estate's holdings. Therefore, it has to be divided separately from the rest of B & C's debt. Each has claim to the full 100z, so each gets equally. The second division is taken from the beinonis of what the person owned that the time he started owing B & C money, and if there is non left, from the ziburis (lesser quality). Again, different material, so it is divided without consideration to the remainder of the debt to C. merchandise. Therefore, it is accounted for separately The second explanation focuses on why this case is different than shutefus, where the shutefim do divide proportionally to their investments. The debtor's assets are entirely meshubadim to A just as much as to B or C. C can't get his 300z until A's 100z is accounted for, no less than the other way around -- each has full power to halt distribution of any of the man's assets. So the division is by shibud, which is equal. But with shutefim, the profit is clearcut. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late micha at aishdas.org to become the person http://www.aishdas.org you might have been. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - George Eliot From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Migo vs Chazakah Message-ID: <20180629194917.GA8106@aishdas.org> AhS 82:18 is a qunterus on migo. Looking at #6 (within se'if 18), RYMEpstein looks at two gemaros that discuss migo bemaqom rov -- BB 5a and Qiddushin 64. In BB, Raza"l say that while rov adif meichazaqah, this is not true for every chazaqah. Chezqas mamon outranks rov (you don't make someone pay up on a "probably"), because the mi'ut yeshno ba'olam, so we can't take something out of his hands -- maybe he is of the mi'ut. This is true even though chezas haguf adif mechezqas mamon and migo adif meichezqas haguf. So chazaq IOW: rov > migo rov > chezaqa chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon So rov > chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon But chezqas mamon > rov -- where mi'ut yeshno be'olam, without bitul Acharei rabim lehatos is a case of bitul, so if the majority of dayanim rule that the nit'an has to pay up, that rov does trump chezqas mamon. Hoserver the gemara in R' Nasan says: "Mah li leshaqer?" ki chazaqah dami. Lo asi chazaqah ve'aqrah chazaqah legamrei. (R' Nasan shows up in two of my posts in a row!) Migo doesn't trump chazaqah, because assuming a person wouldn't give that particular lie is itself a chazaqah. Which is it? Another related issue that confuses me is what kind of chazaqah is a chezqas mamon: One could say it's a chazaqah demei'iqara -- preserving the status quo of who has the money. One could say it's a chazaqah disvara -- normally property belongs to the person holding it. Now, say the to'ein is tofeis the money he claims. This can at times work, because it shifts which is hamotzi meichaveiro when they get to BD. However, we know this is a normal case of the person holding the money, we know how he got it. So how would my chazaqah disvara apply? OTOH, it's not your usual case of presrving the old halachic state, because everyone agrees that before the dispute, the property was the nitan's. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger How wonderful it is that micha at aishdas.org nobody need wait a single moment http://www.aishdas.org before starting to improve the world. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anne Frank Hy"d From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jun 30 21:01:59 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? Message-ID: Naaah, of course he was not Jewish. The subject line was just to get your attention. But then again.... I would not have surprised me if Bil'am had said, "I can't do what my god doesn't let me do." After all, religious people of *any* religion generally refrain from going against the will of their god. Likewise, I would not have been surprised if he said, "I can't do what Hashem doesn't let me do." He is a professional, and he knows the rules of the game (most clearly seen in maftir). He knows who he is dealing with, and if he is trying to curse the Jews, it would be a good idea to follow the rules of the Jewish God. But Bil'am didn't say either of those things. What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase. There have been plenty of polytheists who accept the idea that there are many gods, One of them being Hashem, the God of the Jews. But in this pasuk, we see that Bil'am goes beyond accepting Hashem as *a* god - he accepts Him as "my God". I checked my concordance and found about 50 cases in Tanach of the phrase "Hashem Elokai", spelling "Elokai" with either a patach or a kamatz. It seems that this was the ONLY case where this phrase was used by a non-Jew. Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Sat Jun 30 22:44:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 01:44:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180701054415.GA28439@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 12:01:59AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me : do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase... : Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding : has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply : spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now : it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not : have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I : guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. This works well with my recent (few minute old) blog post. I argue that the whole point of Bil'am might have been to illustrate how monotheism and deveiqus don't guarantee being good people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Aspaqlaria Bil'am the Frummy by micha ? Published 18 Tammuz 5778 - Sun, Jul 1, 2018 Sun, Jul 1, 2018 The Medrash Tankhuma (Balaq 1) says: And if you ask: Why did the Holy One blessed be He, let his Shechinah rest upon so wicked a non-Jew? So that the [other] peoples would have no excuse to say, `If we had nevi'im, we would have changed for the better', He established for then nevi'im. Yet they [these nevi'im] broke down the moral fence of the world... For that matter, the Sifrei says on the last pasuq of the Torah: And another navi did not arise again in Israel like Moshe: In Israel, [another] one did not arise, but among the nations of the world, one did arise. And who was it? Bil'am ben Be'or. So here you have a prophet with the abilities of Moshe (whatever they meant by that) and yet he was no paragon of moral virtue. He didn't teach them how to lift themselves up, but how to corrupt the Jews. So how does that address the complaint of the nations? They had their navi, but they said it was unfair that they didn't have nev'i'im to give moral instruction -- and Bil'am wasn't capable of leading them in that way. Perhaps Bil'am stood for them as an example to teach them just that point. The nations are described as complaining that if they only had a navi they would have been as good as the Jews. But Bil'am was there to show them nevu'ah wasn't the answer. Even being a navi and having the Shechinah rest upon them is not sufficient to make an ideal person. The whole detour into telling us about an event in the lives of Balaq and Bil'am is such a departure from the rest of the Torah, it is considered a separate book. "Moshe wrote his book and Parashas Bil'am" (Bava Basra 14b) So why it it included? Based on the above suggestion, the section teaches us about the dangers of frumkeit. We can get so caught up in the pursuit of deveiqus, one's personal relationship with G-d, one can end up as self-centered and honor-seeking as Bil'am. We need to start out pursuing moral and ethical behavior, ehrlachkeit, and then the connection with the Divine can be harnessed to reach those goals. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 30 21:01:27 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pinchas Message-ID: <56A42568-E095-442F-A19F-017F306492C3@cox.net> ?Pinhas? has turned back Chamasi, my wrath, from the people of Israel.? (Num.25:11) Pinhas has proven his unusual power to turn back God?s wrath from Israel through a very courageous, difficult and controversial act. The Vilna Gaon brilliantly observes that in the word chamasi (my wrath), the two outside letters ches and yud read chai ? life ? while the inside letters mem and sav read meit ? death. The hidden meaning is that by Pinchos facing squarely what has taken place on the outside, he has miraculously turned back the wrath of the Almighty. In doing so, he has removed death (meis) from the inside, replacing it with life (chai). Why do we pray with a set text? An opinion recorded in the Talmud states that prayers correspond to the daily sacrifices offered in the Temple which are mentioned in this coming week's portion of Pinchas. (Numbers 28:4) It has been argued that this opinion may be the conceptual base for our standardized prayer. Since sacrifices had detailed structure, so too do our prayers have a set text. If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 08:09:35 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 01:09:35 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: This year's incarnation of the Gebrochts discussion attempts to discuss the Halacha and I think traverses territory not clearly enunciated in the past. Also I would not characterise this as Gebrochts-bashing; I dont believe anyone is troubled by those who say, "My Rebbe/My tradition is not to eat whatever it may be" the issue is that Gebrochts is promoted as Halachically legitimate and therefore preferred if not mandated. The ShA HaRav declares firstly, that as far as the Halachah is concerned, there is no concern with Kneidlach during Pesach, see the link - http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=25074&st=&pgnum=486 He does however advise that it is a valid stringency his first observation/proof however is that flour can be found on the surface of the Matzos and later on says this is quite common However, A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years B] no other Posek ever verified this claim this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within the finished Matza - but C] there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already been made D] even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link provided - It is universally accepted these days that flour is not added to a dough already made and there is no Matza baking program that permits adding flour to the already made dough Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 18:30:38 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 21:30:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The not-Korban Pesach Message-ID: I had asked: : It has come to me attention recently that the Torah never refers to : the Pesach as a Korban... : My question is this: Whatever reason it was, why the Torah avoided : using that word in this context ... why did Chazal feel differently? Upon further research, it seems that my question was based on the *mistaken* assumption that the Pesach was unique in this regard. It turns out that while the Torah does use the word "korban", it never uses phrases such as "Korban Tamid", "Korban Todah", or "Korban Musaf". These were referred to simply as the Tamid, the Todah, and the Musaf, just as the Pesach was. Apparently, construction of the phrase came much later, and was applied to them all. Exception: The "Korban Mincha" is mentioned three times in Vayikra 2, but that would change the whole question drastically. I should also clarify: these phrases aren't missing only from the Torah, but from the whole Tanach. They seem to have arisen after the Tanach. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sun Apr 1 20:40:08 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 23:40:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b27445d-5dde-c27e-a809-871e12258604@sero.name> On 01/04/18 11:09, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years Who is "we"? > B] no other Posek ever verified this claim > this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within > the finished Matza - but > > C]? there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not > thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product > the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already > been made Perhaps you mean no *other* posek, because this one clearly says it. It's no surprise that nobody before him mentions it, because he says it's a recent phenomenon. > D]? even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link > provided - This is a bizarre claim. The teshuvah "admits" no such thing. First of all, the footnote is obviously not part of the teshuvah, not by its author, and thus completely irrelevant to anything. Second, the footnote does not "admit" such a thing either. It brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 1 21:12:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 06:12:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions, one that basically is an exception that proves the rule and the other is a real exception. 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. 2) Powered chalav nochri. Labels here are supposed to state that a product containts powered chalav nochri (if it does). This was the result of a lawsuit.? I guess that no one wants to start listing every possible kula that goes into a food product. OTOH? if meat isn't halaq, labels generally don't state it. They only state the meat's halaq status if it is halaq. Ben On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: > I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the > lines to fine, or it becomes unusable. Once it's certifying a product > as lacking qitniyos, it might as well stick to avoiding all qitniyos > rather than having a confusing (to some) explanation on each package > which minhagim can or can't use the product. > > The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that > in a number of ways. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 1 18:58:35 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 21:58:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which >is eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give >his full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are >15,000 Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. Have patience and watch developments. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 2 07:10:57 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:10:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 01/04/18 21:58, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >> I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which is >> eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give his >> full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are 15,000 >> Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. > > Have patience and watch developments. Do you claim prophecy, or are you breaking silence on some vast and hereto unsuspected conspiracy? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 3 08:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180403150030.GA23693@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 06:12:23AM +0200, Ben Waxman wrote: : On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: :> I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the :> lines to fine, or it becomes unusable... :> The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that :> in a number of ways. : I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions... I think what I said is really particular to the US, or maybe chu"l as a whole. Where people who keep kosher will suffer with less, and people who don't won't care what has a hekhsher and what doesn't. Few people will make a less observant choice if an Amerucan hekhsher chooses to be more machmir than their own minhagim require. Non-Mehardin rabbanut has a strong motive away from least common denominator. They have a responsibility to a large population that will buy with a hekhsher IFF and only if the sacrifice is not too onerous. : 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that : they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that : proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any : case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically : stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. I recall the marshmallows sold in the US with a long explanation as to why the mei qitniyos they contain are a non-issue. Tha candy with a teshuvah on every wrapper. (Even better than Laffy Taffy or Bazooka Joe!) Unfortunately, they all have the same one. Pretty much the same thing. But didn't work in the US in the long run, as the rightward drift continued. :-)||ii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 3rd day micha at aishdas.org in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Chesed: What is perfectly Fax: (270) 514-1507 balanced Chesed? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 3 21:58:05 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:58:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin Message-ID: One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, he does this privately, since the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was sitting up front without wearing tefillin. When I asked his brother, who does put on tefillin during Chol Moed, about this, he told that the rabbi put on tefillin during Chol Moed until he married. "Our minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed," he said. My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in the ladies section. Thus I do not understand how the rabbi of the shul that I davened in yesterday could sit up front facing everyone without wearing tefillin. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 06:28:11 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:28:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Professor L. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 12:58 AM > My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them > in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put > on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should > not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in > Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in > the ladies section. This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom came from different places with different minhogim. According to halokho, what the acharonim say about wearing t'fillin or not halakhically does not apply here. Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where there was a mnhag hamokom. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 4 07:44:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:44:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin References: Message-ID: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 09:28 AM 4/4/2018, Mandel, Seth wrote: >This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." >But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from >Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom >came from different places with different minhogim.... >Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where >there was a mnhag hamokom. If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 08:07:12 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 15:07:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: , <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: From: Prof. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 10:44 AM > If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section > than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin > can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section Any shul has the right to set up its own rules, and anyone who davens there has to follow its rules. That is also halokho. Even if they were to make a rule, for instance, that one must wear green on Chanukka. Or that the shul must say the prayer for the State of Israel. But to claim that it is halokho that in America people who daven with t'fillin may not daven together with people who do not is wrong. There is no such halokho in America. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 4 20:58:28 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 05:58:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6b0af463-987c-0e3e-d5a2-27cb630b86ba@zahav.net.il> On 4/4/2018 6:58 AM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is > to put on tefillin during Chol Moed,? he does this privately,? since > the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. > > > Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin > during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was > sitting up front without wearing tefillin.? When I asked his brother . > . . . . > Wouldn't the rav in question be the proper person to ask? ?Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at mail.gmail.com Wed Apr 4 23:46:31 2018 From: meirabi at mail.gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: The ShA HaRav does not initiate this ban on Gebrochts as his own, rather he bases himself upon the propositions of Poskim which we are now exploring, and it seems that they actually do not support the proposition to create a ban against Gebrochts. A] The observation made by the ShA HaRav, which is central to his anti-Gebrochts argument - is un-supported. Our Poskim and our personal experience, has verified that there is no such thing as flour being found on the surface of baked Matza. B] The ShA HaRav does not issue his own assessment [other than observing flour on the surface of baked Matza] but relies upon other Poskim to support the proposition that flour remains within the finished Matza. However, no such thing is found in the Poskim, other than in situations where flour is added to a dough which is ALREADY formed. No Posek ever suggested that a normal dough may not be thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product. And the ShA HaRav admits this by saying that nowadays the dough is made very hard, dry, with very little water i.e. it is not surprising that Poskim have not discussed this as it is a concern that is due only to this recent change. But no other Poskim from his time endorsed the reasoning that flour is found on the surface of baked Matza etc. C] it is surprising to hear a devoted Chabadnik suggesting that the footnotes found in the KeHos, the official Chabad publishers' publication - are completely irrelevant to the Teshuvah. There are 2 versions to understanding note 33 on the link provided = here is the gobbledigook version - "it brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions" = here is the plain speak version - "this is the best we can find to support the proposition" which is, however which way you turn it, no support at all for this new concern of flour remaining within the baked Matza. One can hardly but suspect that the footnote was added because the Taz and MaAv that the ShA HaRav next refers to, is no support at all for banning Gebrochts, because their observations are exclusively applicable to thick soft Matzos that were under suspicion of having had flour added to the dough during its kneading - and as we mentioned - this had already been comprehensively stamped out by the times of the ShA HaRav. Remember, they were kneading soft dough for soft Matza and it was quite likely that the dough may have been a little too loose and one would be tempted to add more flour to it. So there we have it - if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not - then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha - then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Apr 7 20:38:51 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 23:38:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Isru Chag Message-ID: <64A81636-64D4-4FF1-B35D-C25381E32A1C@cox.net> The gematria for Isru Chag is 278, the same gematria for l'machar found in Bamidbar, Ch.11, vs.18. This is in the Sidra, Beha'alotch, where God has Moshe establish a Sanhedrin because Moshe complained that he could not carry on alone. God says to Moshe: "To the people you shall say, 'Prepare yourselves for tomorrow and you shall eat meat..." There is an interesting tie here. The day after a festival is the "morrow" and even though the holiday is over, we must always be preparing ourselves. As a matter of fact, in counting the omer, we are preparing ourselves for mattan Torah in 50 days. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Sat Apr 7 21:15:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 14:15:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 "Rabbi Meir G. Rabi" wrote: > So there we have it -- if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your > parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o > Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and > enjoy Pesach Is RMG Rabi's post on Gebrokts consonant with the comment of the Mishna Brura. The Chafetz Chaim stated that even though one may have doubts as to the Halachic imperative of being careful (yes, perhaps needlessly) about Matza Shruya, nevertheless, "one should not be MAZNIACH [translate as you will] those who have this Chumra" In particular, it seems to me that the practice of actually keeping Shruya is very much in line with many other Chumras that people have. Consider Garlic on Pesach, for example. I would posit that today the chance of garlic inducing Chametz is akin to itinerant matza flour being present on a baked Matza. Nonetheless, those who have this Chumra, keep it. They keep it because of the Minhag to be Machmir on Pesach! That Minhag, by its nature is concerned with the infinitessimal. There are many other examples. The Belzer don't eat carrots because of a Chametz incident. They were Machmir from then on. Lubavitchers has an incident with sugar and were Machmir from then on to pre-cook it. Halacha on Pesach does admit the concept of remote Chumras! Yes, for those who look at things from a non Pesach purist halachic view, may well scratch their heads. Nonetheless, the Chafets Chaim taught us that we should not be Mazniach. The idea that Pesach cannot be enjoyed without Kneidlach is fanciful, and not directly born out by plain Halacha. The Halacha specifies Meat and Wine as primary inputs from Gashmiyus food that give rise to happiness. Yes, B'Sar Shlomim (not chicken) and wine (good enough for Nisuch Hamizbeach?) To state "if you are CONCERNED about Halacha... eat Kneidlach" is perhaps a worse actualisation than "Mazniach" as it implies that such people are acting in perhaps some antinomian-like chassidic voodoo practice. [ One can argue quite cogently, for example, that wearing a Gartel today is also "not in line with the Halacha". (We wear underpants!) We do not, however, dismiss such practices. [On Shruya see also Gilyoney Hashas from Rav Yosef Engel Psachim 40b]] The Ari z'l stated that he would never 'talk against' a minhag yisrael/chumra on Pesach. In summary, and I've felt that RMG Rabi, Halacha is not a pure science which leads to a true/false conclusion for every question that is investigated using the rules of the Halacha. Admission: My father a'h had the Minhag from his family (likely via Amshinover fealty) not to eat Gebrokts. This is Toras Imecha for me, especially on Pesach, and whilst I know that in general this practice is unique to families who follow the minhogim of the Talmidei HaBaal Shem, and is most minor, I state quite openly that deciding NOT to follow a family minhag/chumra on Pesach would be FAR more upsetting and disturbing to me than not eating Kneidlach. I'm happy to wait for the last day, and for the record, I am not a fan of them, despite my wife being a superlative cook. Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a "hot dog roll". "It is only the anticipation of redemption that preserves Judaism in Exile, while Judaism in the Land of Israel is the redemption itself." Rabbi A.I. Hacohen Kook From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 8 05:55:41 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 12:55:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent actions of Simcha Felder. >From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv "Using his leverage as the swing vote in the divided State Senate, Sen. Simcha Felder appears to have strong-armed a provision into the budget that significantly changes state oversight of yeshiva curricula, political observers say. " I have talked to some people who live in Willimsburg, and the picture they paint of the level of secular education in Hassidic yeshivas is not a good one. One Satmar woman who lives in Williamsburg told me that her sons received no secular education in the Satmar yeshiva they attended. For the record NYS law requires that all children receive a secular education. What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf R. Barukh Schick of Shklov (d. 1808): When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . . . He urged me to translate into Hebrew as much secular wisdom as possible, so as to cause the nations to disgorge what they have swallowed, making it available to all, thereby increasing knowledge among the Jews. Thus, the nations will no longer be able to lord it over us-and bring about the profaning of God's name-with their taunt: "Where is your wisdom?" R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. I:Iayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, 6 through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash. The Gaon of Vilna's sons: By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... 8 First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): I cannot refrain from repeating a true and astonishing story that I heard from the Gaon's disciple R. Menachem Mendel. . . . 10 It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. This included its inner and outer manifestations. He explained: All secular wisdom is essential for our holy Torah and is included in it. He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. He especially praised music, explaining that most of the Torah accents, the secrets of the Levitical songs, and the secrets of the Tikkunei Zohar could not be comprehended without mastering it. ... He explained the significance of the various secular disciplines, and noted that he had mastered them all. Regarding the discipline of medicine, he stated that he had mastered anatomy, but not pharmacology. Indeed, he had wanted to study pharmacology with practicing physicians, but his father prevented him from undertaking its study ,fearing that upon mastering it he would be forced to curtail his Torah study whenever it would become necessary for him to save a life. . . . He also stated that he had mastered all of philosophy, but that he had derived only two matters of significance from his study of it. . . . The rest of it, he said, should be discarded. To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw for this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 8 05:22:36 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 08:22:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Message-ID: <9ABBE35B-0F5B-4CD1-917D-550FD3E33394@cox.net> 9:1 "Vay'hi bayom hashemini..." The Sages teach that the word "vay'hi" often indicates that trouble or grief is associated with the narrative (Megillah 10b). What trouble or grief could there have been on that joyous first day of Nissan? It presages the tragic deaths of Aaron?s sons, Nadav and Avihu. Another explanation: Even in the midst of our greatest rejoicing, a Jewish wedding, we pause for a moment to recall the destruction of the Temple and the fragility of life through the breaking of the glass. Here, too, we have such a happy occasion, but the "Vay'hi" is to remind us of our fallibility and the frailty of life. There are many commentaries on Aaron?s response when told of his sons' deaths: Vayidom Aharon, ?and Aaron was silent.? It is somewhat coincidental that the third syllable of vayidom sounds a little like the English word ?dumb.? One of the literal meanings of the word ?dumb? is mute and unable to speak. It seems to me that Aaron?s silence was his inability to speak due to shock. Many people would faint dead away if told of such news. So it really isn?t surprising that his reaction was one of a deafening silence. When two egotists meet "It's an I for an I" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 8 12:08:57 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2018 21:08:57 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rabbis Ben Nun, Sherlo, and Rimon have come out strongly against the wheat substitutes and feel that they should be banned. In their opinion, the primary reason for the kitniyot minhag is to prevent mixing up the various grains. Eating these types of products will lead to the same confusion. Ben On 4/8/2018 6:15 AM, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: > Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they > essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and > pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are > quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a > "hot dog roll". From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 07:29:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 10:29:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180409142919.GG25254@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 12:55:41PM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects : in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent : actions of Simcha Felder. : : From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv ... : What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular : studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept : only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time : studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, rather than the one you're critiquing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 07:54:47 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:54:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: Message-ID: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:29 AM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with >the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? > >You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh >in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, >rather than the one you're critiquing. And what do you do with the GRA's statement When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . simply ignore it? This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech cannot go against the facts. Also from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf Friesenhausen's critique, however, was hardly confined to the left; he also had to contend with the right: I appeal especially to all those who fear God and tremble at His word, that they not heed the false claims of those who plot against secular wisdom . . . , unaware that those who make such claims testify against themselves, saying: "We are devoid of Torah, we have chosen folly as our guide." For had the light of Torah ever shone upon them, they would have known the teaching of R. Samuel bar Nachtmeni at Shabbat 75a and the anecdotes about Rabban Gamaliel and R. Joshua at Horayot 10a. Also, they would have been aware of the many talmudic discussions that can be understood only with the aid of secular wisdom. Should you, however, meet a master of the Talmud who insists on denigrating secular wisdom, know full well that he has never understood those talmudic passages whose comprehension is dependent upon knowledge of secular wisdom. . . . He is also unaware that he denigrates the great Jewish sages of the past and their wisdom, as well. Worst of all are those guilty of duplicity. They speak arrogantly in public, either to appease the fools and gain honor in their eyes, or out of envy of the truly wise, disparaging those who appreciate secular wisdom, yet in their hearts they believe otherwise. See in the above link the Chasam Sofer's evaluation of Rabbi Friesenhausen. He was indeed a talmud Chacham. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 08:17:47 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:17:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:54:47AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : And what do you do with the GRA's statement .... : simply ignore it? Yes, that's exactly what the Chassidim who run the mosedos in question do with many of the Gra's statements. Why would it surprise anyone if they ignore this as well? As for me, as in your question, "what do you do", that's an entirely different issue. : This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree : with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech : cannot go against the facts. It may be more productive to ask about 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on and 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. Being surprised when Chassidim don't see the world the way the Gra did isn't really useful or warranted. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 11:28:06 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 14:28:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 1144 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 13:30:59 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:30:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180409203059.GB4975@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is : not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with : what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find : that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Or any of a million other things someone who disagrees with the Gra might suggest. A few years back there was a storm, and my son's grade school rebbe ended up losing a son to a downed power line. The friend who tried saving the son died immediately. The boy lingered for about 2 weeks. We attended the levayah. The father was proud that his young son went to his Maker pure, unsullied even by learning the alphabet. Alef-beis, yes, the child knew; but they hadn't yet begun the English alphabet. Not a sentiment I would share. In fact, hearing it from a rebbe who taught my son in a MO school, I found it kind of startling. But it's a perspective. And if it fosters accepting ol malkhus shamayim and ol mitzvos, raising children who are "ohavei H', yir'sei E-lokim, anshei emes, zera qodesh..." who am I to say it's not the right answer for someone else? :> It may be more productive to ask about :> 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on :> and :> 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. : Rabbi Dr. Shnayer Leiman, who wrote the article from which the : quotes come... I meant in each point something different than what your responses reflect. To spell out further: 1- The reports that lead you to believe the norm for secular education in chassidishe chadorim today is actually as weak as you believe. Rather than the likelihood that the more extreme stories are the ones more often reported. They could all fully be true, and yet not reflect the experiences of a statistically significant number of American students. Or perhaps they do. I would want statistics, not anecdotes, before judging. For example, I did not notice it any easier to teach Sukkah 7b-8a "sukkah ha'asuyah kekivshan" and the diagonal of squares vs circles or their areas to MO Jews who weren't themselves in STEM fields than to American chareidim. And if things were so bad, how do so many end up "in computers", if not in a job that requires as much post-HS education as mine? 2- How do they understand those "facts" about needing limudei chol to succeed in limudei chodesh. Which of the numerous possible responses I refered to in response to the first snippet in this email they actually believe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 15:12:48 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 18:12:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:30 PM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: >: One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is >: not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with >: what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find >: that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... > >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 15:31:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 18:31:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409223134.GD12000@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:48PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's : >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. : : Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" : is learning? I hope not. I am implying that it is valid for the chassidim whose school you are critiquing to believe so. And yes, they probably believe that the Gra's hisnagdus was an error caused by his exposure to the wrong set of ideas. They *certainly* believe that of RYBS. (Or at least did in his lifetime. I see an "acharei mos - qedushim" effect currently going on with RYBS's memory.) As I wrote, I am defending the position in an eilu va'eilu sense. It is not a position to which I personally subscribe, nor could subscribe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com Mon Apr 9 23:17:53 2018 From: rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com (Rabbi Meir Rabi) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:17:53 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Gebrochts - MInhag but absolutely no foundation in Halacha Message-ID: My Gebrochts postings have been to clarify one point - it is wrong to claim that Gebrochts is Halachically mandated or justified and points to anything other than a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition. and I do thank RIB for his query to which the answer is a firm NO - my observation - [if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach] - is in no manner a violation of, "one should not be MAZNIACH [ridicule] those who have this Chumra" IF they do not eat Gebrochts FOR THE RIGHT REASON i.e. a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition BTW - I do not see this in the ChCHayim, pity RIB did not provide sourcing But it is in the ShTeshuvah [460:2] - Nevertheless those who wish to sanctify themselves by refraining from that which is permitted - soaked and cooked Matza, even that which has been [baked hard] and ground [again referring to the corrected practice of making Matza meal from thinner hard baked Matza and NOT from thicker soft Matza which was grated on a Rib Ayzen, and at greater risk of being underbaked and Chametz] - should not be ridiculed. RIB has not suggested any argument to associate not eating garlic during Pesach with Gebrochts, and I have no idea what makes one Chumra IN LINE with other Chumras. Neither do I understand the significance to our discussion/disagreement. We both urge those who do not wish to eat Gebrochts/Garlic etc because their parents etc did not - to keep their tradition. However, the natural corollary is - that IF you DO NOT have such a custom - then eat them and enjoy Pesach because there is no legitimate Halachic imperative. Also, the reference to Keneidelach being an important contribution to Oneg Yom Tov is not of my making - it comes from great and highly respected Poskim. It is also not correct to characterise this Minhag as being concerned with the infinitesimal - because that is the Halacha - a speck of flour can become Chametz and ruin your entire Pesach. Indeed this was the very point I am making - there is no substance in Halacha to support this concern - if there was it would be Halacha. And finally - If anything, the urging that we not be Mazniach, demonstrates that Halacha has no concerns about this issue. We ought to however, nevertheless, not ridicule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 01:37:42 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:37:42 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: " Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge." You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a question of cost/benefit for the masses. Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is greater then benefit. The people you listed were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 02:23:50 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:23:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: At 04:37 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will >affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a >question of cost/benefit for the masses. > >Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be >harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is >greater then benefit. The people you listed > >were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 03:05:03 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:05:03 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular > studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am > paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular > subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not > study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" > > I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from > observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of > Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. > > YL > > And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: "All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are largely Orthoprax." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 02:16:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:16:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: Will those who are against the teaching of secular subjects simply ignore what R. Yhonason Eybeschutz wrote in Yaaros Devash 2:7 (as translated by L. Levi in Torah and Science, pages 24-25)? For all the sciences are ?condiments? and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impureand how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:32:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:32:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:31:27AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: :> Is that a common interperation of minhag hamaqom -- that there be :> a common practice in all things? I understood minhag hamaqom to :> be designated practive by practice. : Otherwise the concept of Minhag Ha Makom is meaningless.... Again, why? It is meaningful to say, "here, the minhag hamaqom is to say "umoried hageshem", not "gashem", without making reference to anything else the qeillah might do. Why do we need a context of a qehillah that has many such rules rather than a few? And how many? : Many people wear tefillin on chol hamoed in Eretz : Yisroel, including some gedolim. However, some do : it betzinoh so it is not so well known. You misspelled, "a tiny percentage". : One such godol is the Erlauer Rebbe. You can go : in his beis medrash and see him with tefillin. He : keeps the minhogim of his zeide, the Chasam : Sofer, to wear tefillin on chol hamoed and daven nusach Ashkenaz. One may argue that the Erlau community has their own minhag, and their beis medrash it's own minhag hamaqom. But that raises questions of how one defines "maqom" that I don't know how to answer. .... : Bekitzur, Al titosh toras imecho, keep on : following your minhog and Al yisbayeish., as the : Rama says in beginning of Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim. Minhag avos is inferior to minhag hamaqom. In fact, we have had a hard time finding its basis. The best I can come up with is that minhag avos means that in the absence of a minhag hamaqom in your current location, you should follow the minhag hamaqom of your prior location even if that means the location of your avos. :> For other things? Give it time. How long did it take Jews from Provence, :> Italy and elsewhere to congeal into a single minhag Ashkenaz? : On the contrary, I doubt that the Chassidim will : ever eat Gebrokts on Pesach, the Sephardim will : stop eating kitnyos, and the non-Chassidic world : will stop eating Gebrokts on Pesach. And yet nowadays Sepharadim make an Ashkenazi qutzo shel yud, to be yotzei lekhos hadei'os. Yekkes and Litvaks eat glatt out of necessity (go find reliable non-glatt), but how many would eat that piece of non-glatt if they found a reliable hekhsher for it? Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. The choilam is far broader in the US than its ancestry; and in other communities, tav-lessness caught on. How many non-Morrocans in Israel celebrate Mimouna nowadays? It seems from the media, this minhag is spreading. (I think it would be a beautiful thing for "misht-night" communities to adopt. After a week of not being guests, make a point of sharing food and showing it had nothing to do with a lack of friendship.) I see lines coalescing. These things take centuries, and accelerate as people who remember pre-migration life pass away. We just begun. I think it is less that a Minhag America can't emerge than the mashiach won't give it the time necesssary to emerge. And Minhag EY may go back to being by sheivet and nachalah, but in any case its evolution will be radically changed by the rapid influx of the rest of Kelal Yisrael. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:03:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:03:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:37:30PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as : a trivia question for now). There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one were considered propitious for a large crop. (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:12:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:12:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101226.GC31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 07:50:13AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat before Biur : Chametz? What makes this mitzva different from so many other mitzvos, where : we cannot eat until doing rhe required act? When the issur de'oraisa begins is a machloqes tannaim (RH 28a-b): Rabbi Yehudah holds starting from chatzos, R Meir - from sheqi'ah. (Does the issur start from when the non-qorban could be shechted, or when it could be eaten?) The Rambam in Chameitz uMatzah 1:8 pasqens chatzos, as do we when we make the zeman 1 hour before chatzos (rather than 1 hour before sheqi'ah). MiDerabbanan, it's pushed earlier, and that's the safety margin. But I don't think that's enough to make it a morning mitzvah that it must be done first thing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:19:33 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:19:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 02:15:47PM +1000, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: : Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they : essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and : pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are : quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a : "hot dog roll". It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. Like not declaring quinoa to be qitniyos. And unlike declating peanuts to be. (Which some of Eastern Europe did, and as RMF attests, some didn't.) For that matter, is there anyone whose ancestors had the minhag of qitniyos but didn't include corn when it was brought over from the New World? Since minhag is by definition informal and mimetic, what happens to catch on or not doesn't trouble me. Boils down to a qasheh oif a masseh. (You can't ask a "question on a story"; how it happened is how it happened, unreasonalbe or not.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From isaac at balb.in Tue Apr 10 03:24:59 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:24:59 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> On Apr 10, 2018 at 8:19 pm, wrote: > It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, > even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. > There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels > would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of another term. From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 02:59:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:59:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] PESACH -- AFTER 400 YEARS GD'S IN A HURRY TO REDEEM US? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410095948.GA31049@aishdas.org> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:28:48PM +1100, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: : We begin the Seder with Matza being a reminder of our suffering -- but we : conclude it with a new perspective -- Matza reminds us of how quickly Gd : took us out of Egypt. Actually, that's the end of Maggid, not the end of the seder. Later than that in the seder, Hillel reminds us of a third aspect of matzah -- al matzos umorerim yokhluhu. Not that of slavery, nor of leaving, but of the midnight in between, and every Pesach thereafter. There is a fourth aspect: Lechom oni -- she'onim alav devarim harbei. Rashi takes this idea so seriously that he holds you're not yotzei the mitzvah with matzah eaten before Maggid. Matzah that didn't have the haggadah is not lechem oni. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:51:53 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:51:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> References: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> Message-ID: <20180410105153.GB23901@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:24:59PM +1000, Isaac Balbin wrote: : It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the : Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of : another term. The only thing we know for sure is that it included some subset of grain-like foods and of legumes. Any reason as to why is a post-facto theory. Multiple exist. In principle, pasqaning one such shitah is right, and therefore the rabbanim who made a din must have intended to include the new case is possible. But not compelled. We often leave a gezeira off where it originally ended because it's not for us to ban more things than Chazal did. All the more so in a case like qitniyos, when it's not a rabbinic issur but a minhag. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 05:14:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 08:14:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10.4C.08474.AFAACCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:05 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies >curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not >higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance >is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study >http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p >which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: >"All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, >when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are >largely Orthoprax." I am not claiming that the study of secular subjects is any sort of guarantee that one will remain religious. The reasons for someone to give up observance or to water down their observance are complex. However, for many reasons it is important to have a basic secular education. One of them is to open up some opportunities to earn a living. And let me be clear, I am not talking about a "Harvard" secular education. But I see no reason why someone born in the US should not be able to speak, read and write English. I have an Op Ed piece that will appear in this week's Jewish Press on the topic of secular subjects in chassidic yeshivas. In part it reads Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. Parents do not have a blanket right to determine the education of their children. Would you say that a parent has a right to send his child to a school that preaches Antisemitism and prejudice? Also, based on my experience as an educator for over 50 years, I have to say that parents do not always know what is best for their children educationally. Choosing to enroll one's sons in a school that does not give a basic secular education is a very poor choice. Also, having a school that does not give a basic secular education is against the law as is clear from my recent Jewish Press article. Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma let alone a Regents diploma? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Tue Apr 10 04:29:37 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:29:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: It's not only the lack of secular education (that R' Yitschok Levine refers to) or knowledge to interact with the secular world (that R. Hirsch z"l is reported to have referred to) that is the problem; it's the abysmal standard of the education they do receive, the overall intellectual integrity, and their attitude to anything scientific. Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. As far as i recall, the Munkatche Rebbe [frequently?] visited the Natural History Museum when he could. There is such a terrific gap in some of our children's education that it's hard to believe it's not going to be detrimental in some way to their development. [I know I'm spouting to the 'converted', but thanks for the opportunity to at least voice my concerns somewhere.] Dovid Rubin From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 06:07:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:07:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. I will just deal with one of the things you raised. If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against the crowd, this practice would end. YL The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of Volumes I-IV. The German custom to bring a young boy to the synagogue with a wirnpel (wrapping for t he Torah scroll) has no connection whatsoever to the practice of the chalaka (the Arabic term for Upsherin) observed by Sepharadirn and later ad opted by many Chasidirn. Th e custom of holding a special celebration marking the boy's first haircut developed among these groups. The celebration takes place at a specific age, usually three. Th e festivity is customarily held near the gravesite of a tzadik or in a synagogue. T his custom was unknown in ancient Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities. The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are found in accounts written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim. Some three centuries later, we find the first indications that the custom had made its way into Chasidic circles. The most important source concerning the chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. The details of this story are somewhat vague, and it is unclear whether the Ari-zal made a chalaka for his son, or whether the account refers to his disciple, Rabbi Yonatan Sagish. There is also some question as to whether the Ari-zal participated in Lag Ba 'omer events in Meron after his kabalistic insights because the custom to conduct a chalaka on Lag Ba 'omer runs in opposition to the Ari-zal' s final ruling that forbade hair cutting during the orner period. Furthermore, the custom of the chalaka has given rise to some questions as to the propriety of hair cutting at a gravesite or synagogue, which might constitute an infringement upon the sanctity of the site. Some have also questioned the permissibility of haircutting on Lag Ba omer, during bein ha-rnetzarirn (the three weeks before Tisha B' A v) or during Chol Ha 'rno 'ed. Yet another concern was the immodest behavior that occasionally accompanied this event. :Most Sephardic and Chasidic rabbis applauded, or at least defended the practices observed in their circles, though there were those who forbade The custom in this manner. Rabbi Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik of Brisk (1889-1960) disapproved of bringing children to rabbis on their third birthday for the chalaka, claiming that this practice "has no reason or basis." He noted that there are sources indicating that one should introduce the child to matters of Torah at the age of three, but none that involve haircutting. Rabbi Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky [the "Steipler Ga'on," (1899-1985)] also opposed this practice, and would send away parents who brought their children to him for the chalaka haircut. The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. Some, however, dismissed this argument, claiming that to the contrary, the chalaka perhaps began as an ancient Jewish practice which was later adopted by the gentiles. There are some older customs, originating in the times of Chazal and the Ge'onim, such as fasting on Erev Rosh Hashana and the ceremony of Kapaprot on Erev Yom Kippur which were opposed by some rabbis since they feared that their origins could be found in pagan rites. In any event, although some communities accepted this custom, Ashkenazi communities \yere never aware of such a practice. They did not receive this tradition from their forebears, and they found no mention of it in the writings of the Rishonim. The ancient tradition among Ashkenazi communities was to cut a boy's hair at a very young age. In fact, during the times of Chazal, parents would cut an infant's hair not long after birth, and they even permitted cutting a baby's overgrown hair on Chol Ha 'mo' ed. In the times of the Rishonim, too, boys' hair in Ashkenaz was cut already within the first several months after birth. The phenomenon of children with overgrown hair simply did not exist in Germany, and a boy with overgrown hair would have been mistaken for a girl. The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no special affair was held to celebrate the event. .. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:21:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:21:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 09:07:38AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for : >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. : : I will just deal with one of the things you raised. I only raised one thing. You are discussing an example, and not the point. : If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go : against the crowd, this practice would end. Which has nothing to do with the general principle of whether the resettlement of Jewry post-war should or shouldn't evolve into new minhagei hamaqom, nor the topic I raised -- the claim they actually are. Nor the reason why I raised the topic: the idea that minhag avos is only a stop-gap, a way to manage when in a maqom that has no minhag. Nor the reason for my post: Your claim that minhag hamaqom only has meaning if the maqom has loits of minhagim. That it can't be applied one-off to whatever practice is under discussion. And if you are correct, what's the threshold of minhagim that unify a community sufficiently to qualify. Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line accordingly. : The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: : Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of : Volumes I-IV. WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. : The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are : found in accounts : written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... It has to be earlier. Originally, chalaqah was held at the qever of Shemuel haNav on the 43rd of the omer, his yahrzeit. See teshuvos haRadvaz 2:608. (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get associated with a haircut at age 3. The move to Meron and Lag baOmer happened when the Ottomans restricted access to the qever in the 1500s. But that has little to do with upsherin in general, eg on a birthday.) The Radvaz, R' David b Shelomo ibn Zimra, was among the gerushei Sefarad, who ended up in Tzefas in 1513 and eventually end up in Egypt where he was RY (he taught the Shitah Mequbetzes, R' Betzalel Ashkenazi) and ABD. So, upsherin was already a practice old enough to get recorded as minhag by someone who lived through the transition from rishonim to achronim. : The most important source concerning the : chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. What makes this "post important source" if the practice predated the Ari by generations? Raising questions about a tradition that the Ari practiced it is a distraction if he isn't the basis of the minhag. AND, the problems with the story isaren't around upsherin, but around making a celebration the night of Lag baOmer, again nothing to do with making one on the child's 3rd birthday. (Unless it too is in the wrong part of the omer or during the 3 weeks. Issues we already navigate for bar mitzvah parties that aren't on Shabbos.) .... : The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice : stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka : transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's : hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in : ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation : of pagan ritual... All I know is that people invoke a similar Hindu practice. And while Hindus may wait to age 3 before making a celebratory first haircut, waiting until 5 or 7 are more common, and not making any ceremony at all is most common. (Although a girls' only haircut being at 11 months is most common.) Observant Sikh men never get a haircut. In Mongolia, between 2-5, girls get their first haricut when they are 3 or 5, boys when they are 2 or 4. No match. China - 1 month. (They wait until after the bulk of infant mortality; lehavdil but yet similar to our considering a child who dies in their first month a neifel.) Poles: a pre-Xian tradition that survived into the 1700s was 7-10. Ukraininans, 1st birthday. Polenesians, teens. Yazidi, originally 40 days, now, 7-11 mo. Interestingly, Moslem boys get their first haircut at 1 week old -- in other words, on the 8th day. In short -- no culture that wikipedia or google found for me has a special haircut for 3 yr old boys ceremony. And yet, I turned up much else. We've seen similar attacks on shlissel challah ('tis the week for that perrennial) based on a difficult to assert connection to key-with-cross breads in Xian communities that were nowhere near the areas where shlissel challah originated -- in either time or space. And yet, the same people continue dressing up their children in Purim costumes, despite the similarity to Carnivale -- and both being local to Italy in origin. Or milchigs on Shevu'os starting in the same region that already had Wittesmontag on the Monday before the Xian Pentacost. For that matter, both of those customs are first originated LATER than chalakah! ... : The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or : other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic : communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern : Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. : Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no : special affair was held to celebrate the event. Is using the haricut to tell the boy "You're not a baby now, time to start chinukh in earnest with alef-beis" really so terrible? Nothing will make that point as deeply as weeks of build up, followed by changing the look in the mirror. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From sholom at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:09:18 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:09:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> References: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <22b69f274e57a0d24c6dcbc45c456a93@aishdas.org> > : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? > : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as > : a trivia question for now). > > There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one > were considered propitious for a large crop. > > (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) REMT wrote me off line and noted: "I don't know its source, but I first heard it when I was a young child." He also answered my trivial question, writing: "In a leap year, the parsha read eight times will always be Acharei Mos. I know of no one commenting on its significance." It just occurs to me that the main event in parshas Acharei Mos occurred on the same day as the events in parshas Shemini. Kol tuv! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 09:30:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:30:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 11:21 AM 4/10/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line >accordingly. > >: The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: >: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of >: Volumes I-IV. > >WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. It was not RSRH who wrote this, but Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger who has spent much time investigating minhagim. >: The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are >: found in accounts >: written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... > >It has to be earlier. Again you are questioning Rabbi Hamburger. I suggest you contact him about this and the rest of your post. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:31:21 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:31:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 09:07, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >> Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >> children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. > > I will just deal with one of the things you raised. > > If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against > the crowd,? this practice would end. YL That is simply not true. The Baal Shem Tov and his talmidim practised it, and that is more than enough for most people. That not everyone did it is irrelevant; very few practices had unanimous support. The BeShT was far greater than the sources you cite, and many more people follow him today than follow those people, so they would have no reason to change. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:35:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:35:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, > and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get > associated with a haircut at age 3. Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From seinfeld at jsli.org Tue Apr 10 10:08:53 2018 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:08:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Playing devil?s advocate here. For the record, I have college and graduate degrees, my children all read and write well etc. However, in response to Prof. Levine. If the cost of that exposure to American secular culture (language, history, values, etc.) is that a certain percentage of children may be enticed by it and go OTD - more than would have otherwise - then, yes, it makes sense. That?s an unacceptable cost. I?m not saying that that is a real cost, but that is the perception. If you want to change the practice, you have to change that perception (which may have some truth to it, I don?t know). >Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America >cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade >science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he >has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the >history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what >happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the >mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic >knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the >digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of >HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has >no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. > From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 10:29:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180410172934.GA1877@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:35:39AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : >(This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, : >and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get : >associated with a haircut at age 3. : Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. As per the same discussion in previous years.... That's what the rishonim run with -- see Rashi and Radaq on the pasuq. Although Rashi says 22 mo in our girsa, I think the other girsa of 24 mo is more likely, because... As the Radaq points out, this fits halakhah, that the time a woman is mish'ubedes to nurse is 24 months. But while elegent, it is not mukhrach that Chanah kept to the minimum. (Thinking out loud: The exchange in 1:22-23 fits better if it was about Chanah not attending an aliyah laregel that was after Shem'el was 2. After all, why would Elqanah have pushed her to bring ShMemu'el to the mishkan before it was safe?) More to the point (and back to repeating myself), there is a machloqes in the medrash whether Shemu'el lived 52 or 53 years. And since that's 50 years after he was weaned and brought to the Mishkan, it implies a machloqes about when he moved into the Mishkan. The minhag was apparently based on the position that he was niftar at 52, and thus moved into the Mishkan at 3. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:06:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:06:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? Message-ID: One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has no inherent "Jewish" quality.) However, there are opinions that say that the Jews spoke Egyptian while in Egypt. I have posted some selections from the Sefer Lashon HaKodesh, History, Holiness, & Hebrew by Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/jews_egypt_hebrew.pdf While it is true that according to one Medrash the Jews did speak Hebrew while in Egypt, there is another Medrash that contradicts this. >From the above reference: GOD SPEAKS TO THE JEWS IN EGYPTIAN While the above sources point to the notion that the Jews in Egypt did not speak Egyptian, there is another Midrash that implies otherwise. This Midrash likens the Jews in Egypt to a prince who was kidnapped for an extended period of time. Finally, his father the king decided to exact his revenge on the kidnappers and release his son. Upon saving his son, the king conversed with the child in the language spoken to him by the kidnappers. Similarly, explains the Midrash, after God redeemed the Jews from exile in Egypt, He spoke to them in Egyptian.221 The Midrash explains that the Jews had been in Egypt for many years, where they had learned the Egyptian language.222 Therefore, when God wanted to give them the Torah, He began to speak with them in the Egyptian language with which they were already familiar. He began by proclaiming, "I (anochi, ) am Hashem, your God ... !"223 According to this Midrash, the word "anochi" in this context does not denote the Hebrew word for "I"; rather, it refers to the Egyptian224 word anoch (11:ix), which means "love" and "endearment."225 One Midrashic source even explains that the Jews forgot Lashon HaKodesh, which is why God had to speak to them in Egyptian. >From page 99 THEY SPOKE LASHON HAKODESH, BUT TOOK ORDERS IN EGYPTIAN Similarly, we can posit that even when exiled to Egypt, the Jews indeed continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, they were not accustomed to accepting orders in Lashon HaKodesh; their Egyptian taskmasters spoke to them only in Egyptian. Therefore, at Mount Sinai, when God was giving the Jews the Decalogue, He spoke to them in Egyptian, the language in which they were accustomed to "taking orders." THEY MAINTAINED THE ESSENCE OF LASHON HAKODESH, IF NOT THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE Even if we assume that the Jews completely forgot Lashon HaKodesh, we can still reconcile the contradiction based on a previously mentioned concept set forth by Rambam. Rambam, as we already mentioned, writes that Lashon HaKodesh is called so because it lacks the explicitness found in other languages, making it a chaste and holy language. Therefore, one can explain that although the Jews in Egypt spoke the Egyptian language, they did not deviate from the moral standards manifested by Lashon HaKodesh. God had to speak to them in Egyptian since that was the only language with which they were familiar. However, they did not change their manner of speaking; that is, they internalized the refined and moral linguistic style of Lashon HaKodesh, which they maintained even when speaking Egyptian. And from the Chapter Summary After discussing Joseph's personal exile to Egypt, we segued into discussing the Jews' collective exile to Egypt. A well-known Midrash states that the Jews in Egypt did not change their language, meaning that they continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, another Midrash states that God began presenting the Torah to them in Egyptian, because that was the language that they spoke in Egypt. While these two Midrashim seem at odds with each other, we presented several approaches to reconcile them and give a more concrete answer as to whether the Jews in Egypt spoke Lashon HaKodesh or Egyptian: ? Radak explains that there were some Jews who were not enslaved, and they spoke Lashon HaKodesh exclusively. Their not-so-fortunate brethren spoke Lashon HaKodesh between themselves, and Egyptian with their Egyptian overlords. ? Alternatively, it is possible that all the Jews spoke Lashon HaKodesh, yet God presented them the Torah in Egyptian because they were acclimated to accepting orders in that language. ? A third possibility is that since the hallmark of Lashon HaKodesh is its embodiment of holiness and purity, even if the Jews forgot the literal language, they could still be said to speak Lashon HaKodesh- The Holy Language-if their manner of speech remained holy. After the Jews exited Egypt and eventually arrived in the Land of Israel, establishing their own rule, it is clear that Lashon HaKodesh alone served as their spoken language. This arrangement lasted for several centuries until the language began receding under Babylonian influence, toward the end of the First Temple period. Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may not be true. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:22:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:22:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Legendary Chassidic Rebbe Admits: The Noda BiYehudah Was Correct In His Opposition to Lisheim Yichud Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/QEUCPq However, what is less well known, is that the Divrei Chaim, despite being a great Chasidic leader, actually said that the Noda BiYehuda was correct in the matter, and, based on that, his followers do not say lisheim yichud before sefira. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:39:28 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:39:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:06 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews > from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. > Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their > children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far > as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has > no inherent "Jewish" quality.) > > > ... > Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may > not be true. > > YL > > > May not be true is the operative word, there is no disputing that there is an opinion in Chazal that it is true and that the Jews spoke only Hebrew in Egypt. This is the opinion that the Chasidim follow and therefore they are against speaking English. I don't see how you can find fault with them when they are following a valid opinion in Chazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:10:49 2018 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Yehuda Gluck) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 04:10:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Wed Apr 11 02:59:49 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: R? Moshe Yehudah, Thank you for taking notice of my post! ?Only a narrow band of Torah studies are benefited by a narrow band of secular studies? - I agree with you - but only in part. 1. If I may add the word ?directly? to your statement (- ?only a narrow band of Torah studies are *directly* benefited?), as, arguably, the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education [though admittedly, this was not the thrust of my original statement]. 2. Re the case in point, Chullin and biology. Though, in general, the biology syllabus does not necessarily help in learning Chulin, biology could be taught in a manner that would: i.e. a teacher familiar with the various sugyos, could give a thorough grounding in anatomy, etc. This would be better than relying on Temunei Chol [or similar compilations], which (might) stifle critical thinking. Furthermore, an appreciable amount of Torah literature is based upon a medieval understanding of chemistry and anatomy. A fuller understanding of those thinking processes, coupled with a comparative study of [human] biology and the basics of modern chemistry, could conceivably open the door to a much fuller Torah experience. Indeed, a syllabus could conceivably be drawn up that would both benefit the Ben Torah and satisfy the requirements of an Examinatory Board. 3. Re maths; again, you are right, so far as a basic understanding of the sugyos are concerned. But to appreciate maths as a backbone of the world?s structure and thus marvel at the???? ????? , to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory to deeper areas of the Torah [which surely some of them will want to learn], requires a fundamental grounding in the subject. Dovid Rubin Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ________________________________ From: Moshe Yehuda Gluck Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 9:10:49 AM To: 'The Avodah Torah Discussion Group' Cc: 'D Rubin' Subject: RE: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:23:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:23:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Lets take a step back for a second. There has been a machlokes for thousands of years (see the Gemara in Berachos 35) whether the ideal is torah only or for lack of a better phrase torah im derech eretz. There is no disputing that in the last 200 years the overwhelming majority of Gedolim have been in the Torah only camp and in the 20th century the Torah im derech eretz is pretty much RYBS and the followers of R' Hirsch. I can provide an almost endless list of Gedolim who had zero secular education and knew kol hatorah kula while on the other hand the list of Gedolim who had a secular education is much much much smaller. Your position regarding secular studies while certainly a valid one is unquestionably the minority opinion and therefore it is ridiculous for you to simply dismiss the other opinion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 03:23:23 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 10:23:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <79615f4629784da49fb5941943399ebd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. ----------------------------- Bingo-and probably true on a micro level but not, I fear, on a macro level. I used to tell my boys that 80% (not based on a study but the handy 80/20) rule)of what they learned would not be used later, the problem is you don't know which 20% will be. Look here for the background of the inventor of the m-16 and you'll see what he brought together https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Stoner Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 04:40:52 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 07:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote, and I quote his closing last paragraph in full: > Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them > to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend > a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma > let alone a Regents diploma? The first and second sentences don't have any logical connection that I can see. There are plenty of boys who attended a Hassidic yeshiva, who now earn enough to support a family. Diplomas are not guarantees, and I'm don't know how much they help. They certainly don't help as much as drive and persistence and elbow grease. My boss, for example, asks me for help occasionally with English spelling and grammar, but that doesn't seem to have hampered his ability to own his business at half my age. (His mathematics abilities are a good example. He understands enough of the concepts that he can figure out anything on his calculator without my help. But he avoids doing even simple arithmetic in his head. And because he refuses to do the arithmetic in his head, I make more mistakes than he does.) Akiva Miller From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 11 06:22:58 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:22:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <1F.0A.18065.33C0ECA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:10 AM 4/11/2018, Moshe Yehuda Gluck wrote: >I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that >a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. >What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion >sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some >secular knowledge in order to understand them. Please read RSRH's essay The Relevance of Secular Studies to Jewish Education (Collected Writings VII) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 06:50:01 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:50:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption Message-ID: Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:20:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:20:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org> I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:45:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:45:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:50:01PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may : be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? All I have is the reverse. R' Gedalia Felder (Yesodei Yeshurun 2 pp 188-191) holds that an adopted child can be called up "ben Micha Shemuel", but that this shouldn't be done when the adopting father or the son is a kohein. In order to avoid confusion about the child's kehunah. (Or that of a future descendent, when people vaguely remember his name years later). I assume leviim too, but that's not in my notes. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 12:08:20 2018 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:08:20 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> References: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Tangentially, there is a convention to write the name of a chalal in official documents as Ploni ben Ploni Vehu Kohein, to signify the difference in status between father and son. I'm not sure that this would be recommended (or desirable) in the case of an adopted child. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 11 23:46:36 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 01:46:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: I suspect that some will feel that my position on the issue "secular" studies comes from the left of center. First off, we need to delineate what we mean by "secular" studies. This word as we use it today is far different from the science the GRA or the many achronim, rishonim and of course Chazal learned in the sense of math, astronomy and biology. Today that word would also include many areas such as social studies, psychology, philosophy, evolutionary biology, cosmology, comparative religion, black studies, sexual awareness, cultural studies etc, etc, that could lead a young untrained mind into problematic areas that could raise many question they are not prepared to deal with. The scientific study required by the various sugios in shas and halacha really require a minimal study of some elementary math such as some trig and geometry, some values such as that of Pi, square root of 2 etc and Pythagoras theorem, astronomy (mainly lunar orbit, seasonal and diurnal calculation), anatomy and some other limited areas of biology plus a handful of other concepts. By this logic much of what we call science today would be excluded from being necessary for learning Torah. Mi'sevoras libi, I would say that the study of much of what we think of in modern parlance of the many new fields of mathematics and the physical sciences such as the many branches of modern physics both classical and relativistic and quantum mechanics, the many branches of chemistry, biology and medicine and of course modern astronomy including much more than just solar system dynamics (mainly lunar & seasonal) and positions of a handful of stars are mandated for a very simple reason -- an understanding (the deeper the better) in these fields makes one truly understand that the world is so highly complex and functions so beautifully that this it can not be a random happening and that there must be a borei olam. A havana into the very ultra small as we find through quantum mechanics and particle physics, or into the wonders of the atom and chemistry and how things combine, or into the wonders of dynamics, optics, elec & magnetism, or the modern fields of solar and stellar astronomy and spectrographic analysis and through the beauty and understanding exposed through the many modern branches of modern math including advanced algebraic theory, statistical analysis, advanced calculus and vector and tensor analysis and the many other fields to numerous to mention here that are so useful throughout all of modern science.. These literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam. The understanding of biology from its lowest levels of its physics and chemistry to the molecular with the tremendous complexities at its molecular and cellular levels and onto its study at the organic and systemic levels, through developmental biology of the miraculous changes from conception through the fetus to birth, infancy and childhood to the adult and ultimately death. Many of these may not help much with the simple peshat of any particular sugio in shas, but they surely create emuna and tremendous yiras haromeimus. No one who has even the smallest inkling of any of this knowledge could believe that existence as we now can begin to perceive it is a bunch of random events. Just the mind boggling complexity of the functioning of a single cell is awe inspiring. With so many thousands of things happening in each cell with perfect timing, with everything just in the right place at the right time in each of the billions of cells in our bodies. Worst of all, leaving a young mind unexposed to many of these areas and without proper training in them leaves him vulnerable to the many questions he will eventually encounter as he goes through modern life. He will not be prepared to deal with evolution, cosmology, philpsophy etc that he will surely encounter no matter how well shielded he may be. In addition to the above, in our modern society some of the above may be needed merely to functional and earn a living in todays highly technical society and he will be severely limited in the types of parnasa available to him. I am sure that many will differ substantially from my position above. Please excuse my rambling and repetition at times and run on sentences in the above. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 12 10:20:51 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 17:20:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not utter the phrase with the congregation? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Apr 12 12:42:50 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:42:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "There is no way that a "Rabbinical committee (namely the Rabbanim/Poskim/Rebbeim of the respective chassidishe Yeshivos whom Simcha Felder is representing) decided that systematic secular education is forbidden by Orthodox Jewish law. The reason is that the Torah requires one to study secular subjects. I have posted part of an article by Dr. Yehudah Levi from his book Torah Study. " Of course there is. Dr. Yehuda Levi is coming from a Torah Im Derech Eretz point of view however, Chasidim and most Charedim have a different viewpoint, namely Torah only. You seem to be a classic case of someone living in an echo chamber. The only opinion/derech that you recognize as legitimate is Torah Im Derech Eretz. As I stated many times, Torah Im Derech Eretz is a small minority, the overwhelming majority of gedolim rejected it. So much so that Gedolim like R' Baruch Ber could not believe that R' Hirsch thought that it was lechatchila. R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch wrote a teshuva (end of Bircas Shmuel Kiddushin) where he explicitly forbid a secular curriculum: ?What emerges is (a) that according to the Torah the obligation of Banim Ubeni Banim means you must make your children into Geonei and Chachmei Torah ? and not merely to prepare them for life as a Jew. But rather, you must teach them and get them to learn the entire Torah, and if chas v?sholom you do not, you violate the entire Mitzvah of learning Torah as per Banim Ubnei Banim. ... (c) To learn secular studies on a regular basis is prohibited as per the Rama 246:4 ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 12 12:34:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:34:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu In-Reply-To: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180412193406.GA7972@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:20:51PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to : bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "barchu : hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in : order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait : and not utter the phrase with the congregation? See the Agur, Hil' Berakhos 98, which can be found at . The Maharam miRothenburg held the sha"tz needn't say it at all. R' Yehudah al-Barceloni says he should say. The Agur adds: and we are noheig to say it. The next source, the Avudraham (or to be accurate: Abu-Dirham), says that the sha"tz says it to be among the community of mevorkhim. He cites the Y-mi (Berakhos 7:3). And he adds that R' Yehudah b"r Barzili Barceloni (I assume the same source as the Seifer haAgur) writes in the name of R' Saadia that even though the sha"tz said "haMvorakh", and therefore didn't remove himself from the klal, he needs to return himself to the klal "legamrei" and day "Barukh H' Hamvorkh". Like in bentching, where the leader says "nevareikh" and yet repeats the responses of the rest of the zimun. No answer there. However, note that the assumption is that Borkhu doesn't need the sha"tz or the oleh to repeat it. The sha"tz needs to repeat it for his own sake, so as not to exclude himself from the kelal of mevorkhim. (Except according to the MmR, who doesn't believe the sha"tz has such a need.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 12th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Gevurah: What aspect of judgment Fax: (270) 514-1507 forces the "judge" into submission? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 01:31:53 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:31:53 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am surprised that you even bothered to quote him." And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his teshuva. There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 02:10:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 05:10:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: >"In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz >wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am >surprised that you even bothered to quote him." > >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with >his teshuva. If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in EY are pursuing higher secular education. >There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' >Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and >Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through >this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not >with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to >learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a >book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the >Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of >issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even >happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas >and poskim. Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat and Yom Tov (holy days) - and furthermore, it is better to occupy oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). >And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but >Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after >them." as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as >the Mishna Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of >people are capable of studying Torah all day. Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? The following is taken from Rav Schwab on Chumash, Parshas Acharei Mos. "At all times the Torah's unchanging teachings must be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, attitudes, relationships to man and beast, and positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and evaluation of the Torah. "What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the 'ways of the Earth.' The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world that surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities that confront him. "What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more crucial it is that this wisdom be conveyed to the Jewish contemporary world. It must be transmitted in a language that our generation understands and that will attract the searching youth, the ignorant, the estranged and the potential ba 1al teshuvah to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah leader must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. "There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose life task is to enlighten and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those 'messengers of G-d' the highest respect and a loyal following. These are the kohanim and levi'im of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. "Yet education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore it becomes mandatory for the present day 'Tribe of Levi' to initiate and encourage an educational system that can serve the other "eleven tribes who comprise the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meets its challenges, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head-on the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. "The Divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Sun Apr 15 05:53:59 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:53:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Micha Berger) In-Reply-To: References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com>, <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org>, Message-ID: This reply was sent earlier to R' Michah and is still valid: I agree. With respect, I did allude to ?learning skills and a mode of thinking? in both of my previous posts: ?the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education?, ? to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory?, and my reference to ?the [lack of] overall intellectual integrity?. Related to this: Is it incorrect to posit that a lot of ma?amorei Chazal was formulated in accordance to their understanding and cultural absorption of sciences of their day? Can we not further Torah with our understanding of modern science, both peripheral and integral ? even though clearly lacking their sya?ato dishmayo and Ru?ach HaKodesh? Is that not the derech taught both by the Ba?al Shem and his disciples, and the GRA and his school [to use the chochmoh of the world..]? Another q: Do we view Torah SheBa?al Peh on a par with Torah SheBiKsav, in the sense that it must be learnt ?as is?, without consideration of the worldview that shaped those comments? [I rather think we can see two views in the Rishoinim.] Dovid Rubin ________________________________ From: Micha Berger Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 5:20:06 PM To: Moshe Yehuda Gluck via Avodah Cc: Moshe Yehuda Gluck; 'D Rubin' Subject: Re: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:39:19 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:39:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:45:43 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:45:43 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 3:01 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a > regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance > secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > > > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > > The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he > already knew shas and poskim.? > > > Can you verify this assertion? > Not really but given that the Gra was a super genius and the stories that abound about how much he knew as a child it is certainly plausible to believe so. The fact is that no one really knows how old the Gra was when he learned these things so your assertion that he learned mathematics as a youth is unprovable as well. > > > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > > Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in > 1518? > > > Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there > would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. > > > And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple according to the Rama, the study of Torah is what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get us into the world to come and the study of secular studies will not. That fact remains the same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 03:39:38 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:39:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >> And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his >> teshuva. > If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who > attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend > the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in > Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today > offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. Touro College was established against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim see http://haemtza.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/yosefs-folly.html for example for details. > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in > EY are pursuing higher secular education. Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a pig with a streimel (see http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html ). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: " *Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the other nations, she didn't want to burn them, rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need any outside wisdom and therefore she was priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the world with his wisdom which was solely torah based. * *We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt."* >> There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch >> Ber. The Rama writes: >> "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >> and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will >> acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other >> wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all >> other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called >> by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the >> Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he >> knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >> regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance >> secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles > Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also > learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He > taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning > of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is > permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this > excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible > and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh > De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his > decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy > only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat > and Yom Tov (holy days) -- and furthermore, it is better to occupy > oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). Not sure what you point is here, the Rama is quoted exactly as I wrote, you cal leanr secular studies only now and then and only after you know shas and poskim. > And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but > Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them." > as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as the Mishna > Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of people are > capable of studying Torah all day. > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in 1518? From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 05:01:14 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:01:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:39 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. >R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a >pig with a streimel (see? >http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html >). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak >Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: > >" Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn >them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the >other nations, she didn't want to burn them, >rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need >any outside wisdom and therefore she was >priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the >world with his wisdom which was solely torah based.? > >We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish >home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish >wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt." Too bad this statement does not differentiate between un-Jewish and non-Jewish. as RSRH did. I agree that we do not want un-Jewish influences in the Orthodox world. However, there is no problem with non-Jewish influences. I wonder if they are against the use of, for example, modern medicine or electricity or running water, and countless other things that are "non-Jewish wisdom and come into Chareidi homes. >>There is no question that the simple reading of >>the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: >> >>"But it is not for a person to learn anything >>but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >>decisors that come after them and through this >>they will acquire this world and the world to >>come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >>In any case, it is permitted to learn through >>happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >>isn't a book of heresy.? This is what called >>by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person >>should not take a trip in the Pardes until he >>has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] >>and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> >>The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >>cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >>only that, but he writes that even happenstance >>secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > >Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > >The Gra was sui generis, when he studied >mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim.? Can you verify this assertion? >>And how many people are capable of capable of >>learning "anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >>and the halachic decisors that come after >>them."? ? as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah >>in Koheles as well as the Mishna Brurah make it >>clear that only a very small percentage of >>people are capable of studying Torah all day. > >Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > >Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah >less in 2018 then it was in 1518? Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 09:44:37 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:44:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:45 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not >for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna >and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come >after them and through this they will acquire >this world and the world to come. But not with >learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple >according to the Rama, the study of Torah is >what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get >us into the world to come and the study of >secular studies will not. That fact remains the >same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person >should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. The facts do not remain the same in 2018 as in 1518. The day school movement in the US as well as all of the Orthodox schools throughout the world where secular studies are routinely taught from kindergarten on show that things have changed. Please spend the time to read "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 ? 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 The Jewish Press, July 6, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916)" "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1786-1879)" "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1654 ? 1785) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 08:07:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:07:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi >world agrees with his teshuva. > >There is no question that the simple reading of >the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything >but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >decisors that come after them and through this >they will acquire this world and the world to >come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >In any case, it is permitted to learn through >happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by >the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should >not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and >he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >only that, but he writes that even happenstance >secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. I must admit that I do not understand your assertion against secular studies in conjunction with Torah studies even for boys at a young age.. The day school movement in the US was founded on the principle of a dual curriculum. The model was RJJ. Today in the US the vast majority of yeshivas follow this model save for some of the Chassidic yeshivas. Gedolim like Rav Yitzchok Hutner (Chaim Berlin), (Mr.) Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz (Torah Vodaath), Rav Avraham Kalmanovitz and Rav Shmuel Birenbaum (Mir), Rav Dr. Yosef Breuer and Rav Shimon Schwab (Yeshiva RSRH) , to name just a few, headed yeshivas in which boys were taught Torah and secular studies in elementary and high school grades. I am sure they were well aware of what the RAMA wrote and paskened that it did not apply today. Even in Europe in the 19th century there were some places where secular and Torah studies were taught along side each other. The Kelm Talmud Torah was one. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelm_Talmud_Torah "In addition to Jewish subjects, students studied general subjects such as geography, mathematics, and Russian language and literature for three hours a day. The Kelm Talmud Torah was the first traditional yeshiva in the Russian empire to give such a focus to general studies. " There was the L?mel-School in Jerusalem where both Torah and secular subjects were taught. So I really do not understand why you focus on the RAMA when it is clear that yeshiva education in many places, since the 19th century and throughout the 20th century involved a combination of Torah and secular studies. What are you arguing about? YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 11:16:15 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:16:15 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> On 4/15/2018 11:10 AM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, > in EY are pursuing higher secular education. I just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different story entirely). From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 10:14:25 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:14:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916) ... There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in have secular studies: 1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would have had no students 2. The law mandated secular studies Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a bdieved. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:22:23 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:22:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:14 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in >have secular studies: >1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send >their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would >have had no students >2. The law mandated secular studies When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young people. >Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but >as a bdieved. Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! YL From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:29:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:29:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <4C.65.18065.A7C83DA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:16 PM 4/15/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I Just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went >through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these >colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or >should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different >story entirely). And many of those who attend these institutions find their secular knowledge woefully inadequate and probably wish they had a stronger secular education when they were younger. Look at the first part of the video at https://goo.gl/WKrKyT and see what he says about his own yeshiva education. At about 2 minutes in he says he discovered that he didn't know anything when it came to being prepared to work. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 15 05:48:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:48:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria Message-ID: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> The leprosy mentioned here was special kind of leprosy which only the Jewish people suffered from only in Israel. It never occurred outside of Israel, even in a Jewish home. The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical but rather a spiritual disease. The Rabbis comment: b?sorah tovah hee l?Yisroel ? "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and mortar to act as if it were alive. It would be most unusual for a house to become sick just like a human being. Such an illness borders on the miraculous. Why does the Torah say that a house may be afflicted with leprosy? It means that a Jewish home is different from other homes; it has life and spirit attached to it. When the people who live in these homes are sinful, the very bricks of the home reflect that sinfulness. The Rabbis tell us that leprosy is a sign of evil and sin; therefore, it is natural that house would manifest leprosy as a sign of its inhabitants evil. Now we can understand why the rabbis say it is good news when a house is stricken with leprosy. If one can notice the disease before it spreads, he has a chance to cure it. When the disease goes unnoticed, the real trouble ensues. Since in today?s world we don?t have the warning of leprosy attached to our houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. The Bible will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible Dwight L Moody -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 11:02:08 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:02:08 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sunday, April 15, 2018, Prof. Levine wrote: > When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 > there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young > people. > Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a > bdieved. > Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 15 12:45:46 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 19:45:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. _______________________________________________ Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 13:08:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 16:08:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <13.9E.29097.691B3DA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:02 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >This is not something to be happy about. This is >more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu >torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very >difficult decision to violate the Halacha in >order to save the next generation. This was not >uncommon in America of that time. Young >Israel???s sponsored mixed dances for the same >reasons. However, now that the Torah community >is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. ? On the contrary, this is something that is appropriate for our time and the future. Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? See my article "Frum or Ehrliche?" The Jewish Press, October 20, 2006, page 1. This article is also available at "Frum or Ehrlich". Letters to Editor Also see "The Obligation to Support a Family" The Jewish Press, February 18, 2015, front page. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 15:35:12 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 18:35:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the > community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the > congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l?olam vaed" > and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included > with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not > utter the phrase with the congregation? Incidentally, the same situation and question applies by the Borchu prior to Birchos Krias Shema, as per S"A 57:1. I can't bring any source, but in my mind, the simple answer is that if the oleh would say it together with the congragation, he might not be heard. The delay is to insure that no one mistakenly thinks that the oleh is excluding himself. I was going to ask a related question about Kaddish that has bothered me for some time. Namely: When the Kaddish-sayer says "Yhei Shmei Raba" himself, why does Mishne Brurah 56:2 tell him to say it *quietly*? But I am *not* going to ask that question, because RJR's post has forced me to compare these tefilos carefully, and I have found a difference that might help to answer his question. RJR was very correct when he used the word "command" to describe what the oleh is saying. The word "Borchu" is indeed the tzivui/imperative form of the verb. But no comparable command exists in Kaddish. Yes, the Kaddish-leader does command them "v'imru", but he even specifies what it is that he wants them to say. Namely, a simple "amen". And so they do. May I suggest that the "Yhei Shmei Raba" is an impromptu addition, that the tzibur adds of their own accord, NOT commanded to do so by the Kaddish-leader. Thus, there is no fear of causing any illusions that he is somehow excluding himself. Indeed, he himself added to the praise by saying "Yisborach v'yishtabach", which (one might say) is simply an expanded version of "Yhei Shmei Raba". So I guess the real question on MB 56:2 is not why the leader says Yhei quietly instead of loudly, but perhaps we could ask whether the leader really needs to say Yhei at all. Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 20:59:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:59:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <54519ad6-5f2a-1c69-4e5f-2d8f0fa2f2a5@zahav.net.il> 1) Is the community as strong as it was back when Torah was transmitted orally? 2) Who is the rabbi who is going to overturn decisions made by the Ta'naim (as opposed to overturning decisions made by school administrators in the 50s)? On 4/15/2018 9:45 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es > laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. > KT From hankman at bell.net Sun Apr 15 18:13:32 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:13:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> R? Marty Bluke wrote: ?R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah.? My response to R? Marty makes a number of assumptions that may not be universally accepted but that I firmly believe. The times are different, the level of knowledge is different both in the physical sciences and in Torah hakedosha. Dare I say that these as a function of time seem to be moving on trajectories that are unfortunately inverse to each other ? particularly in the latter time frame that we live in ? most intensely over the last 10 to 12 decades but can already be clearly seen over the last 4 centuries. With each dor we can see an ongoing diminution in the level of our Torah havanah while a commensurate level of greater scientific understanding has come about (with perhaps the exception of a very few yechidei de?ah such as the Gra and a few others who may have achieved levels more common in much earlier times before them). While Chazal tell us ?haphoch v?haphoch d?kol bah? and that certainly for those who are capable of a great level of Torah understanding such as those of Chazal who were doresh all the essin or all the taggin in the Torah probably could have been able to find quantum mechanics or tensor analysis or molecular biology in the Torah if they so chose. Certainly if the scientists of our day were able to discover these facts, Chazal certainly were able to as well. But I would point out that there is no maimre in Chazal that relates to having discovered any of this knowledge through their pilpul and passing this on to us. Perhaps they did not feel it important enough to report. But this level of understanding in Torah in our times is sadly not available in our times. Given the level of limud for the average person (unlike for some of the gedolim of our times) in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics. The average person (maybe I am just giving away my matsav) will not find much yira or emuna from learning that which is typical of our yeshivos (say a sugia in shas say ?succa govoah m?esrim ama or a sugia on movuy or on tumas negaim ? of hilchos melicha or muktsa in shulchan aruch etc). For the average person these are not awe inspiring subjects and unfortunately only a true godol or great talmid chochom could extract yira and emunah from these cut and dry subjects. Such inspiration for the average yid are fewer and much further in between from most of his limud of Torah. This as a result of our sad diminution in our Torah learning ability. Today, given our greater abilities in understanding the Borei?s briah it is much easier for us to find yira and emuna from our hisbonenus in them. So ?of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none? is Torah, but a very solid adjunct in our times for a vehicle to further inspire yira and emunah would very effectively be math and scientific knowledge. Part of the mitsva of emuna, is not simply belief, but to go out and prove to your satisfaction (to be doresh v?choker) the truth of the Borei and his achdus and that he is the Borei olam and revealed Himself to us at matan Torah and so on. To the extent that science facilitates this search it is a MITSVA and not just mere secular studies at the cost of Torah studies. Clearly the experience our ancestors experienced at yetsias Mitzrayim, al hayam (ma sheroaso shifcha al hayam etc) and revelation on sinai etc was more than enough to inspire tremendous yira, awe and emunah without the need for any help from science (which was not great in their period in any case) and on through the period of the nevi?im and the batei mikadash and later Chazal inspiration was possible through there havana of Torah alone. But I do not see that to be the case in our generation and times. ?So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah?? Because in our day it may be another additional (I hesitate to say ?more? effective way b?avonoseinu harabim for most people) very effective way for most average people.? So today, for the yechidei olom the tried and true method of attaining great yira and emunah through limud Torah may be the best way to go as we have witnessed these great traits in our great gedolim, but that recipe may not work so well in our times for everybody else without additional help. I am also not comfortable with the notion that there are certain areas of knowledge that are off limits to even our gedolim. I feel quite confident to assert that in our time, non of even our gedolim come to discover the great advances in science through there limud hatorah. If they know these subjects it came from sources outside of their linudei kodesh. But Chazal was not constrained in their knowledge. They were required to know shivim loshonos, they studied kishuv and astrolgy and the chukos hagoyim and certainly the science of their day (sometimes even quoting chachmei ha?umos and cf the Rambam quoting Aristo often etc [I also imagine the Rambam learned his medicine in the conventional way mostly including sources outside of Torah]). I feel sad for many talmidei chachamim in our day who lack the background in (sometimes in even minimal) math and science to grasp that they are saying a peshat in a sugia that could not be, and to seek out another peshat therein or to at least realize there is a problem they need to deal with to get a proper havana. Also the chiyuv to teach a son an umnus, obviously means, other than the chiyuv to teach one?s son Torah. We do not assume that his limud haTorah will suffice to teach him an umnus as well. The conventional ?secular? methods of teaching an umnus are to be followed. If you want your son to be a carpenter, send him to carpentry school ? do not expect him to come from yeshiva a talmid chochom AND a carpenter just from his limud haTorah. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 16:30:43 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:30:43 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: Is it not likely that the prohibition is against non-Torah learning which serves no purpose other than engaging in those studies for their own interest and excitement? There is no prohibition against learning any skills for earning a livelihood. Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and research. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 18:06:13 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:06:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. It seems to me that there is indeed one very obvious exception, namely, the chometz which the Rav has not yet sold to the non-Jew. (I suppose that one could avoid this situation by delaying the bittul until the very end of the fifth hour, but the danger of missing that deadline scares me.) I have not seen any sifrei halacha, nor any pamphlets or bulletins or websites, that mention this point. Perhaps everyone just presumes that people have this exception in mind when they say the bittul? Here's a better way to phrase my question: Would a mental reservation be valid in this case? Perhaps halacha ignores the mental reservation, and only cares about the actual words of the bittul - which explicitly refers to ALL the chometz. If halacha does allow this exception - and people do have this exception in mind either explicitly or implicitly - then there is no problem. But I would like to hear that this is confirmed by the poskim. Some might say, "What's the problem? There is chometz in his house, but he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" No, I can see two very serious problems. But before I go further, I must reiterate that these problems would only arise in the case where one does his Bitul Chometz BEFORE the Rav transfers ownership to the non-Jew. (If the ownership transfer occurs first, then at the time of the Bitul, there is no problem, because the only chometz still in his possession is really and truly nothing more than the chometz that he is unaware of.) 1) If there is still chometz in his home, and he is expecting for it to be sold to a non-Jew several minutes or hours later, but the words of the bittul - "All the chometz in my possession, whether I know about it or not" - are to be taken a face value, doesn't this case aspersion on the sincerity/validity of the bittul? 2) Perhaps even worse: After Pesach, when it is time to re-acquire the chometz, he can no longer rely on "he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" Rather, a determination must be made. If he got rid of it via mechira (despite happening after the bittul), then the chometz may be eaten. But if, in the final analysis, he got rid of it via bitul, then it is assur b'hanaah (Mechaber 448:5, MB 448:25). So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? Akiva Miller From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Apr 16 06:35:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 23:35:36 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: I enjoy reading smatterings from the philosophical musings of the great scientists. But I suspect, that is the very reason they are banned. It is because they are NOT boring. And I suspect that unless it may assist me in my Parnassah even reading about new tech developments etc, is likely to be prohibited, not as a corrosive Hashkafa but simply as a time waster. But as the saying goes, Nobody's Perfect [which is sometimes followed by - I am a Nobody] Furthermore, the loud protests that I can already hear, are voiced by those who live in this world which is influenced by non-Torah energies. If we experience boredom when learning Torah - then is it not true that we are still far from the truth of Torah? Reb Avigdor M said - ever noticed how people yawn during Bentching? And would then wryly observe, They were not yawning a minute earlier during the ice cream. I have a friend, a Sefaradi Satmar Chossid, V Frum V Ehrlich, who asked R A Miller if he should learn ShaAr HaBechicnah in the ChHalevovos, R A asked him if he reads the newspapers, to which he replied, No - to which Reb Avigdor responded You need to learn it anyway because the streets are infiltrated with the HashpaAh of the newspapers. I apologise if I seemed to be dismissive of the scientists and their philosophical musings - and the truths that they may discuss Sure, I agree, truth is truth no matter the source. I was merely reflecting upon the reason for the ban on Alternative Wisdoms A] they are unnecessary - they are not required for Parnassah B] they waste time from Torah C] they may well harbour and cultivate life-concepts that are alien and contrary to Torah, amongst the granules of truth Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 06:51:02 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:51:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: <20EAE8A6498E468ABF14517EBCFFBC8A@hankPC> R' Meir G. Rabi wrote: > Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to > various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. > Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote > extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and > research. Do not ignore the truth of the message because you (and we all) do not like the like the lifestyle of the messenger. Pythagoras' theorem is a central truth to much of mathematics and science, and the truth of Einstein's science has withstood the test of time and been subject to much experimental verification. So what exactly is your point -- ignore the truth because you do not like its source? Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Apr 16 11:33:13 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:33:13 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <100f9bef-3e84-6df0-e91d-87b4c01ee3c7@zahav.net.il> Last year I read the document that one signs with the Rabbinate about the mechira. It was quite clear - you sell everything.? Everything includes things that you may have forgotten about? and even things that you have no idea if you own, like stocks in some company that deals in chameitz (even if your ownership is via your pension fund). Everything? means everything. I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". On 4/16/2018 3:06 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the > chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. > > > > So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? > > Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 16 11:07:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:07:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria In-Reply-To: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> References: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180416180705.GG23200@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:48:58AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical : but rather a spiritual disease. I like calling it spirito-somatic, coining a term to parallel "psychosomatic". Just as it stress can turn the presence of Helicobacter pulori in the stomach into having an ulcer. : The Rabbis comment: b'sorah tovah hee l'Yisroel -- : "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." : Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and : mortar to act as if it were alive... But they also say it's purely theoretical (Sanhedrin 71a). Although that's tied to R' Elazar b"R Shimon's side of a machloqes in the mishnah (Nega'im 12:3). R' Yishmael and R' Aqiva (the other two opinions in the mishnah) would apparently disagree. In any case, as with the rest of the cases in the gemara of laws that exist only for learning (ben soreir umoreh and ir hanidachas) it continues with tannaim saying they saw something local tradition said was evidence of one. Nowadays, house mold is known to be all too common. The actual physical side of tzara'as habayis needn't be miraculous. However, unlike tzara'as of the body, one can't invoke a soul - mind - brain causality. It would be pretty direct evidence of Divine Providence if tzra'as of the sort that would cause tum'ah struck only appropriate homes. Which is how I saw the quote. It requires people living on a level where blatant hashgachah peratis is approrpriate. As opposed to an era where even tzara'as of the body requires far more spirituality than people achieve. : Since in today's world we don't have the warning of leprosy attached to our : houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be : able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. There is a discussion of the role of learning Torah, and whether studying Torah that is non-applicabile is of value. Because of ideas like this one, it is hard to believe there can be Torah that is non-applicable. Even if the case isn't, "derosh vekabel sekhar" could refer to taking home lessons for the general principle. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 16th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Tifferes: What type of discipline Fax: (270) 514-1507 does harmony promote? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Apr 16 06:55:47 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:55:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzorah Message-ID: <672ECAA3-45E8-4B5C-A040-0A47C6B91FE2@cox.net> The second verse of this portion (14:2) states: "This shall be the law of the metzora on the day of his purification..." Since the Torah mentions that his purification takes place during the day, the Sages expound that the Kohen's declaration, which alone permits the metzora to begin his purification ritual, may be made only during the day (Rashi; Sifra). The observance of Taharat Hamishpacha has been a central feature of Jewish life for millennia. One finds Mikvehs in medieval Spain, in ancient Italy and in the famed desert outpost of Masada. This is consonant with Halacha which mandates that even before the town synagogue is built, a Mikveh must first be established. The source of the laws of Mikveh and family purity is found in this week's Torah portion. The Torah commands that when a woman has a menstrual flow, she and her husband must stay apart from one another. During this period she is "tameh," a Hebrew term that has been incorrectly translated as "unclean." In point of fact, the word tameh has nothing to do with uncleanness. When one is tameh it means that a person has had some contact with death. In the instance of a menstruating woman, it is the death of the ovum. Similarly, when a man has had physical relations (which inevitably involve the death of millions of sperm), he too is tameh. Implicit in this Biblical tradition is a great sensitivity and awareness of the natural life cycle. After a week has passed since the cessation of the woman's menstrual flow, the woman goes to the Mikveh where she undergoes a "spiritual rebirth." Various aspects of the Mikveh experience reinforce this notion of rebirth. The Mikveh itself must have 40 seah of water, the number 40 alluding to the 40th day after conception when the soul of a child enters the embryo. The woman must have no ornaments or barriers between herself and the water, for her emerging from the Mikveh is like that of the newborn leaving the waters of the womb with no ornaments or barriers. A child is the mirror of the family, he reflects the moral purity of his parents. Anonymous From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 16 08:34:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:34:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Kriyas HaTorah, Aseres Ha'dibros Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Rambam (Teshuvos HaRambam 60) writes that one who is seated should not stand up for the reading of the Aseres Ha'dibros (Ten Commandments). However, the general custom today is that the entire congregation does stand during this reading. Why is it that this ruling of the Rambam is not followed? A. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt"l pointed out that there are two versions of cantillation for the Aseres Ha'dibros. The first is called ta'am ha'tachton (lower cantillation) which punctuates the Aseres Ha'dibros into sentences in the same manner as the rest of the Torah. The second is called ta'am ha'elyon (higher cantillation), which punctuates following the order of the commandments, reconstructing the manner in which the Ten Commandments were received during matan Torah. There are two reasons why someone would wish to stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros. If one's intent is to show extra honor to this portion of the Torah, this is inappropriate. The entire Torah was given to Moshe on Har Sinai, and therefore all of Torah is equally precious. Standing for the Aseres Ha'dibros might lead some to the erroneous conclusion that only the Ten Commandments were received directly from Hashem. However, there is a second reason why one would stand during the Aseres Ha'dibros and that is to recreate the assembly at Har Sinai. We stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros in the same fashion that all of Israel stood during the original acceptance of the Torah. Today, the general custom is to always read the portion of the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'elyon. This indicates that this is not merely a reading of the Torah, but a recreation of matan Torah. Therefore, it is appropriate to stand. Rav Soloveitchik posits that the Rambam read the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'tachton, equating it to every other Torah reading, in which case, it would indeed be inappropriate to stand. The custom of Rav Chaim Soloveitchik, zt"l was to read the Aseres Ha'dibros both on Shavuos and during the weekly portion with ta'am ha'tachton, following the practice of the Rambam. Some, however, have the custom to read the Aseres Ha'dibros on Shavuos with ta'am ha'elyon, since this reading is a recreation of Sinai, but when parshas Yisro and parshas Va'eschanan are read on a regular Shabbos, the Aseres Ha'dibros are read with ta'am ha'tachton. In such a shul it would be best to stand from the beginning of the aliyah so as not to show more honor to one part of the Torah than another. From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 17:58:57 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 19:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: In my previous post responding R? Marty Bluke I wrote: ?in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics.? Upon reflection I wish to add to my previous thought about ?the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly? can lead to great awe and yiras harommeimus and emuna. I have no doubt that the pasuk jn Iyov (19:26) ?umibesori echezeh eloka? is a direct expression in Nach of this idea that my very tissues (biological systems) are great evidence and testimony to the the existence of the Borei Olam and His careful and intricate design and continuing hashgacha of the very smallest and finest, myriad intricate details of every living thing. It basically is the old argument that the existence of a complex system such as a clock implies that there must be a clock maker ? but ever so much in spades. Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 17 10:59:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:59:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> Message-ID: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a : bdieved. Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. The wave of rabbis coming in when the big drive for day school education started were predominantly a particular kind of Litvak. Look who the big voices were in the Agudas haRabbanim of the first half of the 20th century. RARakeffetR makes a strong case that one of the differences between RSRH and RYBS was just how lekhat-chilah secular studies are. RSRH held that our insulation from general culture and general knowledge was a tragic consequence of ghettoization. And that we never chose that life, it was forced upon us. The Emancipation was seen as a boon, allow the full expression of Judaism again. RYBS, in RARR's opionion (and of course, others vehemently disagree) only saw secular studies as the ideal way to live in a suboptimal situation. Secular knowledge in-and-of-itself as well as its ability to help one live in dignity is lekhat-chilah only within this bedi'eved world. But had we all been able to move back to Brisk, it would be all the better. Which gets us to the eis la'asos discussion. Shas too is lekhat-chilah and a great thing. What is bedi'eved is the reality that forced Rebbe, Rav Ashi, Ravinah to canonize official texts and (according to Tosafos) the geonim to write it down. But since we are still in that reality, we still publish TSBP -- lekhat-chilah. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? : Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, : "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of secular studies. Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. I would stick to discussing financial crimes: Yafeh Talmud Torah im Derekh Eretz sheyegi'as sheneihem mishkachas avon. VeKhol Torah she'ein imahh melakhah, sofahh beteilah vegoreres avon. - R' Gamliel beno shel R' Yehudah haNasi (Avos 2:2) But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the am hanivchar means. I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does not produce people less prone to these things. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 17th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Tifferes: What is the ultimate Fax: (270) 514-1507 state of harmony? From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 17 17:25:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 20:25:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz Message-ID: . I had asked: > On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat > before Biur Chametz? I thank those who responded. I still haven't found any poskim who deal with this exact question, but the Magen Avraham does mention something very close: "All melachos are assur once the time for burning has come, until he burns the chometz, just like above in Siman 431." - Magen Avraham 445:2, at the very end Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Apr 17 22:27:14 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 07:27:14 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Omer and Koolulam Message-ID: A Post by Rabbi Alex Israel. In this essay (originally posted on Facebook for public consumption), Rav Israel talks about his feelings about participating in a Koolulam sing along. If you don't know, Koolulam is an organization which gets hundreds, even thousands of people together to teach to sing one song in unison. They took this idea from the US with the twist of having regular folks and not just stars singing. For an example of what Koolulam does, here is their Yom Atzmaut video (described by many as a tefilla b'tzibbur): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxzR9Z-kG6Q (Al Kol Aleh by Naomi Shemer). Rav Israel's post is an excellent example about how people are dealing with inner conflicts of the Omer (and Three Weeks) mourning period and living in modern Israel. Note: There are rabbanim who wouldn't have allowed participation, during the Omer time or any other time. You can read the comments and discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/alexisrael1/posts/10157199448378942 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ If you have been following me on FB, you will know my obsession with Koolulam, especially their ??70th Yom Haatzmaut event. Prior to the event I was asked by 7 or 8 people, friends or talmidot/im, ?whether they could attend during the Omer. (If you watched the video, about half the participants ?were religious-looking.) ? I am generally halakhically conservative (small "c"!) and I try to keep halakha even if it disrupts my lifestyle. I ?am committed to halakhic practice and I don't knowingly contravene the law. So was it forbidden?? On the one hand this was a live event. So is it a problem? The Shulchan Arukh restricts weddings ?and haircuts as modes of marking the death of Rabbi Akiva?s 24,000 talmidim. Magen Avraham ?adds dancing and revelry to the list and I grew up not even going to movies in the Omer. Koolulam ?isn?t a wedding and did not include dancing, but was very much a public celebratory event. Could I ?go and allow others to go? I went to consult. One authoritative Posek said to me "It's not really assur (not dancing); it's not really muttar (public mass event). Go if it is ?important to you." ... But is that satisfactory?? The fundamental issue is deeper than the technical definition of ?music?, dancing? etc. In truth, ?I was going as part of my Yom Haatzmaut experience, as a celebration of life in Israel, of a people ?revived. This was not simple entertainment. Having participated in Koolulam, it was incredibly ?uplifting. My wife has described the evening as ?tefilla betzibur,? as the song?s words are essentially ?a prayer! - Just watch the "kavanna" in the video of the event! This was not merely a fun night out, although it was great fun. It was for us a Zionist ?expression, it touched a far deeper chord; it reflected faith, national unity, pride, hope, and so much ?more.? On the one hand, I see Halakha as embodying values which we aspire to imbibe. As such, I fully identify with the mourning of the ?Omer. It recalls Rabbi Akiva?s students who did not regard or interact with one another respectfully. In Israel ?today, we desperately need to be reminded annually about the need for a sensitive and respectful ?social environment and public discourse. The Omer contains a critical message. We wouldn't want to be without it. The mourning of the Omer, especially for Askenazi kehillot, also marks ?massacres and Crusades throughout the ages; another important feature, (although they may have tragically been eclipsed by the Shoah.?) But here is the problem. These practices totally fail to absorb the huge historic shift that is Medinat ?Yisrael. There is a gaping dissonance between the traditional Omer rhythm and our Israel lives. The ?traditional Omer rubric doesn't match the modern days of commemoration. For example, one ?does not recite Tachanun on Yom Hashoah because it falls in Nissan. If there is one day to say ?Tachanun, it is Yom Hashoah (I wrote about my struggle with this here ?http://thinkingtorah.blogspot.co.il/?/davening-on-yom-hasho?). And is Yom ?Haatzmaut merely a hiatus in a wider period of mourning? Moreover, in general, on a daily basis, ?as I read the Siddur, I wonder how we can ignore the huge chessed of HKBH in our generation of ?Jewish independence and the restoration of land and nationhood. How can my Siddur be the same ??(excluding the prayer for the State) as my great-grandfather? ? In this period of the year, we should be thanking God, celebrating our good fortune, revelling in ?the gifts that we feel as we move from Yom Haatzmaut to Yom Yerushalayim. Fundamentally, the ?Omer is a happy time; Ramban perceives it as a ?chol hamoed? of sorts between Pesach and ?Shavuot where we mark ?the love of our youth, our marriage with God, how we followed God ?through the wilderness? (Jeremiah 2) as we followed God from Egypt to Matan Torah at Mount ?Sinai. Where is the joy? ? So, I felt that this was a sort of Yom Haatzmaut event which yes, contravened the traditional Omer, ?but in some way lived up to our new reality. I keep the Omer - not shaving; watching how I speak ?to others and how I interact in a positive and respectful way - but we are not in the terrible era of ?Bar Kochba when the Romans massacred Rabbi Akiva's talmidim, and we are not in the period of ?the Crusades. We are in Medinat Yisrael, our thriving sovereign State, and I want to praise Hashem and celebrate my people for ?the ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ????, ?? ???????? ????? ?????? ??????? - and so I went to Kululam. ? I don't know how to square the two systems.? Later I saw a post by an amazing Rav, Rabbi David Menachem, whose post reflected similar sentiments, going even further than my thoughts. See his post here: ?https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=963243270498844&id=276752372481274 ?(h/t Yael Unterman) I?m sharing these thoughts without the ability to articulate a solution. Maybe time will change ?things. Maybe we need to push these questions to halakhic authorities and thinkers greater than ?myself.? From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 17 12:56:42 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 19:56:42 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> There have been many many posting recently about the desirability of secular education, but no one has, so far, mentioned an exceedingly important point. Bammaqom sh'eyn anashim hishtaddel lihyoth ish, so I have to step in and point it out. We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have. `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater". This is preposterous; someone who knows xokhma yvanith knows that "epi" means "above" and "tropos" means to move, or to act. An epitropos is someone who acts above someone else, i.e., a guardian, who acts above, and on behalf of, his ward. `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Posqim, especially, need to have a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages. Any poseq who is not willing to be `oqer a din in the Shulxan `Arukh is no poseq (you may attribute this quote to me). But ordinary Jews also need to know this. It is always dangerous to believe things that are untrue. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 17 15:00:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 18:00:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >: Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a >: bdieved. > >Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up by Shearith Israel in the 18th century taught secular as well as Torah subjects. The day school set up by Rabbi Avraham Rice did the same. While it is true that the level of Torah subjects taught was low, still there were secular subjects almost from the beginning. Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects and so did RJJ that was founded around1902. The high school that Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started in the second decade of the 20th century taught secular subjects as well as Torah subjects. The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. Please see my articles "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 "Bringing Torah Education to Baltimore" The Jewish Press, October 3, 2008, pages 57 & 75. >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? >: Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, >: "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." > >So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of >secular studies. The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. >Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of >secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. He knew in detail how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, he did value mathematics. Once he moved to NY he enrolled his children in yeshivas that gave its students a secular education. He received special permission not to send his eldest son to public school in Chelsea, MA, since there was no other alternative at the time. (His eldest daughter did attend public school in Chelsea, MA.) Lazar Miller, his eldest son, told me when he was sitting shiva for his mother that his mother used to help him with his math. However, she used Hebrew terminology for fraction, numerator, and denominator, since she had studied at two Yavneh schools in Lithuania where everything was learned in Ivrit. >: How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? > >Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat >haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. > >I would stick to discussing financial crimes: ... >But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding >of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the >am hanivchar means. What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal. I will take Erlichkeit with aberrance to mitzva practice over Frumkeit any time. >I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, >have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does >not produce people less prone to these things. I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to those who possess it. Originally, higher education in America was tied to religious education, and there was an attempt to instill morality in the students. Today, there is no such attempt. Indeed, if anything, higher education is in many cases anti-morality from a Torah standpoint. Parents contemplating sending their children to a secular collage should keep this in mind. YL From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 18 13:05:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:05:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:00:38PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: :> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a :> : bdieved. :> Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. : This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up : by Shearith Israel in the 18th century ... : Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects ... : The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. None of which led to the dayschool movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? .... :> So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of :> secular studies. : The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member : behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. But you haven't shown a connection between the lack of limudei chol and the extent by which people are not living according to some derekh's understanding of "true Torah values". :> Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of :> secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how : science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. ... And yet would have felt a student who studied science as a full time endevor to be a cause fo a cheshbon hanefesh. And consequently, due to his own lack of formal study, much of the science he uses in his examples is just plain wrong. (And similarly, someone who knew the then-latest theories of cosmogony, geology and evolution would not have found is arguments for Creationism very convincing. If you don't know what the other side of the debate believes, you end up knocking down strawmen.) : how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is : true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, : he did value mathematics. Leshitakha-- Why aren't you asking how R' Miller could ignore RSRH's paean to Schiller? :> But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding :> of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the :> am hanivchar means. : What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on : externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal... Frumkeit is about ritual and a drive to satisfy one's need to be holy. Ehlichkeit is about wanting to do G-d's Will. A frum "baal chessed" wants his gemach to be the biggest in town. An ehrlicher one is happy those in his town in need have so many sources of help. See Alei Shur vol II pp 152-155 A translation of an excetp by R' Ezra Goldschmiedt My blog post on the topic . And if that's not your definition, it's the one I intended when I said that the main cause of the chilulei hasheim you raised (and the mindset that least to them which is in-and-of-itself un-Jewish) is frumeit. :> I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, :> have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does :> not produce people less prone to these things. : I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to : those who possess it... So then why bring up immoral behavior as proof that there are problems with a lack of secular education? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 18th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 balance? From driceman at optimum.net Wed Apr 18 13:30:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:30:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > RAM: >> On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat >> before Biur Chametz? > Burning hametz is a b?dieved. In an ideal world we would eat all of our hametz before zman issuro. So Hazal gave us time to eat hametz in the morning, and instituted biur hametz soon enough before noon that we wouldn?t violate any issurim, but not much before that. Otherwise why not do the biur right after bedika? David Riceman From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 18 16:25:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:25:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95.6C.08474.004D7DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: None of which led to the day school movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Etz Cahim had secular studies in the late 1880s. see below. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started a high school with secular studies around 1915. . R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? This is not true. > From my article "The Founding of Yeshiva Etz Chaim" The Jewish Press, May 2, 2008, pages 48 - 49. From the amount of time allocated to secular subjects, it is clear that the directors of the yeshiva considered these far less important than the students? limudei kodesh studies. Abraham Cahan, who would eventually become the editor of the Jewish Daily Forward and a prominent figure in the Socialist movement in America, became one of the first teachers in the English department in 1887. Cahan records that the curriculum was loosely drawn to provide for the study of grammar, arithmetic, reading, and spelling ? all within the ?English Department.? But because the directors of the school had no clear idea of what should be taught, the English Department functioned haphazardly, more out of a perfunctory acknowledgement for these subjects than a sincere desire to ?provide the children with a modern education.? The English Department was divided into two classes. The first was taught by a boy about fourteen, who had just graduated from public school and the second was taught by Cahan, who was a little less than twenty-eight years old. The students ranged from the ages of nine or ten to fifteen and many were exposed to the formal study of secular subjects for the first time. One of the native students received his first lessons in the English language when he entered the Yeshiva after passing his thirteenth birthday. The young immigrants presented an immense challenge to their devoted teachers. The students drank up the instruction with a thirst centuries old. Cahan frequently remained long after the prescribed teaching hours to tutor his pupils, who were uniformly poor in reading and mathematics and who regarded grammar as an exquisite form of torture. On these occasions, the directors would ask Cahan why he ?worked so hard,? saying that the students ?already knew enough English.? And from my article "The Founding of the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School" The Jewish Press, September 5, 2008, pages 26 & 66. Setting The Pattern For Future Yeshivas The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was unique in that it was the first elementary parochial school that taught basic Jewish studies as well as Talmud. Yeshiva Etz Chaim, founded in 1886, was an intermediate school that enrolled boys at least nine years old who already were somewhat proficient in Chumash and Rashi. Yeshiva Etz Chaim?s goal was to give its students a thorough grounding in Gemara and Shulchan Aruch. In addition, it provided some limited secular studies in the late afternoon. The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was different in that in addition to providing a first rate religious education, it sought to provide its students with an excellent secular education at least equivalent to that offered by the public schools of the time. Nonetheless, limudei chol (secular or ?English? studies) was considered much less important than limudei kodesh (religious studies), and this attitude was clearly displayed in the constitution of the school. It required that there be two principals, one for each department. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 18 17:35:48 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:35:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> R? Jay F, Shachter wrote: ?We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have.? To this I respond: First, I certainly would not wish to set myself up as one who is capable ?to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us,? despite having some modern math and scientific knowledge. I think such a broad statement goes much too far. Not having any significant knowledge of Greek, I will refrain from commenting on your second example. However the first example you cite regarding Pi and the Rambam is one that I am willing to challenge. You are of course correct about the dating of the formal proof[s] (there are more than one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_%CF%80_is_irrational), date to modern, post Rambam times. However, it is very possible and probably likely that the Rambam intuited this on his own, even if without the benefit of a formal proof, that Pi had to be or was most likely to be irrational. I know I did so and probably most reasonably good students of math do so as well, long before they are aware of any formal proof for that fact. One reason for this is the well known method to approximate the value of Pi to any precision desired (even if very slow to converge) that requires little more than the knowledge of how to analyze a triangle. Simply inscribe a polygon of N equal isosceles triangles in a circle and calculate its perimeter and then divide by twice the length of the long side (= diameter of the circle). then do the same for N+1, and N+2 etc. a process in theory you could do infinitely many times for greater precision. So to intuit irrationality is very plausible even if not proven in our modern sense. Practically, note, that no matter how far you carry this exercise you will not get a repeating decimal that is the mark of the rational number. So I think you are far from ?judging the credibility? of the Rambam based on this example you cited. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 18 15:33:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:33:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . R' Ben Waxman wrote: > I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth > of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real > need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know > about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." > > The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika > anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant was that once you sell your chameitz there is no *d'Oraisa* need to do a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, and that's why we say the bracha. This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the only reason. Mishneh Brurah 431:2 writes: "Also: Because people are used to chometz all year long, if there is still some in his house and his possession, they made a gezera because he might forget and eat it." Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of the chometz that we found. But this is an error, in my opinion, because the concern raised by the MB was that one might happen to come across some chometz, and thoughtlessly eat it. Mechira will NOT prevent this. Mechira will ONLY remove the chometz from one's ownership, but it will not help against forgetfullness. I would like to close by showing that Bedikah and Mechira BOTH have strengths that the other lacks, and that is why people should do both: Mechira removes all chometz from ownership, regardless of where it might be, and (I think) regardless of my sincerity, but if I didn't clean the house well enough I may have left some around. Bedika removes (or greatly reduces) the chance that I might come across some chometz accidentally, but the chometz that I didn't find is still in my ownership. A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had intended to type!) Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 00:09:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 03:09:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> Message-ID: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day. In his day it was considered acceptable to say "Look, pi is obviously an irrational number", and nobody would lift an eyebrow, because it *is* obvious. Only later did mathematicians start to say, well, yes, it is obvious, but let's see if we can actually prove it. And eventually they did so, and guess what, they confirmed what everyone including the Rambam already knew. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 18 23:13:45 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 08:13:45 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Ben On 4/19/2018 12:33 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant > was that once you sell your chameitz there is no*d'Oraisa* need to do > a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, > and that's why we say the bracha. > > This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do > Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 03:27:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:27:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam and Pi In-Reply-To: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180419102714.GA11722@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:09:29AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a : rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state : it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day... I fully agree. But there is an irony here. When it comes to theolgy, the Rambam holds the chiyuv is to know, ie to believe because they had proof -- not tradition, not pur faith, etc... I think the Rambam believed he had a proof that pi was irrational. However, he had a differnt definition of the word proof. Continuing on this tangent... I think the definition of "proof" and therefore of "Rationalism" changed so much since the Rambam's day, the Rambam really wouldn't qualify as a "Rationalist" in our sense of the word. For example, science wasn't invented yet. The things the Rambam believed about Natural Philosophy were not backed by anything comparable to the rigor of scientific process. (Which itself is only rigorous at narrowing down the search space. Actual theories are constructed inductively, patterns found from a number of examples, and only have Bayesian levels of certainty. There can always be a black swan out there that, once found, requires replacing the theory with a new one. But *disproving* theories? That black swan does with certainty. Jumping back to before this parenthetic digression...) Similarly in math. The Rambam didn't have a modern mathemetician's definition of proof in mind. Even though he knew Euclid. But he did and always expected knowledge to be backed by some kind of proof. Archimedes spent a lot of time trying to "square the circle", i.e. come up with a geometric way of constructing a square with the same area as a circle. Numerous people tried since. This is the same thing as failing to find the rational number that is pi. Say the square they were looking for had sides of length s. So, the are of the square would be s^2. To "square the circle" would mean to find a square whose sides, s, are such that the ratio between s^2 and r^2 is pi, so that the areas s^2 (the square) and pi * r^2 (the circle) are equal. Repeatedly failing to find s by geometric construction eventually led people to conclude it was a fool's errand. By the Rambam's day, it was taken as a given that geometric construction could not find an s, and therefore that the ratio between them, pi, was irrational. (Weirdly, there still could have been a "black swan", the geometric construction that hadn't yet been found. The level of confidence the Rambam had would parellel that of a scientist believing the results of repeated experiment, but not that of a modern methematician.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Apr 19 08:04:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:04:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day >schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a >post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied >began, but initially, it didn't have to. I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was never separate from the study of Torah. He emphasized the importance of unifying Judaism and secular studies. Often speaking of the, "harmonious union of culture and spirituality," he believed that knowledge of the liberal arts would broaden one's understanding of Torah. However, Revel's dedication to Orthodox Jewry was undisputed. For instance, he forbade the use of a female vocalist in the 1926 Music Festival, as a female singer is a violation of Orthodox Jewish law. He did not allow Reform Jews to serve on Yeshiva College's national board of directors. He was also staunchly opposed to mixed seating in synagogues. "He wrote: 'Yeshiva aims at unity, at the creation of a synthesis between the Jewish conception of life, our spiritual and moral teaching and ideals, and the present-day humanities, the scientific conscience and spirit to help develop the complete harmonious Jewish personality, once again to enrich and bless our lives, to revitalize the true spirit and genius of historic Judaism.'" From https://goo.gl/hbRw8S "Rabbi Revel's first step as the new head of RIETS was the creation of an affi liated high school. The high school, Talmudical Academy, had its fi rst entering class in September 1916." Regarding Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin please see "Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin, Torah Education Pioneer in America" The Jewish Press, April 4, 2008, pages 42 & 91. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 03:19:45 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:19:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> References: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <81715a05-f9f9-f57e-95b1-03dc5240cb96@sero.name> On 19/04/18 02:13, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there > is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Nor is there an issur in having hefker chametz sitting in your property, but you have to search for it and put it away or get rid of it, for fear that if you come across it during Pesach you may absentmindedly eat it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Apr 19 07:45:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:45:48 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . I just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this permission? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:33:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:33:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180419153325.GA3724@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:04:09AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. : : From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b : : "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was ... Before the wave in question, but not the cause of the day school explosion. I do not know why this is so hard of a point to get across. Being around first but not starting a trend does not make something the source of the eventual trend. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is flawed reasoning. In fact, he didn't run a day school. And for that matter TA wasn't fully seperate from REITS. It wasn't a HS model that caught on anywhere. The model of day school and HS that actually catches on across American O through the middle of the 20th cent was the product of compromises between R ("Mr") SF Mendolovitch and his parent body. When TA evolved into MTA and BTA, it was because other schools have already created different expectations of what a HS was. Being in the same track as the eventual college degree, so that going from TA to any other college but YC was more like a transfer, was not sellable. (Although it did make AP courses moot; just take a college course in your 3rd year, if you were ready to.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Apr 19 04:25:17 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:25:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach Message-ID: The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately precedes the Amidah. I gave the following response: Soncino gives a very poignant explantion. ?O Lord, open Thou my lips; and my mouth shall declare Thy praise.? David?s lips had been sealed by wrongdoing, because praise of God would then have been blasphemy. If, then, God opened his lips and he was again enabled to offer Him praise, it was a sign that he had been granted pardon. What a profound thought before one of the most prominent and central prayers of our entire liturgy. We are all sinners and hope for the same pardon that King David was granted. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:59:45 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:59:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180419155945.GA30717@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:25:17AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately : precedes the Amidah. Technically, it is part of the Amidah. That's why we say it between ge'ulah and tefillah in Shacharis and Maariv. Unlike "Ki sheim H' eqra", which is only said before the Amidah of Minchah and Mussaf, because there is no Birkhas Ge'ulah, and therefore no problem of interruption. This is particularly relevant to a Chazan, as Chazaras haShatz should begin with "H' Sefasai Tiftach", not Birkhas Avos. Tangent, since we're looking at what the pasuq is about. Safah is at the edge. The word is not only used for a lip, but also for the seashore (sefas hayam). The peh is what stands behind the sefasayim. So, when I say this pasuq, and when I have the time and yishuv hadaas to think about what I am saying, my thoughts are about Hashem removing the externalities that block me from expressing my real inner self. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 09:23:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20180419162328.GB30717@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:56:42PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: : We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct : judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. : ... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. : He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although : he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater"... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge to that we know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon am? Mind you, I believe in the value of secular knowledge in-and-of-itself. Not just what you need to increase the likelihood of paying the bills. But I just don't see this particular argument. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 09:25:22 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> On 19/04/18 10:45, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I? just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, > then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no > longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). > > But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I > MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is > no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not > destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this > permission? It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 11:55:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahMusings] The Best Charity Message-ID: <20180419185537.GA11736@aishdas.org> People who both know my own proclivities and read this to the end will understand why I just HAD to share this post by RGS. >From https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/04/the-best-charity/ Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings The Best Charity Apr 19, 18 by R. Gil Student My friend, Rav Shlomo Einhorn, is once again attempting a superhuman feat of Torah teaching. A little over two years ago, he taught Torah for 18 live-streamed hours to raise money for the yeshiva he heads. This year, on Lag Ba-Omer, he will be attempting to break that record by teaching for 19 straight hours. This is a cause worth supporting -- or is it? I. Which Charity? Many people in the Jewish community have achieved varieties of financial success, allowing them the privilege of supporting many charities. This raises questions of communal and philanthropic priorities. Others have limited charity funds but still want to allocate them effectively. The issue is a blessing but also a complex problem, with multiple angles. Rav Hershel Schachter discussed this with me a few years ago in [48]Jewish Action. I would like to explore a specific subject that I have seen discussed in the responsa literature -- what is the best charity if you have to choose only one? In mid-sixteenth century Turkey, a wealthy man passed away without leaving instructions for the disposal of his charity funds. The local rabbis decided that some of that charity money should be given to the deceased's poor brother but the sons of the deceased objected that they should inherit the money and decide what to do with it. The question was brought to the Maharshdam, Rav Shmuel Di Medina of Salonica (Responsa Maharshdam, Yoreh De'ah 158). Maharshdam says that we have to try to determine the deceased's desires for the charity fund. Since in this case we do not know his intentions, we should give the money to the highest level of charity. The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 259) quotes his father, the Rosh, as saying that a town may reallocate to a study hall money that was donated to a synagogue or cemetery. Maharshdam argues that if in a case in which we know with certainty that the donor intended for the money to go to a synagogue we can use it for a study hall, then certainly when we do not know the donor's intention we can use the money to support Torah study. If we give the money to a lesser charity, we risk misusing the donation. II. Higher Torah The question then becomes which Torah study organization receives higher priority. Maharshdam quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 119b) that the world survives because of the Torah study of children, who due to their age are free of responsibility from sin. Additionally, more people doing a mitzvah together has greater merit than fewer people. Therefore, concludes Maharshdam, the money should be given to ththe highest charity -- a large elementary school. Similarly, Rav Ephraim Navon in early eighteenth century Turkey addresses a related question (Machaneh Ephraim (Hilkhos Tzedakah 11). A man donated money to establish in a small town a part-time kollel of ten men studying Torah. However, the town could not find ten men willing to enroll. The donor wished to change the endowment from a kollel to a full-time elementary school teacher. Rav Navon permitted this reallocation for technical reasons but adds that this new purpose is higher than the original because the Torah study of children sustains the world. III. God's Place However, Rav Yosef Eliyahu Chazzan challenges this argument (Ma'arkhei Lev vol. 1 no. 25). He quotes the Gemara (Berakhos 8a) which states that nowadays God only has the four cubits of halakhah. Therefore, He loves the distinguished gates of halakhah more than all the synagogues and other study halls. According to this passage, high-level Torah study merits higher priority than any other study. This seems to contradict the earlier passage, which gives priority to children's Torah study. This question gains greater strength when we note that the priority of high-level Torah has practical implications. Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Tefillah 8:3) rules, based on the above Gemara, that it is better to pray in a study hall than a synagogue. Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 90:18) rules likewise. Since the two passages seem to contradict and the latter is quoted authoritatively, it would seem that an elementary school should not be given priority over adult Torah study. Rav Chaim Palaggi (Chaim Be-Yad nos. 64-65) favors the interpretation of Rav Chazzan. However, he struggles with the many authorities who side with the Maharshdam. Rather than taking a minority view against the majority, in an impressive act of intellectual humility Rav Palaggi adopts a middle position that gives due weight to the majority with which he disagrees. IV. Jewish Behavior Perhaps a reconciliation of the two passages lies in the Rambam's interpretation. Rav Chazzan and Rav Palaggi follow Maharsha's interpretation that the Gemara is praising high-level study of halakhah. In the introduction to his commentary to the Mishnah (ed. Kafach, vol. 1, p. 21), Rambam sees the passage about the four cubits of halakhah as a general declaration about the uniqueness of true loyalty to the letter and spirit of halakhah. Synagogues and study halls may be full of people studying Torah but not enough of those students apply these teachings properly to develop a faithful Torah personality. Only someone who internalizes the messages of halakhah can reach out fully to God. If so, the distinguished gates of halakhah may overlap with elementary schools. Schools that teach proper character traits seem to qualify as remaining within the four cubits of halakhah, whether for adults or children. An elementary school that trains its students to follow the law, to embrace and internalize the messages of Judaism regarding behavior and thought, serves in the same capacity as a high-level kollel. Both types of institutions are distinguished gates of halakhah. Elementary schools have the additional benefit of purity, discussed above. If this is correct, the highest charity would be an elementary school that emphasizes proper behavior and attitudes, a mussar-focused cheder that directs pure children on the proper path. About Gil Student Rabbi Gil Student is the founder, publisher and editor-in-chief of Torah Musings. From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Thu Apr 19 18:08:35 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 01:08:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> ?When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah?? One thing I learned in my years as an attorney is that a rhetorical question is not an argument. I, of course, do not know what Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue to be observant in a work environment. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Fri Apr 20 11:40:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:40:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> References: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20180420184026.GA7707@aishdas.org> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 01:08:35AM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : I, of course, do not know what : Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very : proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates : and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue : to be observant in a work environment. Historical (and hagiographical) accounts portray the request for secular education that would make college and professions possible options came from the target audience, a majority of the parents of Brooklyn, not R "Mr." Mendlowitz. His launching of the HS was by convincing 8th grade parents to keep their sons in TvD "just one more year", as the parents wanted their boys to go to Public HS. That was the importance of getting a real American education had to his customer base. Then, it was another "just one more year" into 10th grade, until he had his first graduating class. There wasn't an issue for him of getting secular education into TvD, it was an issue of getting parents to agree to commit time to limudei qodesh! So of course TvD made a big deal about the quality of their secular studies. The whole point their marketing had to make was that the son can learn Torah without parents feeling afraid their boys would be held back. Getting back to the main conversation: What R-"Mr"-SFM thought is more of a historical issue. My point was that the push for limudei chol in day schools at the time the movement (not the first day school!) was getting started came from the parents, not the idealogues. There is no indication the decision was lechat-khilah, as this wasn't a lechat-khilah situation. Limudei qodesh without a guarantee of pre-college quality education wasn't a vaiable option in most communities, not a choice on the table. Meanwhile, the big voice in American O Rabbinate of the time was the East European Rabbi, and not an ideological immigrant who had a pull to America, but someone who came fleeing either progroms or Nazism. We know the majority of them considered limudei chol an assimilationist force. Or is that too under question? (I used the name "R 'Mr.' SF Mendlowitz" [or misspelled as per the usual pronounciation "-olovitch"] because he asked people to call him "Mr." and therefore I thought it respectful to acknowledge it. Even though here, "R" is the default title for men. Then I was afraid people who didn't know the history would think insult was intended, so I am adding this parenthetic explanation.) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 20th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Tifferes: What role does harmony Fax: (270) 514-1507 play in maintaining relationships? From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:54:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:54:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Some thoughts on the passing of a teacher and friend Message-ID: <5f552137ab7f4015af43f057f925c5ae@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> With the greatest trepidation I will share a few thoughts. I knew (to the extent one can know someone) R'Ozer Yeshaya Glickman Hacohain Z"L for 40 years. In the early years we learned together. He certainly was far more able than I but we did discuss many tum issues over the years. I don't think he would be happy being held up as a unicorn even though his blending of both worlds was the reason he felt he was asked by the Yeshiva to be "on the road" so much. I believe he felt that anyone could do what he did at their own level. When the hurley burleys done the question the yeshiva needs to ask itself imho is have they encouraged (or perhaps should they-my uninformed sense is that RIETS looks at the separate mountain approach as a vision -a la r'ybs) broad lives( a la r'hutner) in any of their best and brightest? do they seek out role models of that nature or only exceptional examples in specific accomplishments (e.g big TC or big $ but not a balancer)? Balancing priorities is a big challenge in life, if one wants to honor R'OYG Z"L imho one might start with some cheshbon hanefesh looking at his balance and its message for us (no two of us will likely reach the same conclusions but that's what is to be expected-it's the process not the results) yhi zichro baruch KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:53:20 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:53:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?R=92YBS-Feminist/Talit_Story?= Message-ID: <9fc9dd88e16649d48fc183b298bbfe74@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I believe this version of the story told by R? S Mandel in Jewish Action-not the ?gotcha? version I?ve heard. When a group of feminists visited him and demanded that he permit them to wear tallitot, he listened to them, showed he understood their reasoning, and proposed that there first be a trial period during which they would wear colored cloaks as tallitot, but without tzitzit and without reciting a berachah. He asked them to note how they feel wearing them and to come back after two weeks and confer with them again. After two weeks, they reconvened, and when the Rav asked these women how they felt, they told him how inspired they felt when wearing the cloaks. The Rav replied that that was excellent, that they should definitely continue wearing the cloaks and praying with kavannah, and that there was no need to wear the tallitot with tzitzit that men wore. Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 22 11:27:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:27:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah is Not Religion Message-ID: We are counting towards Shevuous which commemorates the giving of the Torah. The question is "What is Torah?' The following is from RSRH's essay Sivan I that I have posted at Sivan I (Collected Writings I) The Torah, however, did not spring from the breast of mortal man; it is the message of the God of Heaven and Earth to Man; and it was from the very beginning so high above the cultural level of the people to which it was given, that during the three thousand years of its existence there was never a time yet during which Israel was quite abreast of the Torah, when the Torah could be said to have been completely translated into practice. The Torah is rather the highest aim, the ultimate goal towards which the Jewish nation was to be guided through all its fated wanderings among the nations of the world. This imperfection of the Jewish people and its need of education is presupposed and clearly expressed in the Torah from the very beginning. There is, therefore, no stronger evidence for the Divine origin and uniqueness of the Torah than the continuous backsliding, the continuous rebellion against it on the part of the Jewish people, whose first generation perished because of this very rebellion. But the Torah has outlived all the generations of Israel and is still awaiting that coming age which "at the end of days" will be fully ripe for it. Thus, the Torah manifests from the very beginning its superhuman origin. It has no development and no history; it is rather the people of the Torah which has a history. And this history is nothing else but its continuous training and striving to rise to the unchangeable, eternal height on which the Torah is set, this Torah that has nothing in common with what is commonly called "religion." How hopelessly false is it, therefore, to call this Torah "religion," and thus drag it by this name into the circle of other phenomena in the history of human civilization, to which it does not belong. This is a fundamentally wrong starting point, and it is small wonder that it gives rise to questions such as the following, which have no meaning so far as the Torah is concerned: "You want Judaism to remain the same for ever?" "All religions rejuvenate themselves and advance with the progress of the nations, and only the Jewish 'Religion' wants to remain rigid, always the same, and refuses to yield to the views of an enlightened age?" See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 22 04:12:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 07:12:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav Message-ID: . Tumas meis and sheretz, for example, are supernatural phenomena. If someone has been in contact with tumah, and is infected with that tumah, there is no physical evidence of this infection. We are aware of the tumah if and only if we know about the events that took place, and the status of the things in those events. Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses. But they are spiritual illnesses, not medical ones. And in fact, Torah Sheb'al Peh is chock full of spiritual reasons why a person would become a metzora - Lashon Hara being the most famous of these, miserliness and others being mentioned less frequently. My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve myself in general." (Please note: This post is NOT an attempt to categorize all the many kinds of tumah. The first two paragraphs are designed only to show a similarity between tzaraas and zav, and then to highlight a difference.) Akiva Miller From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:02:03 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:02:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Re: R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 RYL quoted R? Yonasan Eybeshutz: --quote-- For all the sciences are condiments and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impure and how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. ?end quote-- >>>>> ? Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual, or even for every member of the Sanhedrin, to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry.? It is not necessary for all these subjects to be part of the standard yeshiva high school curriculum.? It is only necessary that there be in the world mathematicians, zoologists, chemists, doctors, astronomers and so on.? It is not even necessary that they be Jewish.? It is only necessary that their expertise be accessible when needed.? It is not uncommon that poskim confer with physicians, for example, when they need certain medical information in order to posken shailos in specific situations.? The poskim don?t first have to go to medical school.? ? Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. ?It is necessary that they exist in the world. ?It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies. ? If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:55:19 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:55:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> ? In a message dated 4/9/2018 RYL wrote: ? >> ?There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf --quote-- R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. Hayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, ?through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash?. By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy?. R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): ?. It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. ?.He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. ?. ? --end quote-- To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw from this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL ? >>>>? ? ? To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn: ? [1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ? [2] If you can master the ?seven branches of secular wisdom? before your bar mitzvah, that?s fabulous!? Because after your bar mitzvah you have to be mindful of ?vehagisa bo yomam velayla.???But before your bar mitzvah, you can play ball, roller-skate, and memorize the encyclopedia to your heart?s content. ? [3] Funny you should quote R? Chaim of Volozhin.? The famous Yeshiva of Volozhin did not include any of these seven branches of wisdom in its curriculum.? Anyone happen to remember why and when the Yeshiva of Volozhin closed its doors? ? Let me add a passage written by Rabbi Dr. David Berger (who, BTW, was my Jewish history professor for four wonderful semesters in Brooklyn College): ? --quote? ? Although various Geonim were favorably inclined toward the study of philosophy, it is clear that the curriculum of the advanced yeshivot was devoted to the study of Torah alone?.The private nature of philosophical instruction in the society at large [early medieval intellectual Islamic society] made it perfectly natural for Jews to follow the same course; more important, the curriculum of these venerable institutions [the yeshivot] went back to pre-Islamic days, and any effort to introduce? a curricular revolution into their hallowed halls would surely have elicited vigorous opposition.? ? --end quote? ? [Above is from R? Berger?s essay ?Judaism and General Culture in Medieval Times,? in the book *Judaism?s Encounter with Other Cultures* edited by Jacob J. Schachter.] ? Please note these words:? ?the private nature of philosophical instruction.?? The Vilna Gaon studied secular subjects on his own, as many yeshiva students have done over the years. ? Elsewhere RYL has indicated his desire that the NY govt require chassidishe schools to provide a good secular education to their students. ? You don?t have to impose your preferences on others, or get the government involved to force changes in school curricula. ? I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 01:06:16 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:06:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <6b2084c852a745458c68c6f7836e4477@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn:[1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ================================== IIUC, the Gaon?s theory of limud torah was that there was no such thing as spare time (any time one does not have to be doing something else must be spent learning) Thus assumedly he felt time spent on secular studies was required. Unless one posits that he had a need for ?recreation? which was study of secular studies or that he really only studied them when Torah learning of any sort was forbidden. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 23 05:39:50 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:39:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halacha Yomis - Hafrashas Challah, At Large Factories Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. How does the OU separate Challah at Jewish owned factories that manufacture bread and related items that require Challah separation? Is there a mashgiach separating a piece of dough from every batch? Isn?t that impractical? A. For OU-certified restaurants and caterers, the mashgiach separates Challah from every batch of dough. However, in factories it is not practical to have a mashgiach present each time a batch of dough is made. Instead the OU uses what we call the ?Tevel Matzah system.? Open boxes of matzah that did not have Challah separated from them (i.e. tevel) are placed in these factories next to the mixers. The mashgiach declares that each time a batch of dough is made, a designated piece of the matzah should become Challah and exempt that batch of dough. Even though the matzos have already been baked and the mixer contains unbaked dough, we have already seen that one can separate from baked matzah on raw dough when both are obligated in Challah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Mon Apr 23 06:34:22 2018 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 13:34:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. On Sunday, April 22, 2018, 11:29:56 PM CDT, Toby Katz wrote: > Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. It is necessary that they > exist in the world. It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student > take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. > I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female > physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. How > fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn > Torah day and night that men have! ... > If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") > are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and > potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. Not that this is optimal, Those that have the ability, and desire should spend as much time as they want/need to achieve the Torah knowledge we all rely on to live our lives. We all need Gedolim that these kinds of people become to naser the difficult Shaylos that constantly arise as we progress through time. For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah. This that misdirect those strengths - being urged to use their strengths to learn Torah are in my view shortchanging them. They are discouraging Jews from serving God and his people in the best way they can. Where their strengths where they really lie. More to say - no time. HM Want Emes and Emunah in your life? Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/ From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Mon Apr 23 01:26:05 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:26:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 From: Micha Berger > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us > they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon > am? What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, and what they are teaching us, whilst simultaneously utilising our understanding of the era's terms and sciences to better probe the intentions of the original statements. Dovid Rubin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 08:15:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 11:15:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423151544.GD1065@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 08:26:05AM +0000, D Rubin wrote: : > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, ... : > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon : > am? : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) ... Just to clear up the word, I meant non-posqim. I needed something that meant someone who wasn't "from LOR on up", and therefore shouldn't be pasqening for themselves. : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper : understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, : and what they are teaching us... Yes, as I said, I too believe in a role for limudei chol beyond the utilitarian study of things that will eventually help you pay the bills. I was addressing what I thought was a flaw in a particular argument. There is enough Torah to keep one busy for a lifetime without topics that require a formal secular education. The question is what to do when "Mah shelibo chafeitz" is something like hil' qidush hachodesh. Which brings me to a totally new aspect of this discussion: formal vs informal education. Secular study in one's spare time was the norm in places like Volozhin and Slabodka. (Although Slabodka students were more likely to be reading Freud...) To the extent that RSRH thought Volozhin were "fellow travelers on the path of Torah im Derekh Eretz" and described them as such to his followers when fundraisers for the yeshiva approched Frankfurt aM. And yet the same Litvisher rabbanim and RY would campaign against university and formal education. Perhaps their primary concern was leaving the bubble prematurely leading to assimilation, rather than expecting their talmidim to define away the concept of "free time" or afraid of which ideas their students might be exposed to. Although the Alter of Slabodka would make a case-by-case diagnosis and give each student different guidelines, at least we could say there were stduents for whom he thought secular study on one's own was appropriate. And apparently the norm. Remember, these are the same bachurim for whom the leading pass-time when not learnig was chess. Yeshiva wasn't for everyone; the guys who went were a bunch of intellecturals. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From t613k at aol.com Mon Apr 23 09:33:07 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:33:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <162f35a0504-c8b-11ca6@webjas-vab001.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Mon Apr 23 12:43:36 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:43:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: << I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies.>> And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of science the women should pasken the question -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:00:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:00:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423210037.GA8959@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:43:36PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of : science the women should pasken the question Except that it's arguable that pro forma women can't pasqen. It means a poseiq needs to know enough to ask intelligent questions of the expert. Even if the experts would end up being women, BTs who studied the subject before accepting ol mitzvos, unobservant Jews or non-Jews. Which is a good deal of knowledge, but doesn't require years of formal education. When I brought this thread over from Areivim to Avodah, my intent was not to have a bunch of pro-secular education posts. Rather, my focus was on the eilu va'eilu of saying that even though I believe in the value of secular education, I cannot say it's the One True Derekh. For example, the gemara only says that many tried to follow Rashbi's Torah-only derekh and failed. Not that R Yishmael was right. But that pragmatically, one worked for the masses and the didn't. And if the context changes, so that the welfare state makes it possible for more to succeed toing things Rashbi's way? The gemara says nothing against it. Assuming they don't bankrupt the state that way or other Modern Israeli political, governmental and economic issues, but again, that's the balebatishe problem of the system failing. Even if it were chilul hasheim issues (just to pre-empt that line of reasoning), that's not about eschewing secular studies. I would say the gemara leaves both options open. And for today... For every kid who leaves chareidi life going OTD because they feel hobbled by the lack of secular education, or the lack of worldliness in general, or just plain constricted by the paucity of their choices of how to live as adults there is a Mod-O kid who leaves because of too much opennees, a lack of structure, an attraction to the other lifestyles they're exposed to, a feeling that their parents are fooling themselves with compromise... To survive, we need all our options. That said, I find it interesting that none of the arguments in favor of limudei chol actually involved what I consider their real value: There is too much we can't learn from Torah. Not that it's not there, just that we don't know how to extract it. Like when RALichtenstein saw the Chevra Qadisha try to rush the aveilim at one levayah through so that they could begin another, he commented that had they read Hamlet they never could have acted that way. Not that such middos aren't in Torah sources, but they're more accessible sometimes in literature. And for all the awe one may get from the Wisdom of the Author when learning Torah, it hits harder when you see Chokhmas haBorei in the physical world, outside the context of "religious studies". Also, by studying other topics one learns other modes of thought, and becomes more able to think in other ways, reach other conclusions. Mathemeticians, programmers and lawyers all learn a precision of thought and attention to detail that helps in real-life problem solving as well as learning. Vekhulu for other displines. In short... The value I find in limudei chol only starts with knowing more and having more data to put into the Torah and the parnasah mills. They change how one thinks in ways that improve both Torah and life skills. Simply by having more tools in the toolbox. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 11:08:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. When I was a kid, it was a big deal that we couldn't buy chameitz from Walbaum's, including the supermarket whose parking lot was directly across the street. It means that for a couple of months, I couldn't be sent to the store on Fri for many of those last-minute purchases. I presume (given who my parents would have asked in that era) that was R' Fabian Schoenfeld's pesaq. But as the broohaha over beer this year indicates, there is a machloqes. We could view the sale as valid, and the Jew wrongfully selling merchandise that belongs to someone else. Theft, rather than chameitz she'avar alav es haPesach. Which would imply that in our case, where bi'ur chameitz is done later than the rav's mechirah, we would view it as wrongfully destroying someone else's chameitz. Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? I would think the latter. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 14:07:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:07:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> On 23/04/18 14:08, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. > > With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim > who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) > that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to > treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But here your actions show that you were completely serious about the mechira, but you didn't intend this to be included in it. The shtar you signed doesn't specifically say this *is* included. Its description of what's included very much depends on your intentions as revealed by your actions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend to include ANY item? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 23 14:51:13 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:51:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <07.CD.29097.DC55EDA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:31 AM 4/23/2018, RN Toby Katz wrote: >I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a >reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I >never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would >never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the >option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? >? >? >? >--Toby Katz I find your terminology "normal Orthodox schools" somewhat surprising in the context of Chassidic yeshivas. What exactly do you mean by this terminology when contrasted with Chassidic schools? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 21:57:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:57:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/04/18 17:49, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be > : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from > : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a > : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. > > But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when > the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions > showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or > burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend > to include ANY item? Again, you are conflating two questions, one of which depends on your intentions and one which does not: 1) Is the mechira valid? Yes, regardless of your intentions. 2) What is included in the mechira. Certainly anything explicitly included in the shtar. But the shtar's language is vague; does it apply to *this* piece of bread? Only if you meant it to. That which you've set aside for breakfast is clearly not included, even if the mechira happened early in the morning. Ditto for that which you set aside to burn. Did it include an item on your store shelves, which you ended up selling just 20 minutes later? We can approach this two ways: a) It did, because you intended it to. Your intention was that your inventory should not become treif; this is inventory, you don't want it to be treif, therefore it's included. b) I bo'is eima, fine, let it be as you say, and the act of selling an item -- whether 20 minutes after the zman or 20 minutes before the end of Achron Shel Pesach -- shows that it was not included. Even if we were to accept this proposition (which I do not), whatever remains on the shelves that you did *not* sell remains included. Not only did you do nothing to indicate an intention to exclude it, you clearly did intend to include it, since your whole purpose was that it should not become treif. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 22:18:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:18:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name>, <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore > guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is > still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between > chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or > moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? > > I would think the latter. > ?????- Iiuc they sold the whole business, not just the stock Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 24 04:53:01 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 07:53:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira. There have been conjectures that the person's actions might reveal his intentions, or maybe not. But it seems to me that the starting point should be that which has been mentioned in writing. And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser degree of detail. In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this thread. But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other details. It seems to me that the "stam daas" of this person would be that he is selling only what is on the list, and the bittul is on everything else. Akiva Miller From hankman at bell.net Tue Apr 24 06:15:47 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:15:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: <0401042908D24434A2102FDD03A26A7A@hankPC> R?n T. Katz wrote: In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz I would go well beyond that and possibly suggest that when done ?the right way? that certain limudei chol? (read math and natural sciences) could be a better and more efficient way of attaining emunah including drosh vachakor and yiras harommeimus and the goal of understanding ?beHai? boro osom, or the gevuros of masseh bereishis, the intricacies of the olam koton and the actual vast olom not to mention the numerous sugios in shas and halacha that require knowledge of the real world and it science (its understanding). I propose a thought for consideration, that while for some yechidim their level of Torah learning is sufficiently high that Torah is the best and most efficient path to attain these goals. Unfortunately for many (most) of us, our level of Torah havanah is not even close to that level and as a practical fact a more direct path to getting a start on these Torah goals is through studying the briah and its science put there by G-d in the maseh beraishis. Someone like the GRA whose level of Torah study most of us can not even begin to imagine would relegate his study of science to only when it was not in opposition to his limud of Torah (such as the B?HK etc) as the best manner (for him) of achieving this goal was through his limud of Torah. But for most of us to take this as also applying to our situation is wishful thinking. As many times as I learn parshs Bereishis, my havana of ?beHai? boro osom has not really grown very much nor my level derosh vachakor. For us it may be a lekatchila outside the B?HK to set times for scientific study if done with the appropriate approach in support of our Torah understanding and growth in yira and emunah even when not just for parnasa. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 24 08:12:26 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:12:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Some_FAQs_about_the_OU=92s_=93Tevel_Mat?= =?windows-1252?q?zah_system=94?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Here are some FAQs about the OU?s ?Tevel Matzah system? that were described in yesterday?s Halacha Yomis. Q1. What would happen if the box of tevel matzos that was left in the factory was accidentally discarded? A1. If the matzo is discarded, the Tevel Matzah system becomes in-operative. Because of the concern that the tevel matzos might be lost, the OU also arranges a backup Hafrashas Challah each day in the OU offices to cover any factory that did not have a proper Hafrashas Challah done on premises. Q2. Is there any special reason that the OU chooses to use matzos for their tevel system? Couldn?t plain dough or bread be used instead for this purpose? A2. The main advantage of using matzos for Hafrashas Challah is that they have a very long shelf-life. A matzah can easily last from one year to the next and still be edible. Another obvious advantage of using matzah is that it can remain in the factories on Pesach. Q3. From how many batches of dough can one separate Challah using one box of tevel matzos? A3. When the mashgiach places the box of matzos in the factory, he declares that 1/5 of a gram of matzah should become Challah for each subsequent batter that will be produced. Considering that a box of matzos contains approximately one pound of matzos (454 grams), this means that a box of matzos will cover the Challah for more than 2,200 batches of dough. Even if a factory makes ten batches a day, a single box of matzos will last for over 6 months! Q4. Given that a box of matzah can be used to separate Challah for over 2,000 batches of dough, if a factory only makes one or two batches of dough a day, could a single box of matzos be used for several years? A4. No. One cannot take Challah from dough made from wheat that grew in one year on a batch of dough made from wheat that grew in a different year. The cutoff for determining which year the wheat grew is Rosh Hashanah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 24 08:24:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:33pm EDT, R Akiva Miller wrote: : This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do : Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer : to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the : only reason. I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? The MB's other reason (gezeira) and discussion thereof, elided. : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of : the chometz that we found... "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? ... : A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my : chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already : removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for : me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had : intended to type!) Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? A shade over 6 days later, on Tue, Apr 24 at 7:53am EDT, RAM wrote: : I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone : referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira... : And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two : major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person : who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller : must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser : degree of detail. I thought there are so many versions, referencing "the text" or even "a text" is meaningless. I therefore viewed the issue when you raised it last week (?) morein terms of: Does your LOR address this issue, and if so, how? : In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, : I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must : take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual : intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this : thread. Bitul and "all my chameitz" are mutually exclusive sets. It it's hefqeir, it's not mine. (BTW, in Israeli Aramaic the word was "hevqer", which I kept on reading as though it was "the cattle.") Espectially is we allow later actions as evidence of what was intent at the time of the sale. : But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that : he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", : and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other : details... Without "and any other chameitz which may be"? That version would solve all your problems, but affords less protection against issur. Since all the mechirah is belt-n-suspenders with bitul anyway, no big deal. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony? From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 24 09:03:23 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:03:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> References: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1df6ecc6-8417-7966-0620-412e6633fa66@sero.name> On 24/04/18 11:24, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of > hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? Yes, I think it is. Hefker, especially when the item is still in your property, depends on your willing renunciation. If you still regard it as yours then it's not hefker, regardless of your declaration. Either because the insincere declaration is defective, or because the moment you think of it as yours you regain it through kinyan chatzer. > : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point > : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) > : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of > : the chometz that we found... > > "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? Bedika != Bittul. By definition Bedika cannot get rid of what is not found. > Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? I don't see why not. If you inherited an unspecified estate you can surely sell it as a lot, sight unseen, and leave it to the buyer to discover what exactly is included in it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Tue Apr 24 23:26:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 06:26:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hand washing Message-ID: The gemara (Shabbat 62b) states that being derogatory (mzalzel) concerning ntilat yadaim(hand washing) causes poverty. Rava then clarifies that this is only talking about the case where one doesn't wash at all. The gemara then rejects Rava's interpretation based on R' Chisda saying that he had washed his hands with a lot of water and got a lot of good (in return?). As part of a broader shiur, I was wondering : 1. Is it possible that water was not as readily available then and so this focus on the amount of water might not be applicable today? 2. Why would the gemara accept a rejection of Rava without a more specific refutation source? 3. How is R' Chisda's statement a source of rejection? (Rava could well agree that using more than the minimum is praiseworthy but still hold poverty only comes for those who don't wash at all) That's enough to start :) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Tue Apr 24 10:57:13 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:57:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed during the Rav?s lifetime. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 24 05:30:39 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Apr 22, 2018 09:28:10 pm Message-ID: <15245910390.9bBE36.37982@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge [s]o that we > know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto > explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we > question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with > emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? > > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the > metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) > that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such > things. But the hamon am? > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- correction. At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that requires supernatural explanation. Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass them. There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 06:05:39 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:05:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <23688d43-325f-1109-9d85-fcb94a75b7e7@aishdas.org> On 4/24/2018 1:57 PM, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit > and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav's talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav's lifetime. The one that Rabbi Mayer Twersky quotes is in the name of an impeccable source, Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, who was personally involved. KT, YGB From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 07:25:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:25:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425142550.GB15047@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:57:13PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit : and others tell a different version. He believes one... Actually, you can go see RSM's version for yourself. No need to mix RJR into this. From the current Jewish Action: https://jewishaction.com/the-rav/observing-the-rav > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav?s lifetime. Actually, the "a woman" version was. I remember the discussion in shul, because I thought that the story as told belittled the woman too much. (Unlike RSM's impression, "Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances.") Tamar Ross (2004) records R' Meiselman and the Frimer Brothers telling the story https://books.google.com/books?id=vkvNNioH--4C&lpg=PA91&pg=PA91#v=onepage I found R' Meiselman (published Fall 1998) here (near the bottom of pg 9 [5th page of the PDF]): http://bit.ly/2HQBwHm And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 They say they were told the story by Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, former rabbi of the YI of Brokline, and that it happened in the mid-70s. Remember (unlike RSM) your "several of the Rav's talmidim knew the NY RY, not the Rabbi of Boston. There is really enough detail in R' Meiselman and R's Frimer version to rule out the story being legend. I would attribute RSM's version to memory drift; it has been some 40 years since the events, after all. 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? From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Apr 25 07:37:22 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:37:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Translation of Makkos / Binfol oyivcha al tismach In-Reply-To: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> References: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> Message-ID: Revisiting an issue that comes up repeatedly--do classical sources support the approach that we should feel sorrow for / not rejoice over, the suffering of our persecuting enemies. Yeshayahu (15:5) declares, ?My heart cries out? over the destruction of Israel?s wicked enemy, Moab. TargumYonason (and Radak and Metsudos) take this as the prophet quoting the enemy. But Rashi takes it as the prophet expressing his own heart?s thoughts, and he writes, ?The prophets of Israel are unlike the prophets of the umos ha-olom. Bilaam sought to uproot Israel for no reason. But the prophets of Israel [who had good cause to wish for their persecutors? destruction, nevertheless] mourn over the punishments coming upon the nations (miss-o-ninnim al pur-annos ha-ba-ah al ha-umos).?? (Artscroll cites both explanations, but adds a commentary by ''Sod Yesharim (I could not find it on HebrewBooks.org) who, like Rashi, takes the prophet to be referring to his own grief, but contra Rashi declares, ''The prophet had no cause to grieve over the downfall of the wicked nation of Moab, or of other unworthy nations. However, every nation had its own type of impurity that tempted the righteous and was a challenge that they had to overcome. When they did so successfully, they grew in stature. Now, with the demise of Moab, that particular challenge disappeared, and with it the potential for growth.) Also, I did have occasion to directly ask Rav Dovid Feinstein what he meant in the Kol Dodi Hagadah by ''shofchim l'eebud ha-makos and we don't drink them.'' Did he mean we pour out the wine out of sympathy for the Egyptians' suffering the makkos (as I had translated it), or did he mean that after taking the drops of wine out of the cups, we throw them (the drops of wine representing the makkos) out as waste, rather than drinking them (as R. Zev Sero insisted). And how that relates to the issue of ''al tismach.'' Sorry, but he did not commit to either way, comfortable with both approaches towards rejoicing over the downfall of Israel's enemies. Nevertheless, by my request, the next printing of the Kol Dodi Haggadah should have the translation changed to R. Zev's. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 08:32:13 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:32:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". Does _anybody_ here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? Perhaps a bar mitzvah boy the first time his tefillin "counts", or, perhaps the first time one dons a tallis at shul after marriage, or the first time one does birchas hachama? (As a baal teshuva, I have had a plethora of opportunities to do a mitzvah for the first time, and sometimes I get a spiritual high. And it's quite possible that I didn't do all of them correctly the first time, and that sometimes I wasn't even yotzie b'deived. No, I don't check my tzitzis every time I put on my tallis). Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce inappropriate? The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an inappropriate thought? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 25 13:03:11 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 16:03:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages Message-ID: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:26 AM 4/25/2018, Jay F. Shachter wrote: Let me begin with Daas Torah. Some years ago Rav Zelig Epstein, ZT"L was describing how the Mir Yeshiva left Vilna and got to Japan. He pointed out that almost all of the yeshivas were at this time located in Vilna and that almost all of the hanhalla of the yeshivas were opposed to leaving Vilna, because they feared that the Russians would arrest the yeshiva boys for trying to leave the "Communist paradise." However, several yeshivas boys were strongly in favor of leaving. The following is from my article Rabbi Aryeh Leib Malin And The Mir Yeshiva Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 154 The Jewish Press, February 2, 2018. "Rabbi Malin [a top Mir student] felt it was a matter of life and death that the Mir Yeshiva students leave Vilna. He is reported to have said, "I will get a gun and shoot anybody who tries to stop us from leaving!" (This was verified for me by Reb Zalman Alpert, who served as a librarian at Yeshiva University for many years and told me he heard it from two former Mir Yeshiva students.) " When one of the boys heard that the yeshiva students went against what the hanhalla said, he asked, "But what about Daas Torah?" Reb Zelig replied (and I do not know if he was serious or kidding), "This was before Daas Torah was invented." I was told that Reb Chaim Shmuelevitz, who was against the yeshiva leaving, later apologized to Reb Leib with tears in his eyes. The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. Regarding asking and following what a rov tells you, I am convinced that when they ask in the World to Come "Why did you do this or that?" and someone replies, "I asked a Rov and he told me to do this." the response will be, "You were given free will and expected to exercise it." Certainly one needs to ask a rov difficult halachic questions, but need one ask about most things in daily life? A friend of mine who is a therapist told me that some of his patients are afraid to do almost anything on their own. How sad. Even the Avos were not perfect and RSRH points this out. See his essay Lessons From Jacob and Esau (Collected Writings VII) where he points out that Yitzchok and Rivka made errors in educating Eisav. See also his commentary on what Avraham did when he said that Sarah was his sister. He follows the RAMBAN who says Avraham made a "big" mistake when he did this. Sadly there are some who do believe that whatever scientific assertions Chazal made must be valid. Rabbi Moshe Meiselman is one such person. His book Torah, Chazal and Science takes this position. It is hard for me to understand how a nephew of RYBS can hold this view. Regarding believing things that are not true, see my article "My Mind Is Made Up. Do Not Confuse Me With The Facts!" The Jewish Press, August 25, 2004 pages 7 & 77. YL >It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > >Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what >you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when >you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages >have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same >moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- >correction. > >At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the >moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the >dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on >yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, >the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and >advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly >caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). > >Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this >mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still >we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on >our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in >matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, >even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in >Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit >when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must >rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. >If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will >increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where >the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same >reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. > >That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know >already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, >and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, >and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take >literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and >you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that >requires supernatural explanation. > >Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, >and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes >you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like >them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a >Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your >abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is >a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some >of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. > >You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different >species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that >every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid >Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all >scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a >vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us >closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different >species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you >will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are >different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do >is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass >them. > >There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original >topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than >bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, >that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education >inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for >all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and >progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some >people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the >Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded >innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There >is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he >is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will >never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that >he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. > > > Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter > 6424 N Whipple St > Chicago IL 60645-4111 > (1-773)7613784 landline > (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice > jay at m5.chicago.il.us -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 14:03:32 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish Message-ID: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> >From The Jewish Press , by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev [literally, "the fish of the sword"] is kasher. Why is it widely considered to be not kosher, then? Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different consistency - or something like that - from those of other fish. So he decided it was a treife fish. But that's absolutely not correct. The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag hacherev is kasher. Professor [Shlomo] Sternberg, a big genius in learning and math, published an essay maybe 20 years ago in which he writes that Rabbi Soloveitchik asked him to conduct research on the status of swordfish. He did. He showed Rabbi Soloveitchik the scales of a swordfish and Rav Soloveitchik said, "It's a kashere fish!" Professsor Sternberg writes that he still has the envelope with the scales he showed Rav Soloveitchik in his Gemara Chullin. If the commentaries on the Shuchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev is kosher, how can Rabbi Tendler claim it isn't? Rabbi Tendler claims "dag hacherev" is a different fish. It's not true. But Rabbi Tendler did a service to the Orthodox Jewish community because at the time there were Conservative rabbis who were giving hashgachas, so he laughed them out of existence and said they don't know what they're talking because [they were giving swordfish a hechsher when] swordfish is really treif. So the Orthodox realized you can't rely on the Conservatives. L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue, but Rabbi Tendler accomplished his goal. Well, that's a lot of egg (roe?) on my face after what I said repeatedly in the 1990s in soc.culture.jewish[.moderated] O/C/R Wars... But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. "L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! There is a tie in here to what R JFSchachter posted here yesterday (? no time zone) at 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) under the subject line "Judging The Credibility Of The Sages": > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what > you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when > you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages > have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same > moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- > correction. I was okay attributing ignorance to Chazal, but not violating epstemic virtue like "making up an answer". I would think that by the end of the period, subconsious biases wouldn't have made it into the final result. > At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the > moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the > dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah... Except that daas Torah only requires belief that one is obligated to listen to halachic leadership on social and personal issues where the unknowns are not halachic (or even aggadic). Not that they are necessarily right, nor even that they are more likely to be right. (Infallibility was never Agudah doctrine; but you do find it among the population.) And I am not sure that when it comes to halakhah Chazal *can* be wrong. It's like saying that the house john built is inconsistent with the house John built. Pesaq is constitutive, not truth finding; expecially when you are the nation's authoritative halachic source (eg the Sanhedrin or shas as keSanhedrin, depending on when you think the Sanhedrin actually closed its doors). A pesaq made by CHazal based on incorrect science may still be correct halakhah because they define correctness. We would need to revisit our recurring tereifos discussion. But in any case: 1- I refuse to believe Chazal "made up answers" of had other epistemic moral failings (as a group, including peer review, what made it into shas, etc...) And I wonder how emunas chakhamim would work without that kind of assertion. 2- And yet, that may have happened here, among our contemporary posqim. No one is interested in fixing the science error (among those who believe it is in error) because C loses this way. 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? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 12:49:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 15:49:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425194944.GC6722@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:32:13AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 : > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 : : Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav : concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of : 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" : and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". ... : The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is : *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is : doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an : inappropriate thought? I think it's more that the high isn't from the halachic aspect of what they're doing. Rather than it having to be halkhah qua halakhah. I am not sure that "one is doing ratzon H'" is different than "being mequyam a mitzvah" anyway. As for "getting closer to H'", Litvaks would talk more about sheleimus than deveiqus. IMHO this is part of RYBS being, fundamentally, a Brisker. Here's a quote I feel is on a similar theme, from "The Rav: The World of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik", starting on pg 54: Judaism must be explained and expounded on a proper level. I have read many pamphlets that have been published in the United States with the purpose of bringing people closer to Judaism. There is much foolishness and narrishkeit in some of these publications. For instance, a recent booklet on the Sabbath stressed the importance of a white tablecloth. A woman recently told me that the Sabbath is wonderful, and that it enhances her spiritual joy when she places a snow-white tablecloth on her table. Such pamphlets also speak about a sparkling candelabra. Is this true Judaism? You cannot imbue real and basic Judaism by utilizing cheap sentimentalism and stressing empty ceremonies. Whoever attempts such an approach underestimates the intelligence of the American Jew. If you reduce Judaism to religious sentiments and ceremonies, then there is no role for rabbis to discharge. Religious sentiments and ceremonies are not solely posessed by Orthodox Jewry. All the branches of Judaism have ceremonies and rituals. This is not the only reason why we must negate such a superficial approach. Today in the United States, American Jewish laymen are achieving intellectual and metaphysical maturity. They wish to discover their roots in depth. We will soon reach a point in time where the majority of our congregants will have academic degrees. Through the mediums of white tablecloths and polished candelabras, you will not bring these people back to Judaism. It is forbidden to publish pamphlets of this nature, which emphasize the emotional and ceremonial approaches. There is another reason why ceremony will not influence the American Jew. In the Unitesd States today, the greatest master of ceremony is Hollywood. If a Jew wants ceremony, all he has to do is turn on the television set. If our approach stresses the ceremonial side of Judaism rather than its moral, ethical, and religious teachings, then our viewpoint will soon become bankrupt. The only proper course is that of Ezekiel's program for the priests: "And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and the common, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean" [Ezekiel 44:23] The rabbi must teach his congregants. He must deepen their appreciation of Judaism and not water it down. If we neutralize and compromise our teachings, then we are no different than the other branches of Judaism. By RYBS's standards, being moved by music at a kumzitz is "ceremony". Meanwhile, Chassidus, Mussar, RSRH, Qabbalah-influenced Sepharadim (following the Chida and Ben Ish Hai) and numerous other derakhim have no problem with ceremony. For that matter, before it became minhag, specifying specific patterns of hand washing (RLRLRL or RRLL) was also ritual once. And many of those Academics that RYBS foresaw want their Nesivos Shalom, Tish, kumzitz.... Neochassidus is a big thing in YU. This idea that ceremonies that aren't defined by halakhah are inherently empty and its sentimentalism is cheap rather than reinforcing the cognitive and halachic, is, as I said, only something a Brisker would write. Even within Brisk... RYBS went further in this direction than did the Brisker Rav (R Velvel, his uncle). The BR holds that one makes berakhos on minhagim that have a cheftzah shel mitzvah (eg lighting a Chanukah menorah in shul), and that the Rambam and Rabbeinu Tam don't argue about that. What they do argue about is whether Chatzi Hallel is close enough to Hallel to qualify for a berakhah. This is a non-started for RYBS, who requires minhagim have a cheftzah shel mitzvah or else they're ceremoial. RYBS even fit the minhagim of the 3 Weeks and 9 Days to fit this shitah by insisting they must follow what was already established aveilus and sheloshim, respectively. Oops. I just notied I'm repeating something I worte a decade ago. See . At least the berkhah-in-minhag part was posted in 2011, so that this post had the value of combining the two earlier ones. Beqitzur, I don't know of two many people (aside from our mutual rebbe-chaver) who would agree with RYBS on this one. 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? From zev at sero.name Wed Apr 25 14:37:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:37:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish In-Reply-To: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 25/04/18 17:03, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish > because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with > scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is > young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are > elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) > So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question > seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify > as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. There can be no question that a fish does *not* have to keep its scales to remain kosher. The posuk says fish only have to have their scales in the water, not when they leave the water. A fish that sheds its scales when caught is kosher, and no rabbi has the right to say otherwise. And I don't see a difference between shedding when caught and shedding on reaching adulthood. As I understand R Tendler's claim, it was that swordfish never have true scales, that even the ones they have as juveniles are not kaskasim. And this seems not to be true. BTW R Ari G and R Ari Z dispute the claim that adults swordfish (or landed swordfish) lose all their scales. They claim that this is the result of not examining adult landed fish closely enough, and that if one does one finds kosher scales still attached to the skin. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Apr 25 16:33:33 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 23:33:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: <06705270-E689-4937-BAAF-0C7AE035E469@tenzerlunin.com> I simply note that (a) all the stories were published after the Rav died and (b) all appear to be least first degree if not more hearsay. (It?s unclear how R. Mandel knows the story. His article doesn?t say if he saw it, heard it from the Rav, or heard it from someone else.) But the difference between the two ways the story is told is striking and, I believe, calls it into question. But I guess we?ll never know. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 26 05:25:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:25:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sifrei torah Message-ID: <6fef9ae673744a11a2ede85a210fb782@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Can anyone point me to information concerning the history of the difference between the physical element of Ashkenazi (atzei chaim) and Eidot Hamizrach (containers) Sifrei Torah? The differences in the timing and physics of hagba and glila ? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Apr 26 10:06:01 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 17:06:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Unknown Days of the Jewish Calender Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NZ9BN1 This coming week, an unsuspecting person wishing to catch a minyan, who walks into a random shul in many places around the world, might be in for a surprise. After the Shemoneh Esrei prayer on Sunday there will be no Tachanun. On Monday there will be Selichos; and on Thursday there again won?t be Tachanun! Why would this be? No Tachanun generally signifies that it is a festive day[1]; yet, no other observances are readily noticeable. As for the reciting of Selichos on Monday, they are usually reserved for a fast day; yet no one seems to be fasting! What is going on? See the above URL for more about this. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 19:43:43 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 22:43:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> On 4/25/2018 11:32 AM, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: >> And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at >> (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav > concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense > of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something > else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". > Does anybody here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? ... > Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah > was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce > inappropriate? > The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he > is thinking that he is being mekayum a mitzvah?... For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a problem. KT, YGB From meirabi at gmail.com Thu Apr 26 15:58:32 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 08:58:32 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach Message-ID: Yeshayahu (15:5) My heart cries out over the destruction of Israels wicked enemy, Moab. Rashi understands, the prophet is expressing his own agony - The prophets of Israel, unlike the prophets of the world, like Bilaam, seek to destroy us without provocation. Our prophets however, mourn for our persecutors when they suffer Divine punishments. As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness, that is certainly more of an intense and personal loss than the millions of Egyptians who perished - but we mourn them all from the perspective of lost potential, lost opportunity to be loyal to HKBH, and HKBH's failure to successfully persuade them to open their eyes and do what is right. That is why we spill wine from the cup we use for Hallel - HKBH's praise is incomplete, He was not fully successful - the gift He gave humanity, free choice, can, and was, used against Him. Obviously the cup should not be topped up. Each plague was a lesson and a plea from HKBH to all who witnessed these astonishing events - do the right thing, reconise that I am the King of all kings, The Master of the universe. Every Yid deserves 600,000 to attend his funeral. The Gemara explains - As it was given So it is taken away. Every Y, even the most Poshut or unlearned, is a potential recipient of the entire Torah and we must visualise their departure as the loss of that tremendous potential. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 26 18:35:26 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:35:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2499630f-df1d-04ef-9897-ef18103da093@sero.name> On 26/04/18 18:58, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of > descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness Where is this written? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri Apr 27 01:04:10 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 10:04:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> References: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> Message-ID: When I was in yeshiva, one of my rabbanim told us that we should dance when we "get" a Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Ben On 4/26/2018 4:43 AM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: > For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a > problem. > > KT, > YGB From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 29 07:49:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 17:49:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: A while ago we had a discussion about farfetched ukimtas. In yesterday's daf (Zevachim 15) the Gemara made a very startling statement about farfetched ukimtas. The Gemara has a question about whether Holachah without walking is Pasul or not. The Gemara brought a proof from a braisa If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher (even though when it spills, some if it spreads out towards the Mizbeach, i.e. Holachah without walking). The Gemara answered that none of the blood spread towards the Mizbeach.The Gemara then asked, surely, it spreads in all directions! The Gemara gave 3 answers 1: It fell on an incline. 2: It fell in a crevice. 3: The blood was very thick, and almost congealed. It did not spread at all. Then the Gemara made the following startling statement to reject these answers: It is UNREASONABLE to say that the Tana taught about such unusual cases The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? I brought an example from Bava Basra 19-20 which had at least as farfetched ukimtas and yet the Gemara didn't think they were unreasonable. Here is the example that I quoted from Bava Basra A Baraisa states that the following block Tumah, grass that was detached and placed in a window, or grew there by itself; rags smaller than three fingers by three fingers; a dangling limb or flesh of an animal; a bird that rested there; a Nochri who sat there, a (i.e. stillborn) baby born in the eighth month; salt; earthenware Kelim; and a Sefer Torah. The Gemara then proceeds to ask questions on each one that it is only there temporarily and the Gemara gives ukimtas, qualifications, for each thing to explain why it is not there temporarily. 1. Grass The grass is poisonous. The wall is ruined (so the grass will not destory it) The grass is 3 tefachim from the wall and does not harm the wall but bends into the window 2. Rags The material is too thick to be used for a patch It's sackcloth which is rough and would scratch the skin. It's not sackcloth, it's just rough like sacklocth 3. Dangling limb of an animal The animal is tied up and can't move. It's a non-kosher animal. It's a weak animal. 3. Bird The bird is tied down. It's a non-kosher bird. It's a Kalanisa (a very lean bird). It's not really a kalanisa, it's just lean like a kalanisa. 4. A non-Jew He is tied up. He is a ?????. He is a prisoner of the king 5. Salt The salt is bitter. There are thorns in it. It's resting on earthernware so it does not harm the wall. 5. Sefer Torah It's worn out. It's burial will be in the window. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 29 22:24:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 05:24:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? -/////---- One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the already known outcome. Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon Apr 30 01:22:56 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:22:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched >> ukimtas? ...` > One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition > as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the > already known outcome. It doesn't sound that way from the Gemara, The Gemara goes as follows: 1. Ula makes a statement that Holachah without walking is Pasul. 2. The Gemara brings a proof against him from a Mishna (where the blood spills, etc.) 3. The Gemara answers for Ula with an ukimta for the Mishna which doesn't contradict his din 4. The gemara says the ukimta is unreasonable Nowehere does it sound like we are reconciling sources with a known outcome. It sounds like a typical give and take found all over shas where ukimtas are simply accepted. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 29 18:59:29 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 21:59:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Question from the Book of Yechezqeil Message-ID: In Yechezqeil, 44:31, he writes that a Kohen shall not eat nevayla (or T?refah). Nobody can eat it so why is there a prohibition for just the Kohen? I?m aware of what Kimchi and Rashi say, but it seems to be a weak explanation. To say the Kohen needed a special warning is stretching it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:55:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:55:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:24:19AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition : as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with : the already known outcome. I don't know if that works here. I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and there are no counterveiling issues involved. Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish case. Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the floor of the azarah and not spread. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:51:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:51:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215105.GB12997@aishdas.org> My first thought was somewhat off topic but feel like it should be related... R' Yirmiyah's banishment from Bavel was over his habit of checking shiurim by posing implausible edge cases. He ends up in EY, and succeeds in the Y-mi. The final question (BB 23b) before his expulsion was whether we assume owned a bird that had one leg within 50 amos of the dovecote (ie within the shiur for the chazaqah for assuming that's its origin) and one leg outside? But there is also when he questions tevu'ah growing at least 1/3 before RH if harvested on Sukkos. Veqim lehu lerabbanan? How can you measure such a thing? (RH 13a) And his question on hashavas aveidah of 1/2 qav in 2 amos, or 2 qav in 8 amos? We assume yi'ush if we find less than 1 qas scattered across 3 amos. Is that a ratio? (BM 2a) How can you say that a revi'is is the amount of mayim chayim that the blood of a metzorah's birds would be niqar within? Wouldn't it depend on the size of the bird? (Sotah 16b) What if a kohein becomes a baal mum while the dam is in the air between his hazayah and it landing on the mizveiach? (Zevachim 15a) According to R' Meir, a miscarriage that was developed enough to have the shape of a beheimah causes tum'as leidah. (As opposed to saying it must be human shaped.) So, R Yirmiyah asked R Zeira, according to R Meir, what if a woman gives birth to such a baby, a girl and the father was meqadeish her to a man? R' Zeira points out that the child wouldn't live 3 years anyway, so bi'ah isn't an issue. R Meir asks: but what about marrying her sister? This one may or may not count, as R' Acha bar Yaaqov says that R Yirmiyah's point was to get R Zeira to laugh. (Niddar 23a) But it does reflect what kind of thing would come to his mind. (Tangent: There are a number of stories that indicate R Zeira needed chearing up. Like the golam Rava sent him. RMMS tied this to "Rav shachat lei leR Zeira".) But when he gets to EY, the Y-mi accepts his question. (Not that the Y-mi ever answers questions that involve guessing what the tanna / amora would have said...) A picker can eat a snack (quantity discussed) before tu"m was taken from the crop. As long as he is holing them. R Yirmiyah asked whether a picker can eat an olive he was juggling -- and thus didn't put down but also isn't just picked. (Maaseros 3:4, vilna daf 17b) Maybe the issue in the OP is about this time rejecting an absurd -- R Yirmiyahu-like -- oqimta is just the difference in styles in different batei medrash? Too haskala-ish to be satisfying? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Mon Apr 30 20:47:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:47:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tuesday, May 1, 2018, Micha Berger wrote: > > > I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is > the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and > there are no counterveiling issues involved. > > Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish > cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish > case. > > Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's > that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the > floor of the azarah and not spread. And it?s easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn?t seem more unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 06:47:36AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is :> the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and :> there are no counterveiling issues involved. :> Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish :> cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish :> case. : And it's easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a : prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn't seem more : unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. I suggest exploring if the distinction is between a din that could only apply in the farfetched case and dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from the distcussion. This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See . (He offered to send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. In a different post, I suggested another line to explore, if you prefer it. Diffierent batei medrash had different tolerances for R Yirmiyahu's questions, and those too also used farfetched cases. And if so, maybe there was one beis medrash during the course of the ccenturies of amoraim that simply had no patience for odd oqimtos; even though they were atypical that way. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 31st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Hod: What level of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 results in harmony and balance? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 1 03:34:33 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 13:34:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > > But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. > > I suggest exploring if the distinction is between > a din that could only apply in the farfetched case > and > dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated > in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from > the distcussion. > > This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought > in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See > . (He offered to > send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta > serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in > this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. > The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without walking from the equation. It would seem to be a perfect example to apply R' Michel Avraham's thesis and yet the Gemara rejects the ukimta as being unreasonable -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue May 1 04:40:42 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 11:40:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: Please see https://goo.gl/ESJERH for two links to a talk given by Rabbi Dr. Shnyer Leiman titled The Strange History of Lag B'Omer. Please see https://goo.gl/s2KHAVfor [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] The Spreading Fires Of Lag Baomer: Tempting Quick & Easy ?Spirituality? vs. Enduring Ruchnius goo.gl In the past we have discussed at length (5771, 5772, 5773A, 5773B, and 5773C) how Lag Baomer is marked in minhag Ashkenaz, and contrasted it with other, more recent customs, that have become popula? See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) No less an authority than Chasam Sofer was strongly opposed to Lag B'Omer celebrations. He argued that one should not make a new Yom Tov that is not based on a miraculous event, that has no basis in Shas and Poskim, and that is based on the death of someone. (See here for links.) See https://goo.gl/Zma8pS [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] No ? No ? No ? No ? No ? Minhag Ashkenaz & Recent Lag Ba?omer Innovations ? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ?????, ??? ?????, ??????, ?????, ??? ???? goo.gl Yes, it is that time of the year again. Lag ba?omer is almost here. And with it, all the hype and solicitations for trips to Meron, Chai Rotel Mashkeh donations, upsherin, bonfires, and the l? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:54:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:54:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:34:33PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter : (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that : blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The : ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without : walking from the equation... I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Tue May 1 04:25:47 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 14:25:47 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the > stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. > And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's > not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. The Gemara starts with Ula stating a din that holacha without walikng is pasul. The Gemara then brings down the following statment from a Mishna If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher. The Gemara then asks on Ula from this Mishna, namely that the blood must have moved towards the Mizbeach, e.g. holacha without walking and it is kosher. The Gemara then answers with the implausible ukimtos to explain the Mishna. In other words, it seems that the ukimtos are there to explain the Mishna namely that the Mishna provides a principle that blood that falls on the floor is kosher and the ukimtas are there to remove any extraneous factors such as holacha without walking. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 1 15:57:50 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 18:57:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ahava Eternal Message-ID: <2060439B-6A01-4D14-AC06-6D6675AC6381@cox.net> I heard a beautiful d?rash by Rabbi Yosef Shusterman (Chabad of Beverly Hills). He said the following: If you ask 20 people the definition of ?LOVE,? you will get 20 different responses. However, the best definition of love is the Jewish definition. He uses gematria. The gematria of Ahava is 13 and the gematria of Echod is 13. ?Love" is when you are at ?one? with whomever or whatever. Theologically, the love of God is when you are at one with God. Sometimes it takes an entire lifetime to reach that madreiga. I am in you and you in me, mutual in divine love. William Blake (18th c. poet, painter and printmaker) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 2 01:33:44 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 08:33:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of?= =?windows-1252?q?_Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/W49XHX Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. See the above URL for more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 07:10:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 10:10:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <64a22eb4-af1e-fab5-373f-889b1083cd08@sero.name> On 02/05/18 04:33, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From https://goo.gl/W49XHX > > > Toras Aba ?just put up an interesting post > discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to > similarity with ancient practice of idolators. > > See the above URL for more. And yet your precious Minhag Ashkenaz was to (have a nochri) make a bonfire and dance before it (or around it) on Simchas Torah. R Wosner was asked about doing so in camp, stam on a Wednesday, not on Lag Bo'omer when it is, at least in Meron, Chevron, and a few other places in Eretz Yisroel, a long-established minhog practiced by tzadikim and chachomim who were much greater than R Wosner or anyone else you can cite. I don't believe it occurred to him that someone might apply this teshuvah to those fires, and it's dishonest to do so. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 09:04:58 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:04:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:33:44AM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : From https://goo.gl/W49XHX : Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. Most of us have little problem with Israel's Moment of Silence on Yom haZikaron and Yom haSho'ah, at least not Derekh Emori problems. And we wear ties. There are limits to invoking Derekh Emori. To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last days too. And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah kekhol hayom". At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled later than the norm, this evening.) I don't know the origin. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 09:45:50 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:45:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> On 02/05/18 12:04, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag > baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) > and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas > simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo > velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than > waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the > Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last > days too. > > And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo > you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I > have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah > kekhol hayom". > > At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I > know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled > later than the norm, this evening.) > > I don't know the origin. The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. A cessation of mourning, such as the last day of shiva, obviously begins in the morning. Nor is it an occasion for joy; when one gets up from shiva one doesn't go dancing and singing. Thus the restrictions are lifted only after daybreak, and tachanun is said at mincha on the previous day, just as it is on the other three days whose observance begins in the morning, viz Pesach Sheni, Erev Rosh Hashana, and Erev Yom Kippur. But the celebration of Rashbi is a positively happy occasion, so it starts immediately at nightfall, and no tachanun is said at the previous mincha. The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and relies heavily on the Magen Avraham. (He later expressed regret over his over-reliance on the MA, which is one reason why he wrote a second edition, only a few chapters of which are extant.) So it's not surprising that this is the psak found there, however it is not the psak that was followed in Chabad, which means in practice he paskened differently. (Sometimes it means he changed his mind, but sometimes he never paskened in practice as he wrote in the SA, for the reasons I mentioned above.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 10:53:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 13:53:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : >I don't know the origin. : : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain how or when the older minhag was changed. And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. ... : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 11:25:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 14:25:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> On 02/05/18 13:53, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : >I don't know the origin. > : > : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the > : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of > : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the > : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. > > That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain > how or when the older minhag was changed. It follows that the minhag changed when the significance of the day changed. In other words, the minhogim of the day when R Akiva's talmidim stopped dying did not change, but on top of them came a whole new layer of minhogim for the new holiday that occupies the same day on the calendar. For a similar example, the significance of 3 Tammuz in Lubavitch changed dramatically in 5754. The earlier significance of that day and whatever practices it had did not go away, e.g. those who did not say tachanun on 3 Tammuz before 5754 still don't say it, while those who did still do, but the new significance, and the host of practices that came with it, overwhelmed the earlier significance and observance. > And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" > is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. Doesn't the Idra Zuta say that Rashbi asked for his hilula to be celebrated rather than mourned? > You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, > after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, > in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) > that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, > Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. Whether it's the correct explanation of the Pri Etz Chaim or not, it is the one held by the people actually doing the celebrating, and thus fully explains their practices. > ... > : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which > : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and > : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... > > I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to suppose they didn't exist in his day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 15:57:53 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 18:57:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> Message-ID: <4b464085-efab-7164-2d33-7726eba6a069@sero.name> On 02/05/18 14:25, Zev Sero wrote: >> >> : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which >> : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and >> : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... >> I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. > They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to > suppose they didn't exist in his day. PS: Indirect evidence that in the AR's day the night of Lag Baomer was already considered part of the simcha is that in his siddur (as opposed to his SA) he wrote that tachanun is not said at mincha of erev Lag Baomer. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 3 07:01:56 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 03 May 2018 10:01:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?iso-8859-1?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= References: Message-ID: At 12:04 PM 5/2/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag >baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) >and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas >simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo >velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than >waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the >Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last >days too. > >And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo >you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I >have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah >kekhol hayom". > >At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of Aveilus on the 34th day? If so, how can Sefardim go to Meron on the night of the 33rd? I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at Tzeis and who started it. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 3 06:04:34 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:04:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tzedaka priorities Message-ID: The S"A in O"C 152:1 codifies a prohibition against tearing down a synagogue before building a new one (one must build the new one first). The M"B (4) gives the reason for this prohibition as a concern that if one had not built the new one first, a case of pidyon shvuyim(captive's redemption) might arise requiring funds to be diverted from the new construction. 1. Why couldn't the chachamim make a takana in that case? 2. Why would the chachamim work around required priorities? 3. Doesn't 152:6 says you would sell a synagogue anyway in a case of pidyon shvuyim? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 09:03:10 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 12:03:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on the > night of the 33rd? The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve either of those things. (There is no issur on music during sefirah; that seems to be a modern invention, presumably because in modern times we've become lenient on the prohibition against music at any time, so we need to impose a restriction during sefirah, whereas earlier generations who were strict with the general prohibition didn't feel a need to strengthen it now.) > I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at > Tzeis and who started it. As I wrote earlier, it seems associated with the adoption of the Rashbi's celebration on top of the earlier marking of the end of the plague among R Akiva's students. Thus it would probably have started in Tzfas in the late 16th century and spread into Europe in the 18th century together with the AriZal's kabbalah. (Note that according to the AriZal, not cutting hair is not connected to avelus, and applies on Lag Ba`omer as well, except for upsherenishen. But not having weddings is because of avelus, so if we're celebrating Yom Simchas Rashbi they should be permitted.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 10:13:07 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:13:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on : >the night of the 33rd? : : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve : either of those things... An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 10:17:41 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:17:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> On 03/05/18 13:13, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on > : >the night of the 33rd? > : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are > : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve > : either of those things... > An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. For children, who are not obligated in aveilus anyway. But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and the answer is the same way they go by day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 11:56:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 14:56:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and : the answer is the same way they go by day. The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both Ashk and Seph? Yes, if the party happened to be during the day, I would have the same question WRT Sepharadim (only). So how does pointing out that fact help me any in answering it? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 33rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total Fax: (270) 514-1507 submission to truth, and what results? From simon.montagu at gmail.com Thu May 3 16:36:11 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 02:36:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 > > > Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is > > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did that before the 16th century. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 12:08:37 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 15:08:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> On 03/05/18 14:56, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and > : the answer is the same way they go by day. > > The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > Ashk and Seph? And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do so from nightfall. (b) The Meron celebrations, which the question was about, don't violate the sefira observances anyway. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 05:04:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 08:04:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer Message-ID: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:24 AM 5/4/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > > > >I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings >Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did >that before the 16th century. In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to show that it was not really part of the davening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 05:14:32 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:14:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Bow_and_Arrow_on_Lag_B=92Omer?= Message-ID: >From http://www.collive.com/show_news.rtx?id=50532 A 4-year-old son of a Shliach in Florida was hit in his eye by an arrow on Lag BaOmer. Please pray for Baruch Shmuel ben Chana. I do hope he has a refuah shleima. This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. >From https://goo.gl/kumYeX One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn?t even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a break from their Torah studies. It is also surprising that they should pass the time with such a martial activity, seemingly out of character with the day devoted to the man of peace. Rav Menachem Mendel of Rimanov, one of the early Hasidic Rebbes, explained that the custom is based on the Midrash which states that all the days of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, the rainbow didn?t appear in the sky. (Ketubot 77b the same is said there of Rebbe Yehoshua ben Levi.) Rashi explains that the rainbow is the sign of the covenant that the world will not be destroyed, and if there is a perfect tzaddik in the world there is no need of such a sign. (Cited by B?nei Yissachar on Lag BaOmer.) See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 07:58:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:58:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both :> Ashk and Seph? : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do : so from nightfall... You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something aggadic. But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from what I was raised to believe on that. I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and rishonim couldn't have known about? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 07:05:58 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:05:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Mysterious Origin of Lag Ba-Omer Message-ID: Please see http://www.hakirah.org/Vol20First.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 4 09:57:47 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 18:57:47 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Bottom line: They do it or they don't? Ben On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time,? and I > was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to > show that it was not really part of the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:41:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:41:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Let me begin with Daas Torah. ... : The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a : result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this : was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. So what are those formulations? Here are 3 I know of: 1- Given how the gadol's mind is shapeds by his learning, he is a useful resource for advice. He could be wrong, but aren't your odds better by asking? 2- Asking a gadol will get you the answer Hashem wants you to act on, whether it is the truth or not. E.g. the error of advising agaisnt fleeing the Nazis was because that was what Hashem wanted of us. But it was still pragmatically in error. I also see hints of this model in RALichtenstein's "Im Ein Daas, Manhigut Minayin?" but with the added caveat that RAL didn't expect to find daas Torah in practice. (Not since RSZA.) Again, just implications; I could be reading too much into the essay. 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, they are supposed to lead. RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like the same model. Notice that all advocate listening to gedolim even on non-halachic matters, but not because of any guarantees about accuracy. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:52:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:52:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180504165212.GC13247@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 07:12:36AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They : have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye : (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so : much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses.... The relationship to a kohein is trickier than that, as their is no tum'ah until after the declaration. He is more parallel to an eid qiyum than an eid birur. For example, Vayiqra 14:36 tells a person to remove all the items from his home before the kohein comes to inspect a potential nega in it. Even even if the kohein sees the same unchanged splotch and declares it a nega, those itsems are not tamei. It wasn't a nega until the declaration. ... : My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would : become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate : some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just : another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve : myself in general." Tum'as leidah isn't because something is spiritually awry with the mother. So I am not sure we have to assume that zivah is like tzara'as. Lefi RSRH, tum'ah comes from things that could make us overly identify with our bodies -- death, birth, the kinds of sheratzim that share our homes (in EY), niddah... Zivah and leidah would fit that pattern. So would tzara'as, because it too feels like the body is rebelling against the will. The difference is that chazal is saying the body really is rebelling (or made to show rebellion) against a tainted will. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From zev at sero.name Fri May 4 11:15:17 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:15:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 04/05/18 10:58, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > :> Ashk and Seph? > > : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in > : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus > : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't > : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do > : so from nightfall... > > You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, > nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new > information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. Nothing is being uprooted. Something new has come. Just as when a local "Purim" or lehavdil a fast is declared. > If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a > comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something > aggadic. > > But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind > the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous > revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from > what I was raised to believe on that. > > I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence > of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation > anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take > over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in > this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and > rishonim couldn't have known about? They didn't know about the Zohar, let alone the Idra Zuta and R Shimon's request that people rejoice at his "hilula". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 11:51:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 14:51:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:57 PM 5/4/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >Bottom line: They do it or they don't? > >Ben >On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >>Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and >>I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it >>to show that it was not really part of the davening. > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the beginning are said responsively. The Shatz stands at the table where leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 12:06:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 15:06:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <7E.8C.04381.0DFACEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:41 PM 5/4/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Let me begin with Daas Torah. >... >: The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a >: result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this >: was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. > >It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the >popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues >speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are >infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. Please see the article To Flee Or To Stay? at http://www.hakirah.org/vol%209%20bobker.pdf At the end of the article it says, "This article is excerpted from Joe Bobker's "The Rabbis and the Holocaust," to be published by Geffen Books in the summer of 2010." However, to the best of my knowledge this book was never published, and I have always wondered why. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 5 11:45:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 05 May 2018 20:45:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1ed3f3d3-7cb6-927c-da0f-e22d19aa3a4e@zahav.net.il> Bseder. We are all agreed that even Frankfurt changed their seider Tefilla sometime in the last few hundred years. Many shuls have someone, even a child, say (sing) the tehillim from the bimah. Ben On 5/4/2018 8:51 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the > beginning are said responsively.? The Shatz stands at the table where > leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over > he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun May 6 01:53:37 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 11:53:37 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: Yesterday's daf (Zevachim 22) has another wild ukimta that seems to just be there to answer a question on an amora and not provide a sterile environment to learn out a new principle. Here is the gist of the Gemara: R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina states if the Kiyor does not contain enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim, it is invalid - "v'Rachatzu Mimenu Moshe v'Aharon u'Vanav." The Gemara asks a question from the following Baraisa: One may be Mekadesh from any Keli Shares, whether or not it contains a Revi'is of water (this is much less then the water needed for 4 people) Rav Ada bar Acha answers: The case is, the Keli Shares was carved into the Kiyor (so the water comes from the Kiyor, which contains enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim). I don't see any way that you can say here that the ukimta is to remove extraneous dinim etc. The ukimta here seems to serve one and only one purpose, explain the Barisa that it is not a question on an Amora. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From saul.mashbaum at gmail.com Sun May 6 06:41:09 2018 From: saul.mashbaum at gmail.com (Saul Mashbaum) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 16:41:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: RYL >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. Saul Mashbaum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 05:28:41 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 15:28:41 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire Message-ID: << And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. >> Fore details about the printing error to give rise to the idead that Lag Baomer is Rashbi's yahrzeit see http://seforim.blogspot.co.il/2011/05/ changing subjects one of the weirdest experiences I had was a bunch of black coated Chevra kadisha dancing about a grave in Bet Shemesh at 12 midnight with just a flashlight for light -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 07:21:11 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 17:21:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: <> OTOH there is the gemara that when there was the dispute in Yavneh between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. This story took place many years before talmidim of R. Akiva (who was junior at that time) died. If so Rashbi was a known talmid many years before R. Akiva revived Torah . As an aside other taananim survived the bar kochba wars including talmidim of R, Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at mail.aol.com Sun May 6 11:22:13 2018 From: t613k at mail.aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 14:22:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bow and Arrow on Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16336b09884-c88-1c19@webjas-vaa039.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 5/6/2018 7:51:35 AM EST, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org writes: From: "Professor L. Levine" > This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. > From https://goo.gl/kumYeX >> One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is >> less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows >> and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe >> Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn't >> even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a >> break from their Torah studies..... Torah sages and their students learned Torah secretly in the woods, hiding from the Roman soldiers. They took bows and arrows with them and if they were found in the woods, they would say they were out hunting. That's what I was told when I was a little girl. I don't know if this is associated with R' Akiva and his talmidim, or with R' ShBY. As a child I thought the story was about young children and didn't realize until later that it must have been adult students with bows and arrows in the woods. (Yes I know Jews don't hunt for food or for sport, but maybe the Romans didn't know that. Or the Jews could plausibly say they hunted for hides and fur.) PS All my Areivims and Avodahs lately are deformed by great quantities of question marks. If anyone knows how to stop this from happening, please let me know. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com -- From driceman at optimum.net Sun May 6 17:58:21 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 19:58:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> RMB: > 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus > stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the > Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act > as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make > gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on > personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, > they are supposed to lead. > > RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before > RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who > carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the > names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked > questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like > the same model. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? David Riceman From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sat May 5 12:17:25 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 5 May 2018 22:17:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Sacrificies Message-ID: Question: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat had to bring the animal to as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result in hundreds -- Eli Turkel From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 7 04:19:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 14:19:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices Message-ID: R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he was permanently a Kohen; From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:37:00 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:37:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 06/05/18 10:21, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > This story took place many years before talmidim?of R. Akiva (who was > junior at that time) died. On the contrary, R Akiva was very senior at the time of these disputes. In the mishna in Rosh Hashana he was one of the two who counseled R Yehoshua to obey R Gamliel's order, and in Berachos when R Gamliel was deposed he was one of only three candidates considered to replace him. > If so Rashbi was a known talmid?many years before R. Akiva revived Torah > .?As an aside other taananim?survived the bar kochba?wars including > talmidim?of R, Yishmael What have Bar Kochva or his wars got to do with any of this? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:45:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:45:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> References: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> Message-ID: <44c411ba-2fee-9ae7-82d6-de3850c6417a@sero.name> On 06/05/18 20:58, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus >> stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the >> Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act >> as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make >> gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on >> personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, >> they are supposed to lead. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim who are to guide them. There need to be askanim because the chachamim have no time for klal work; they're busy learning and will neglect it. So those who lack either the head or the bottom for full-time learning can be the administrators, and when they need guidance they will consult the chachamim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Wed Apr 25 14:17:16 2018 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:17:16 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5AEFEEE1.1030601@biu.ac.il> Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: >>From The Jewish Press >, >by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): ... > Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if > he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi > Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called > up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different... ... >"L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! The attached has lots of relevant information. [Attachment stored at -micha] From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 08:00:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 11:00:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 07/05/18 07:19, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen > even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes > in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was > considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen > only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); > others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he > was permanently a Kohen; Thank you. Note the context: Rav stated outright that Moshe was a cohen gadol, and the gemara cites this braisa to show his source, that he was ruling like the Yesh Omrim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 8 12:40:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 15:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 3000 Year Old Mansion Implies a Sizable Malkhus Beis David Message-ID: <20180508194052.GA19392@aishdas.org> >From . What struck me is what appears to be the weakness of the objection -- some of the results are from a poor source, and even though they converge with other results, we'll question the whole thing? Does This 3,000-Year-Old House Confirm King David's Lost Biblical Kingdom? By Owen Jarus, Live Science Contributor | May 3, 2018 02:50pm ET Archaeologists have discovered a sprawling, possibly 3,000-year-old house that suggests a biblical kingdom called the United Monarchy, ruled by King David and later Solomon according to the Hebrew Bible, actually existed. The archaeologists who excavated the house, at a site now called Tel Eton, in Israel, said in an article published online March 13 in the journal Radiocarbon that the date, design and size of the house indicates that a strong organized government existed at Tel Eton around 3,000 years ago. They added that this government may be the United Monarchy. The site is located in the central part of Israel in a region called the Shephalah. ... In their paper, Faust and Sapir argue that evidence supporting the existence of the United Monarchy is often not studied because of a problem they call the "old house effect." The site of Tel Eton, including the massive house, was destroyed by the Assyrians during the eighth century B.C. As such, the house held a vast amount of remains dating to that century, but relatively few remains that date to 3,000 years ago when the house was first built. This "old house effect" is a problem commonly seen in Israel and at archaeological sites in other countries, the archaeologists said. "Buildings and strata can exist for a few centuries, until they are destroyed, but almost all the finds will reflect this latter event," wrote Faust and Sapir, noting that archaeologists need to be careful to dig down and find the oldest remains of the structures they are excavating so they don't miss remains that could provide clues to the United Monarchy. Israel Finkelstein, a professor at Tel Aviv University who has written extensively about the United Monarchy debate, expressed skepticism about the results. Two of the four samples used for radiocarbon dating are olive pits, which pose a problem, he said. "The single olive pits come from fills [material that accumulated on the surface of the floor before the floor broke apart]. They have no importance whatsoever [for] dating the building. At Megiddo, my dig, samples like this, single items/fills, are not being sent to the lab to be dated, because they enter bias into the dating system," Finkelstein said. "There is no connection whatsoever between the finds at Tel Eton and the biblical description of the United Monarchy." Faust told Live Science he expects that some archaeologists would be critical of the use of material found in the remains of the floors for radiocarbon dating. He noted that all the radiocarbon dates, those from the olive pits and from the charcoal, converge around 3,000 years. "The convergence of the dates suggest that we are on safe grounds," Faust said. He also noted that one of the charcoal samples is not from the floor but from the foundation deposit (the chalice), strengthening the conclusion that the house was built around 3,000 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 38th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Yesod: How does reliability Fax: (270) 514-1507 promote harmony in life and relationships? From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue May 8 13:05:25 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 23:05:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer Message-ID: >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag in the places I have seen -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Tue May 8 15:31:28 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 01:31:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 11:05 PM, Eli Turkel via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > >>> > In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some > places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is > leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. > This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. > >>>> > > This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> > > Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. > In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag > in the places I have seen > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Tue May 8 17:28:19 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 20:28:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Me > >> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? RZS: > > Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those > doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim > who are to guide them. Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. David Riceman From eliturkel at gmail.com Wed May 9 00:33:02 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:33:02 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: A while ago there was a debate about gebrochs while some condemned the minhag others defended it. I suggest reading an article by Brown https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 (4th on the list) It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those practices that can be traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a select few don't count. He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of elitism that only gedolim count. OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at most) His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in terms of protecting their communities from modernism. I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. Again see the above article for more details -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Tue May 8 21:46:46 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 14:46:46 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer & Rashbi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2700442c-cb3b-4267-b4bc-7e47e0d3efc8@yypwn-sl-yzhq-hkhn-blbyn> See also From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 02:53:57 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 05:53:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 01:31:28AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but : parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or : by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and : acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only : at Kaddish before Barechu At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night (in the US, mostly Syrian), everyone chants everything together. No shatz, and no one taking the lead even section by section. As per the first clause above. Somoene takes the lead for Bameh Madliqin from their seat. Chazan starts at pre-Qaddish material for Arbit. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:12:47 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:12:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 18:31, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: > > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but > parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together > or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing > up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame > Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu In other words, the same as pesukei dezimra, or the ashre and uva letzion before mincha. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed May 9 10:59:33 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 19:59:33 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> References: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At the Yemenite place I go to Friday night, everyone chants Kabbalat Shabbat together (same tune, every week, for the whole thing). An elderly person will get the kavod of saying the first line of Lecha Dodi out loud, but the rest is sung together. After Lecha Dodi, they say four lines from Shir HaShirim and then one person leads them in a "Bar Yochai" song (this kavod is auctioned off). After that, all together for BeMah Madlilin and Mizmor L'yom Hashabbat. On 5/9/2018 11:53 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night . . . From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:21:40 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:21:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 20:28, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: >> Me >> >>> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? > > RZS: >> >> Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those >> doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim >> who are to guide them. > > Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not the rav who guided him. Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. But at any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to do their job properly they can't be learning all day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:27:09 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 03:33, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 9 12:54:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 19:54:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation Message-ID: Many years ago when my two oldest grandsons were in elementary school in yeshiva, they began to speak in a derogatory manner abut non-Jews. They had heard these things from their fellow students. Their father, my oldest son, and I made it clear to them that this was not the appropriate way to speak about human beings who were created by Ha Shem with a neshama. Fortunately, they listened to us and changed their attitude. No one is saying that one must be "buddy buddy" with gentiles, but they are to be treated with proper respect. I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/letter_11.pdf While I suggest that everyone read the entire letter, below are some excerpts from it. MISHPATIM. All these insights, however, are of value only if you truly live your life according to what you, as man and Yisraelite in God's world, with your God-given powers, have recognized. The first requirement is, therefore, that you practice justice: -Respect every being in your surroundings, as well as everything within yourself, as a creation of your God, -Respect whatever is theirs as given to them by God or as having been acquired according to Divinely sanctioned law. Let them keep, or have, whatever they are entitled by right to call their own; do not be a source of harm to -others! -Respect every human being as your equal. Respect him, his inner self as well as his outer garment-his body-and his life) Respect his property, too, as a legal extension of his body. Respect his claim to property or services that you have to render to him, 1 properly measured or counted, as well as his claim to compensation for harm done to his body or property. -Respect his right to know the truth and his right to freedom, happiness, peace of mind,P honor and a peaceful existence. -Never abuse the frailty of his body, mind or heart/ and never misuse your legal power over him. The Chukkim require of you: -respect for all that exists, as God's property: do not destroy anything! do not misuse it! do not waste! use everything wisely -respect for all the species: their order was established by God-do not intermingle them;u respect for all creatures: they are servants in the household of Creation; v respect for the feelings and instincts of animals;w respect for the human body, even after the soul has departed;x respect for your own body: maintain it, as it is the repository, messenger and instrument of the spirit; -limitation of your own instincts and animal-like actions: subordinate them to God's Law, so that, truly human and sanctified, they can help you attain the holy goal of mankind and will not turn you into a mere animal; -respect for your soul, when you nourish its tool, the body: supply the body only with such nourishment that will enable it to act as a pure and willing messenger of the world to the spirit, and of the spirit to the world, rather than giving it food that will induce sluggishness and sensuality; -concealment and sublimation of the animal in you, rather than according it too much respect and attention: only thus will the conflict within you ultimately be resolved, and the animal in you will also aspire only to the truly human; -lastly, respect for your own person in its purest expression-your power of speech. In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources can express a derogatory view of gentiles. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 19:50:36 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 22:50:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 15:54, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters [...] > [...] > In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources > can express a [contrary view] How about because they are Torah sources, and are therefore not required to agree with your favorite 19th-century writer. On the contrary, you should ask how he could contradict Torah sources. (The answer being that he found some contrary sources which appealed more to him, so he adopted their view; that was his right, but nobody else is required to do the same.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From sholom at aishdas.org Wed May 9 08:15:51 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:15:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 20:09:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 23:09:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180510030910.GB2931@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 11:15:51AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : We know Rashi's famous question and answer: that shmita eitzel har sinai : here is to show us that this, too, and all the details, were also given at : har sinai. See my vertl at . That's the Sifra that Rashi is quoting. : My question, however, is: why davka _this_ mitzvah (shmita/yovel)? Other : mitzvos could have been used to demonstrate the point that Rashi mentions. Rashi mentions that shemittah isn't taught in Devarim. The Malbim explains that this is unexpected, since shemittah didn't apply until entering EY, and such mitzvos tend to be the ones introduced in Devarim. : Thoughts? I ran with it... Suggesting that the whole point is that the reductionist approach doesn't work to understanding Torah. This was brought to light bedavqa with a mitzvah that isn't needed to be known yet for its own sake. But the whole picture was given at Sinai, even shemittah, so that we can understand any of the picture. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 39th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliable person? From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 01:57:15 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:57:15 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? >> My apologies. See https://www.academia.edu/36530833/A_translated_chapter_from_The_Hazon_Ish_Halakhist_Believer_and_Leader_of_the_Haredi_Revolution_The_Gaon_of_Vilna_the_Hatam_Sofer_and_the_Hazon_Ish_-_Minhag_and_the_Crisis_of_Modernity_English_?auto=download&campaign=weekly_digest which has several articles besides the one by Brown, Alternatively, send an email to eliturkel at gmail.com and I can send the article -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 02:43:30 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:43:30 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya 3rd line in the widest lines near the bottom and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about 130-135 CE. Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died about 20 years earlier (see eg wikipedia on Gamliel II) It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 07:51:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 10:51:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Me: >> >> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. RZS: > > Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every > Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not > the rav who guided him. No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. > Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a > yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. Again the Reish Galusa determined public policy, the hachamim determined halacha. > But at > any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the > full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to > do their job properly they can't be learning all day. The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his role? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 10 09:08:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:08:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:51:16AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : The claim that "da'as Torah" is derived from din melech is precisely the : claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise : in other fields... That's NOT the way I understood R' Dovid [haLevi] Cohen at all. We want a melekh, separate from the beis din hagadol. Although one person can be in both roles, like when Chazal refer to "Shelomo uveis dino." However, ba'avoseinu harabbim we lost the melukhah. The obligation of obeying the melekh devolved into obeyind the Sanhedrin. (This would have to have been some time between Gedaliah and Ezra, inclusive.) Obeying the melekh wasn't based on the melekh's comptenecy, but the need for order in running a society. (And, I guess some reason(s) why HQBH advised monarchy in particular as the means of getting that order, except according to some readings of RAYK. But RAYK didn't hold of the shitah we're looking at, so ein kan hamaqom leha'rikh.) Then, we lost the Sanhedrin. Today's rabbanim fill in -- either as their shelichim, or . The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. And just as the melekh might not be the expert across all of society, the Sanhedrin or today's rabbanim might not be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 40th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Yesod: When does Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliability/self-control mean submitting to others? From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 10 06:30:06 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93normal_practice=94?= Message-ID: <4ee8a413f67f49da89acceed596b8f72@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I was bothered by the gemara-Megilla 26a where it says Jerusalem apartment ?owners? took ?gifts? by force as ?rental? from olei regal. The Beit Mordechai (2:16), who lived in the early 20th century, raises the same question and says since the normal practice in Israel was for renters to leave something for the innkeeper in addition to the rental payment, so innkeepers in Jerusalem would take it by force since they could not charge rent. He admits that it?s possible that this would be considered stealing but because of this ?normal practice? of leaving something, it?s almost like they had a legal claim and therefore they felt they could take the items. Interesting that I couldn?t find earlier authorities bothered by this but maybe I missed something. Any thoughts appreciated. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 08:15:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:15:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6f2cda5f-ce57-a7a3-36af-3cc0b767dc9f@sero.name> On 10/05/18 05:43, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh >> between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it wasRashbithat was involved. > > I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, > and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > > > Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya?3rd line in the widest > lines near the bottom > and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Thank you. > Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about > 130-135 CE. Why do you suppose he was killed around that time rather than much later? If he was killed then, then he would have been born around 10-15 CE, have started learning Torah around 15-20 years before the churban, and have come back home with all those talmidim 4-9 years after it. Doesn't it seem more likely that his Torah learning started after the churban, and after Kalba Savua had resettled somewhere and reestablished himself, which would mean his death was also several decades after Bar Kochva? > Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died?about 20 years earlier (see eg > wikipedia?on Gamliel II) > > It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the > story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. Why is this at all difficult to believe? What makes it difficult? > So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of > the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant If you assume both that the students died then and that he himself died then, then when did he have time to teach his five new students? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 10 05:57:21 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 08:57:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim Message-ID: At 10:44 PM 5/9/2018, R Eli Turkel wrote: >I suggest reading an article by Brown >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2Fu%2F0%2F%23search%2Fhillel%2F1633fd7c1ed2a4a7&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce7f2ed89c0b04a153b9008d5b61fe896%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C1%7C636615170523842613&sdata=KHDvBEGhAvUsiq8oxUjnwZDX%2Bt0hzpo7D25XR2o0CPA%3D&reserved=0 > > >It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish > >Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent >past >basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those >practices that can be >traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a >select few don't count. >He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that >the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even >communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of >elitism that only gedolim count. > >OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of >the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In >fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their >unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at >most) > >His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in >terms of protecting their communities from modernism. >I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between >litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. I believe you are referring to an article that recently appeared in Hakirah that is at https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjyg6mKmfvaAhVCuVkKHeutBeYQFggtMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hakirah.org%2FVol24Shandelman.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3XZQch0OGem-hvrLpivEHB (I cannot access the link you give above, because I do not have a google account.) I found this article most disappointing and sent the email below to the Editors of Hakirah Subject: The Gaon of Vilna, the Hatam Sofer, and the Hazon Ish: Minhag and the Crisis of Modernity To the Editor: I must admit that the title of this article truly attracted my attention. However, after reading it I was sorely disappointed. The author writes at the beginning of the article, "We have seen that from the 1930's to the 1950's at least, the position of the Hazon Ish remained consistent and unyielding: A minhag has no normative status of its own, and at best can only be adduced as evidence for an actual halakhic ruling, which in turn derives its authority strictly from corroboration by qualified halakhists." He then goes on to point out that both the GRA and the Hazon Ish did not observe many minhagim that most people do observe. However, he does not give us a list of the minhagim they did not observe nor does he give us a list of the minhagim that they did observe. Surely these should have been included in detail in this article. Later in the article the author writes, "These two Orthodox groups [the Hungarian Orthodox and the latter-day hasidic] turned minhag into an endless opportunity for the creation of new humrot. And this only goes to show that it is not always a broken connection with the 'living tradition' that facilitates the creation of a dynamic of humrot. Again, I think that the article should have included a detailed list of these Chumras. In my opinion, this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much substance. What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about nothing." Dr. Yitzchok Levine -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 10 06:58:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:58:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Wild Wild State of Kashrus Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/2bPRtq It was an innovative way of saving money. The municipality worked it out that they would outsource the financial cost of the Department of Health inspectors. From now on, it would be the restaurants themselves that would hire the health inspectors. The restaurants would pay them, they would take out the FICA taxes, the worker?s comp ?? the restaurant would handle it all. The move ?worked wonders? for the state of health in the restaurants. Eateries that were previously designated with a C minus rating were now rated A plus and health violation write ups were down too. The astute reader will detect an obvious problem here. This is what is called a classic conflict of interest. The upgraded rating and lowered violations are probably due to the unique financial arrangement. When an inspector is paid by the people he supervises there is a risk that his judgment and actions will be unduly influenced. The safety of the restaurant consumers has been placed at risk. Indeed, the general public has also been placed in danger. SAME FOR KASHRUS The same should be true in the field of Kashrus. The mashgiach is there to protect the public from eating non-kosher or questionable items just as the health inspector is there to protect the public from anything that can compromise their health and safety. RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN ZT?L Indeed, last generation?s Gadol haDor, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, in his Igros Moshe (YD Vol. IV #1:8) writes that the Mashgiach should not be paid by the facility receiving the hashgacha, but rather should only be paid by the Vaad HaKashrus itself. Indeed, he should have no direct monetary business dealings with the company. See the above URL for more. Keep in mind that when it comes to private hashgachos the person giving the supervision is always paid by the person or organization being supervised. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 09:28:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:28:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <2dd3576d-2d8e-762e-5afc-570ef2dbaa9c@sero.name> On 10/05/18 10:51, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Me: >>> >>> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. > > RZS: > >> >> Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every >> Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not >> the rav who guided him. > > No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert > on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted > on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. But if the rav paskened that they were wrong they had to obey him. >> But at >> any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the >> full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to >> do their job properly they can't be learning all day. > The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the > claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. And indeed it does; how do you see a contradiction from R Akiva? He didn't say TCh don't have the knowledge to run the town, but that they don't have the time. > Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at > all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his > role? Same story: He is qualified, but he has no time, so he will neglect the work and the town will suffer. That's why we need and have askanim to run things, but they have to know that they are not in charge but must defer to the chachamim. Note that not even the biggest haredi calls for the gedolei hatorah to sit in the knesset themselves, let alone to be mayors and city councillors. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 12:43:38 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 15:43:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: RMB: > > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. I already raised the objection of R Akiva?s advice to his son; RZS?s response is conceptually clean, but (a) it doesn?t fit the words of the text, and (b) according to you it is internally contradictory - - if the rabbis who run the city have a din melech how can they be supervised by others? There?s also the sugya of b'nei ha'ir kofin zeh et zeh ?. Naively the authority of the kehilla comes from din melech, but then why b'nei ha'ir, why not the town rabbi? David Riceman From saulguberman at gmail.com Thu May 10 11:51:40 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 14:51:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > RMWillig has a kezayis of 22.5cc, and writes that Middos veShiurei > haTorah pg 277 reports matzah has half the weight of an equivalent > volume of water. So, RMW says a kezayi matzah weighs 11.25gm. (1cc of > water weighs 1gm, by definition. So, the weight of 2cc of matzah is 1gm.) > We buy matzah by the pound, so you can estimate a kazayis pretty > accurately if you know how many matzos are in a 1lb box. (2lb boxes, > divide by 2, naturally.) There are 40.3 or so kezeisim in a pound. > > matzos / lb -> kezayis matzah > 6 -> 2/13 of a matzah > 7 -> 1/6 > 8 -> 1/5 > 9 -> 2/9 > 10 -> 1/4 > > :-)BBii! > -Micha I wish I had remembered to use this at the seder. My rabbi tells me that he got an electric scale this year and had the grandkids make shiurim bags for the sedorim on erev pesach. Has the benefit of having something for the kids to do and moves the seder along. When I mentioned to my Rabbi that I was looking into smaller shiurim,that are smaller than the plastic sheet that is so popular, he was not interested in continuing the conversation. My daughter informed me that one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in the base of their calculation. Saul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:13:50 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:13:50 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1be6e645-8a41-f71b-3d11-7c7d0823c398@zahav.net.il> IIRC the Ramban writes that David took a census because he made a mistake, he thought that the issur didn't apply anymore. I found that Ramban to be shocking. How is it that no one, no rav, no navi, came to David and said "No, you can't do that"?? Answer - David never bothered to ask and no one had the job of being his poseik. Similarly, there are certain acts that the chachamim praised Hezkiyahu for doing and others that they disagreed with him. I read that as meaning "after he made the decisions, the rabbanim weighed in". I don't get the feeling from any navi that they stood by the sides of the kings and told them "yes you? can do this, no, you can't do that". They only weighed in when society or the melucha was totally out of sync. or when they were specifically consulted or when God told them "Go to the king". I admit that there is an incredible tension between even the good kings, the ones trying to rule according to the Torah, and the prophets (forget the evil kings). The former? were not able to live up to the expectations of the latter. From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 11 03:50:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180511105019.GA17192@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:43:38PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : RMB: : > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took : > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. : : The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give : commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us : what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. Not "implies", we are talking about R Dovid [haLevi] Cohen's explanation of Da'as Torah -- it's the thesis he is trying to justify! However, unlike some other versions of DT, it only speaks of rabbis as communal leadership. Not as advisors on personal matters (whose open questions are not halachic in nature). It has this in common with [pre-Mizrachi] RYBS's version of DT, "hatzitz vehachoshen". : I already raised the objection of R Akiva's advice to his son... There is also the historical precedent of the leadership of the Vaad Dalet Aratzos. There is no record of rabbinic leadership on civil issues. They dealt with halachic matters, eg shochetim, batei din, a law to require haskamos on all published sefarim... :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 41st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Yesod: What is the ultimate measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 of self-control and reliability? From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:02:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:02:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The article is one chapter from an entire book. You walked into the middle of a movie, that's all. Ben On 5/10/2018 2:57 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > In my opinion,? this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much > substance.? What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about > nothing." From isaac at balb.in Thu May 10 21:23:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 14:23:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Eli Turkel asked: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, > from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult > for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat > had to bring the animal as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the > cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of > whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result > in hundreds I suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim. [The Ramban in the 3rd Shoresh there isn't happy with this] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 11 01:40:10 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 08:40:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Shiluach Hakein, Performance of Message-ID: >From yesterday's OU Halacha Yomis Q. How is the mitzvah of Shiluach Hakein performed? A. Before sending away the mother, one should have the intent to fulfill a mitzvah. There is a difference of opinion as to how one should send away the mother. According to the Rambam (Hilchos Shechita 13:5), one should grab the mother bird by the wings and send her away. Though the Torah prohibits capturing the mother-bird when she sits on the nest, when the intention of grabbing the mother is to send her away, this is not considered an act of capturing. However, Shulchan Aruch (YD 292:4) rules in accordance with the Rosh and the Tur that one need not grab the mother bird. Rather, one may use a stick or the back of one?s hand to send away the mother. According to these Rishonim, the important factor is not that you grab the mother but that you cause her to fly away. The Binyan Tziyon (Chadashos 14) writes that some Rishonim disagree with the Rambam on two points. They maintain that if one grabs the mother and sends her away, a) the mitzvah is not fulfilled, and b) one transgresses the prohibition of taking the mother-bird (even though the intent is to send the bird away). It is therefore best to use a stick or, as Rav Belsky, zt?l advised, to push the mother bird off the nest with an open hand, the palm facing upwards so that the mother bird is not accidentally caught. Once the mother bird is chased away, one should pick up the eggs or chicks and take possession of them. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Fri May 11 02:25:19 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 12:25:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: Instead of answering Zev's questions directly let me try and describe how I see the events. I fully admit that the sources of dates for Taananim seem very sparse and I welcome any more information >From the chabad site R Yochanan be Zakai dies in 74 The Sanhedrin under Rabban Gamliel moved about 86 Bat Kochba Rebbelion ended in 133 R Akiva put in prison 134 Mishna completed 189 ------------------------------------------ First most historians take the story that R Akiva (along with several others) lived for 120 years as an exaggeration. Typical dates given are 50-135. This also implies that magic split into 3 sections of 40 years each is also an exaggeration This would give his learning under Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua as after the death of R Yochanan ben zakai about the year 75 when he would be 25 years old I again stress that all dates are speculation. It seems unlikely that R Akiva would have 24000 students when so many older teachers were around. Hence, extremely unlikely that this happened while the yeshiva was in Yavne under Rabban Gamliel. The one date I saw for the death of Rashbi was 150. What seems to be clear is that Rebbe compiled the Mishna after the death of all 5 talmidim of R Akiva (of course we know that the compilation was done over a period of time beginning at least with R. Meir and probably R. Akiva and earlier). Pushing off the death of R. Akiva decades later would give little time for the activities of his talmildim after his death before the time of Rebbe who is the next generation. One date I have seen for Rebbe is 135-220 (again approximately) R Sherira Gaon lists the year 219 as the year Rav moved to Bavel The gemara (Kiddushin 72b) states that Rebbe was born when R Akiva died which gives the birth of Rebba as about 135 assuming he died as part of the Bar Kochba revolt (which the Chabad site seems to also assume) As an aside the dates of Rebbe would seem to be connected with the debate over who was Antoninus see Hebrew Wikipedia on Reeb Yehuda HaNasi This post started with my claim that Rashbi was a student in Yavneh years before the plague that kille3d the 24000 students and so he became a student of R Akiva later in life. I note that the other talmidim also had other teachers. Thus, the gemara notes that R Meir also learned with R. Yishmael and certainly with R. Elisha ben Avuyah though R. Akivah was his main teacher 'The students were given semicha by R Yehudah be Buba R Benny Lau claims that R. Yehuda bar Ilai was mainly a talmid of his father and R Tarfon and only secondary by R. Akiva. R Yisi ben Chalfta also learned mainly from his father and then R. Yochanan ben Nuri both of whom stressed the traditions if the Galil. We have no statements of R. Elazar ben Shanua in the name of R. Akiva. R Benny Lau concludes that the two "talmidim muvhakim" of R. Akiva are R. Meir and Rashbi but both of these also had other teachers besides R. Akiva. Hence, we cannot take the story literally that R. Akiva went to the south and found 5 youngsters who became his students. Rather all 5 were already serious talmidei chachamim before R. Akiva. In addition even later many kept up relations with R. Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 14 09:54:07 2018 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 12:54:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel Message-ID: I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential chillul shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:19:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 02:51:40PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : My daughter informed me that : one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even : smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook : It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in : the base of their calculation. But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be invalid anyway? We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more binding than historical reality? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 44th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Malchus: What type of justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 does unity demand? From saulguberman at gmail.com Mon May 14 12:28:24 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:28:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, > the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis > is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does > that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual > olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be > invalid anyway? > > We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai > and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people > causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more > binding than historical reality? > I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:06:21 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:06:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514190620.GC7492@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:33:02AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent : past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those : practices that can be : traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable... So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 15 04:05:47 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 07:05:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . Shemos 12:39 teaches us: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. Various meforshim deal with halachic problems of this pasuk. For example, they were commanded to eat matzah, and being rushed out had nothing to do with it. Or, chometz was forbidden, and being rushed had nothing to do with it. This thread WILL NOT discuss those issues. If you want to discuss those issues, please start a new thread. My questions have nothing to do with halacha. They relate to the sequence and timing of the events of that night. They relate to "lir'os es atzmo" - I try to imagine myself in Mitzrayim that night, and certain parts of the story don't make sense to me. I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: 1) When was that dough made? 2) When was that dough baked? We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for the trip. I find it difficult to imagine that the flour and water were not mixed until the last 17 minutes before morning. Another problem: Given that they DID take unbaked dough out of Mitzrayim, what happened when they finally decided to bake it? Obviously, if they were able to bake it, it must be that they were not hurrying out of Egypt any more. So why didn't they just wait a little longer, and allow the dough to rise? (Someone might suggest that it was only in Egypt that "it did not become chametz", and that they did let it rise after getting out, but the pasuk disproves that, by telling us that "they baked it into matzah", i.e. that the dough never rose at all, at any point.) There are other questions that could ask, in addition to those, but I'll stop here for now. advTHANKSance Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 15 05:11:46 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:11:46 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Issac Balbin wrote: " suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim." There is a fundamental difference between carrying the aron and the avoda in the mishkan. The Rambam writes explicitly there in the sefer hamitzvos that the mitzva of carrying the aron, was given to the leviim in the midbar "v'af al pi shezeh hatzivuy ba laleviim baet hahe". We do not find any such commandment in the Torah regarding avoda in the mishkan. The Torah ONLY commands/allows Aharon and his sons to do Avoda in the mishkan. Therefore there is no room to say that leviim did avoda in the mishkan in the midbar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at yahoo.com Tue May 15 09:53:47 2018 From: gershonseif at yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 16:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know.TIA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 12:31:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:31:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas In-Reply-To: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20180515193110.GB20847@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 04:53:47PM +0000, Gershon Seif via Avodah wrote: : Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked : many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know. The oldest usage Bar Ilan and I could find was the one I had initially thought of -- the AhS. In OC 494:7, RYME gives 3 reasons for not fasting on that day. #2: And more: On that day, Moshe told them to becom qadosh. Uregilin liqroso "Yom haMyuchas" because of this. Which makes me think the AhS was saying it's just mimetic. Otherwise, I would have expected "uregilin le-" to have been replaced by a source. More than that, his vanilla "uregilin" is more typical of his description of accepted Litvisher practice. He tends to report others' practices by saying whom, even if it's a recent import to Litta. For example, se'if 3 mentions that the Chassidim haQadmonim were up all night on Shavuos, as per the Zohar, "vegam agah harbeih osin kein" and in the morning they go to miqvah, all as a zeikher leMatan Torah. Staying up all night gets a "they", not a "we", and is labeled as lower-case-c chassidic / Zoharic custom. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 15 12:39:06 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:39:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bamidbar Message-ID: <24722D2C-AAFF-48C2-A4B0-144A6165528A@cox.net> THEY DID; SO DID THEY DO According to the Sages, not a single letter is superfluous in the Torah. Anything repeated is repeated for a definite reason and with additional meaning. We may not always comprehend the reason or meaning but that doesn't detract from its significance. Also, there may be various interpretations and reasons given by commentators but that is what makes the Torah so profound. This Shabbos we begin the fourth Book of the Torah, Bamidbar. This portion is read the Shabbat before Shavuot, with rare exception. This year it is read immediately before Shavuot. The reason it usually is read the Shabbat prior to Shavuot is because there is a connection between the subject matter of this portion and the theme of Shavuot. There is a verse in Bamidbar in which appears a seeming redundancy. I grappled with it for a while and came up with an interesting chiddush. The verse states (1:54) "The Children of Israel did everything that God commanded Moses, so did they do." The first part of the verse already says "they did everything," etc. Then at the end it again says: "so did they do." Why is it repeated? First, the Children of Israel did "everything that God commanded Moses" because that was what God commanded and they did it as it was a mitzvah. But then, when it states at the end of the pasuk "so did they do," it already had become part of them. In other words, the initial motivation for performing a mitzvah is because God has commanded it, but then after doing it, one does it automatically and out of love and joy (as opposed to being mandatory). It becomes part of the person -- ("so did they do)." Similarly, when the Jewish people accepted the Torah they said "Naaseh v'nishma" (Exodus 24:7) which means "We will DO and (then) we will understand." In other words, we first will do out of duty and obligation since we are accepting the commandments of the Almighty, and afterwards, we will be doing (observing the mitzvot) out of love and joy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 15:45:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 18:45:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos Message-ID: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> R' Mordechai Torczyner (CC-ed) gave 3 shiurim (chaburos?) on koseiv and mocheiq this past march. Including #2, available here . He raises an interesting (to me, at least) question: Catan, formerly The Settlers of Catan, is a game with a board that changes with each play. The board is tiled from hexagons (and played on the edges and corners between them), where each hexagon has a picture on it denoting a kind of terrain, and by implication the reasources one can get from that terrain. This honeycomb is then held in place by a hexagonal frame, which is assembled from 6 pieces, each of which has jigsaw-puzzle-like edges at the join to hold the whole thing together. See RMT cited in shiur SSJ 16:23 (source #5 on the resource page attached to the YUTorah recording). He says you can play a game with letters or pictures IFF one is placing letters or pieces of letters or pictures or their pieces next to eachother. But not if they are made qeva or put in a frame. And only if they do not attach or stick to one another. So, here is RMT's question... Catan's hexagons do not combine to make one picture, but they do combine to make one "message" -- a usable game board. Is assembling a Catan board mutar on Shabbos? And if not, I wish to add: What if the game is played on a pillow, making it hard to keep the pieces interlocked, and the players agree to end the game before Shabbos? If the assembly is neither made to last nor is there intent for it to last, would it then be mutar? Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:11:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:11:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos In-Reply-To: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> References: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> Message-ID: The frame that comes with the newer editions of Settlers is quite flimsy so I don't believe it can be regarded as "fixing" the hexes together in a way that could even raise this shayla. But leravcha demilsa one can simply lay out the board without the frame, as one does with the older editions (my set is close to 20 years old and therefore doesn't have this problem. From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:30:27 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:30:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Further to your question, we've discussed the time of yetzias mitzrayim before, and some have asserted that it was early in the morning, but the Torah says "be'etzem hayom", and Rashi explicitly says this means high noon. At the time of the discussion I couldn't find this Rashi, but it's in Devarim 32:48. So not only did they have all night to prepare food for the journey, they also had all morning. And yet we're to believe they didn't get around to it until just before noon. However, leaving aside the improbability of this timing, my understanding of the actual event is that they started making dough to bake bread, and would have left it to rise but immediately they got the announcement that they were leaving, so they shoved it straight into the oven and baked it there and then, as matzos. Alternatively, given that they had already been commanded not to bake chametz, we can say that because of this commandment they always intended to bake it immediately, but as it happened the command became irrelevant because the announcement came just as they finished kneading it and were about to put it in the oven, so even had they *not* been commanded they would still have had to bake it as matzos. Which of course is why the commandment was given in the first place. Either way, though, my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the perspective of before it was baked. From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 05:55:56 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 12:55:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? A. The Gemara (Avoda Zara 30a) discusses the laws of giluy (beverages left uncovered). Chazal forbade drinking certain beverages that were left uncovered, due to concerns that venomous creatures, such as snakes or scorpions, might drink from the beverage and leave behind some of their venom. Tosfos (Avoda Zara 35a: Chada) writes that in the countries where we live, this concern does not exist, and beverages left uncovered may be drunk. Ordinarily, once Chazal issue a gezeira (decree), the gezeira remains in force even if the reasoning no longer applies. This case is different since the original gezeira was only enacted for places where snakes were common. Accordingly, Shulchan Aruch (YD 116:1) rules that one may drink a beverage that was left uncovered. However, the Pischei Teshuva (116:1) writes that the position of the Vilna Gaon and the Shelah Hakadosh is not to leave drinks unattended. The commentaries to the Maaseh Rav explain that the Vilna Gaon held that there are secondary reasons for Rabbinic decrees that apply even when the primary reason is no longer relevant. Common practice is to follow the position of the Shulchan Aruch, though some adhere to the more stringent opinion -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:26:24 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:26:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me - perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:27:40 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:27:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Designer Babies? Message-ID: Assume that gene editing technology reaches the point that "designer babies" are possible to an extent. Assume that "intellectual acuity" genes can be identified and screened for. Would a Desslerian philosophy allow (require?) mass screening and eventual genetic tinkering to provide a gadol hador material baby? What if there was a clear tradeoff that this gene also resulted in a materially shorter life expectancy? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Thu May 17 08:29:01 2018 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (M Cohen) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 11:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <09af01d3edf3$c8a0bed0$59e23c70$@com> I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul Shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential Chillul Shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before Shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on Shabbos. ..at least 2 major differences between the two. A. the electricity you use is generated in real time, as you demand it (by turning on the switch) B. but the water you use was made and treated in the past, and now simply stored in water towers until you demand it (by opening your tap) (as the water is used, new water is pumped into the tower at intervals. only a gramma). No melacha is done when you use your water C. electricity production in EY typically involves d'orisa issurim of burning fossil fuels, boiling water to create steam etc D. but water production may only be an rabbinic prohibition (electric pumps and filters, adding chemicals, etc) ======= Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2894, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.22240) http://free.pctools.com/ ======= From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Thu May 17 09:00:40 2018 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:00:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: RMB wrote: 'So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here.' I think the point was there was a tendency not to value or keep minhagim, not an absolute rule. And they possibly gave different status to minhagim which clearly originated with gedolim not un-named masses, eg kabalas shabbos. As for the yamulka example, that's got a makor in shas and is mentioned by rishonim, no? Perhaps another example would be Shir hamaalos before bentching which was innovated by the Chida I think. You'd need a whole range of example and a list of who kept what in order to be more certain, I haven't read the rest of Dr Brown's book to know if he does that. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 12:48:18 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 19:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? Message-ID: The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of externalities at all. YL Unfortunately, the term "chasid," meaning a pious person, has become misunderstood because of misconceptions foisted upon us from without. A "chasid" is a person who totally gives himself in love, does not look out for himself but relinquishes his own claims on the world in order to live only for others, through acts of loving kindness. Far from retiring from the world, he lives in it, with it and for it. For himself, the chasid wants nothing; but for the world around him, everything. Thus we find the term applied to David, a man who, from his earliest youth, labored ceaselessly for the spiritual and material welfare of his people and left the shaping of his own destiny, including redress of the wrong done to him by Sha'ul, entirely to God. No doubt you are familiar with the saying shelach shelach v'sheli shelach - -"He who says 'That which is yours is yours and that which is mine also is yours' is called a chasid." Again, a life of seclusion, of only meditation and prayer, is not Judaism. Torah and Avodah (study and worship) are but pathways meant to lead to deeds. Our Sages say, Talmud Torah gadol she'mavi l'y'day maaseh- "Great is study, for it leads to action" - the practical fulfillment of the precepts. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com Thu May 17 13:03:16 2018 From: gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 20:03:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <306356533.2453717.1526587396833@mail.yahoo.com> On Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:48 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that > there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, > speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of > externalities at all. YL Indeed! See Hirsch's commentary to Beraishis 5:24 where he writes very strong words about this. He says that Chanoch lived a life of seclusion after giving up on his generation. Hashem removed him from the earth because "what use is he here" (or something to that effect). From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 17 20:24:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 05:24:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. At one time calling a child a girl did not mean that you were assuming the child's gender? (girl meant a young person of either sex). Ben On 5/17/2018 9:48 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters? I note > that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of > dress,? speaking a particular language,? etc.? Indeed,? there is no > mention of externalities at all. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu May 17 20:51:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 23:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . I had cited Shemos 12:39: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. R' Zev Sero suggested: > ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked > dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. > I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it > has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the > perspective of before it was baked. It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words to have that meaning, that's okay. But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, > their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Fri May 18 14:41:25 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:41:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: See Malbim, who suggests that according to R Yose Haglili, who says that the issur chometz that year was only for one day, that one day was the 14th, not the 15th, but since with kodshim the night follows the day it was from the morning of the 14th till the morning of the 15th. Therefore they started baking bread at daybreak, intending to let it rise, but they were immediately ordered to leave and had no time. Alternatively, since most meforshim understand the one day to be the 15th, he suggests that they mixed the dough intending to bake matzos, but they didn't even have time to do that and had to take the unbaked dough, which would naturally have become chometz during their journey, but miraculously it did not rise and when they got where they were going they baked it as matzos (or, according to pseudo-Yonasan, the sun baked it, which presents halachic problems of its own, since sun-baked bread doesn't have the status of bread). On 17 May 2018 at 23:51, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I had cited Shemos 12:39: > >> They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves >> of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were >> driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare >> any provisions for themselves. > > R' Zev Sero suggested: > >> ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked >> dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. >> I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it >> has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the >> perspective of before it was baked. > > It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the > pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words > to have that meaning, that's okay. > > But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > >> They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, >> their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. > > This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of > Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is > unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff > they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that > the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. > > Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS > for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why > didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. > > The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not > make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then > they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just > before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to > departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water > together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. > > Akiva Miller > _______________________________________________ > Avodah mailing list > Avodah at lists.aishdas.org > http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org -- Zev Sero zev at sero.name From doniels at gmail.com Mon May 21 03:55:24 2018 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 13:55:24 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Generators_on_Shabbos_in_Israel?= Message-ID: R' Ben Rothke wrote: > I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, > AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. Also, apparently, as a form of protest. > With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is > automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the > potential chillul shabbos? R' Israel Meir Morgenstern put out an entire Sefer on this - http://www.virtualgeula.com/Stock/Books/Show/11160 - and regular updates as booklets. According to him, it's not nearly as automated as they pretend. IIRC he did on-site research, not relying on what the Electric Company wants people to believe. > Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before > shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. There are those who do that too. Check the roofs in Charedi neighborhoods - those with huge black reservoirs are doing just that. That said, I asked his father, R' D. A. Morgenstern shlita about getting one of those water reservoirs and he said it wasn't necessary. (I didn't ask him about electricity.) - Danny From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 20 14:10:28 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 00:10:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance Message-ID: <> What effect does this have on shabbat -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon May 21 23:19:20 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 02:19:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 17/05/18 09:26, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) > one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? > What is the source of this practice? (Me ? perhaps the original practice > of only one person saying Kaddish). I assume you mean in a shul where most of the kadeishim are said by multiple people. If so, I have never seen or heard of such a practise until you described it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 03:52:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:52:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Please see Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part I at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FCT8ohf&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=CAO%2FIULzGszY4Io1E7bD7BDzBnrECxpPQX6SlNtHF%2BU%3D&reserved=0 and Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part II at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FKVjQ16&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=RY%2FzL7M3vLMiFdh1MlJcdiMfMVPVPkRXx%2FtVGOhRiWk%3D&reserved=0 If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 05:04:49 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 08:04:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on > a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking > their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me ? > perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). In all the shuls in Elizabeth NJ, the practice is as follows: If no one has yahrzeit, then there are no restrictions on Kaddish. If someone does have a yahrzeit that day, then the Kaddish after Aleinu is said only by him/them (including anyone still in shloshim). As RJR guessed, this is in deference to the original minhag (still practiced in German shuls) that no Kaddish is ever said by more than one person. [A gabbai usually calls out "Yahrzeit!" in addition to the table-banging.] In Shacharis, the other kaddishes (such as after Shir Shel Yom) are said by all kaddish-sayers. After mincha, an additional Tehillim (usually #24) is recited, so that the other kaddish-sayers will have the opportunity to say kaddish. This is done at maariv too, except for situations (such as in Elul) when there's another Tehillim anyway. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:12:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:12:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 06:52:26AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly : going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. But it could still not be worth the learning missed. There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more "nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. micha at aishdas.org Thus excellence is not an event, http://www.aishdas.org but a habit. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aristotle From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 04:01:35 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:01:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Birkat Kohanim Message-ID: 1) The Priestly Threefold Benediction had the following: The first blessing has three words, the second five, the third seven. They remind us of the foundation for all blessings: The tree Patriarchs, the five books of the Torah, and the seven Heavens. Bachya 2) Israel said to God: "Why do you tell the priests to bless us? We desire Your blessing alone!" Said the Holy One: "Although I have told the priests to bless you, I shall stand in their company to give effect to the benediction." Therefore, at the end of the section it states explicitly (verse 27): "I will bless them." Midrash Numbers R. (11:2, 8, end). 3) Why do we ask God first to bless us and then keep or guard us? Because, if He does give us material blessings, we need to be protected from the evil results such prosperity may bring. The Hasidic Anthology P.359 quoting the Tzechiver Rebbe. 4) There is an interesting connection between Parshat Naso, which is the longest parsha in the Torah, comprising 176 verses, and the 119th Psalm (of Tehillim), which also contains 176 verses and is the longest in the book of Psalms. This psalm carries the distinct title, "Torah, the Way of Life." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 03:57:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:57:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Who Sings In This World Will Sing Also In The Next." Joshua b. Levi, Sanhedrin, 91b Message-ID: <37067FE1-055D-4504-A143-8FB433E508DE@cox.net> LA'AVOD AVODAT AVODA VA'AVODAT MASA 4:47... Note the four words in a row with the same root. (Probably the only place in the Torah with four words in a row with the same root). Rashi says the Avodat Avoda (kind of a strange phrase) refers to playing musical instruments. As far as Avodat Masa (Work of burden) is concerned ? the Gemara in Chulin comments that only when there is heavy manual labor involved, then there is an age limit for the Leviyim (as with the others). And it seems that the age limit of 50 was only for the carrying. In other words, a Levi was able to continue serving in the Mishkan after 50, but only for SHIRA and SH'MIRA. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 04:29:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:29:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor Message-ID: We are told that Hashem spoke the words Shamor and Zachor together, and I have presumed that we heard them together as well. But the Ramban (Devarim 5:12) suggests that "He (Moshe) is the one who heard Zachor, and they (heard) Shamor." The ArtScroll Chumash (page 969) quotes Rav Gedalya Shorr as explaining: <<< At the highest spiritual level - the one occupied by Moses - the awesome holiness of the Sabbath is such a totally positive phenomenon that one who understands its significance could not desecrate it. Thus, the positive remembrance of the Sabbath contains within itself the impossibility of violating it, just as one who loves another person need not be warned not to harm that person. This was the commandment that Moses "heard." Lesser people, however, do not grasp this exalted nature of the Sabbath. They had to be told that it is forbidden to desecrate the sacred day; when they absorbed the Ten Commandments, they "heard" primarily the negative commandment *safeguard*. >>> Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue May 22 08:19:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 11:19:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 22/05/18 06:52, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going > there and seeing the falls is not nothing. Not at all. One says a bracha on many things that one would much rather *not* see, and that one would certainly not go out of ones way to see. Also consider the rainbow. If one happens to see it one says a bracha, and quite a positive one, but one still should not tell others to go outside and see it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:27:43 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:27:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet : he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. But AGAIN, no one obligated RAMiller to hold like RSRH. Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim around, etc... : R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or : taken a plane and learned on the plane. : Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the : world as it is, namely, mostly gray. But this isn't about how RAMiller lived now about life in general. It's advice to a school, an institution dedicated to learning. What I am actually taken by is the importance RAM is giving girls' education. Contrast that to the number of seminaries today that are so exclusively focused on inspiring that textual education is limited. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When we are no longer able to change a situation micha at aishdas.org -- just think of an incurable disease such as http://www.aishdas.org inoperable cancer -- we are challenged to change Fax: (270) 514-1507 ourselves. - Victor Frankl (MSfM) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:54:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:54:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522135452.GC14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 07:29:51AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be : understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so : supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", : I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Except that the Rambam believes the Qol had nothing to do with accoustics or physical sound to begin with. That the term is just being used as a metaphor to help those of us who never experienced such things. (Moreh 2:48) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 06:52:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:52:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:12 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >But it could still not be worth the learning missed. > >There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples >of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at >the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. >And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more >"nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. I know that Rav Schwab also went to Switzerland. Many gedolim in Europe went in the summer to vacation resorts, and there are pictures of Mir students at summer camp. See http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rkimble/Mirweb/YeshivaStudents2.html R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or taken a plane and learned on the plane. Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the world as it is, namely, mostly gray. I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:08:39 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:08:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522140839.GD14915@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 05:24:24AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. ... With that in mind as a caveat, let's look at Chazal's chassidim harishonim. Aside from famously spending 9 hours a day (12 on days when Mussaf is said?) on tefillah, Our sages repeated [in a beraisa]: The early Chassidim would hide their thorns and broken pieces of glass in the middle of their fields 3 tefachim [roughly one foot] deep, so that it would not [even] stop the plowing. Rav Sheishes would put them to the fire, Ravan would place them in the Tigres [the large river alongside which his home city of Pumbedisa was built]. Rav Yehudah said: The person who wants to be a chassid [he should take care] to follow the words of [the tractates on] damages. Ravina said: The words of [Pirqei] Avos. Others say in response [that Ravina said]: the words of [the tractate] Berakhos [blessings]. - Bava Qama 30a "Amrei leih" as the end is most ocnsistent with what we normally discuss about them. However, notice everyone else assumes a BALC definition of chassidus. They come up in Seifer Hakabiim I as among the bravest of warriors, and among the last to accept the permissibility of fighting on Shabbos. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:22:35 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:22:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522142235.GE14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:05:47AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about : the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: : 1) When was that dough made? : 2) When was that dough baked? We are talking about 600,000 or so homes. I assume there are a range of answers. And when the Torah says they didn't have time for it to become chameitz, it means that in many or most of those homes... enough that the haste came to characterize how we left. Just trying to aid the imagination by three-dimensionalizing the peopl involved. : We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally : irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as : Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the : Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to : leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for : the trip... Already in this discussion it was raised that in Shemos we're told we left "be'etzem hayom". And yet, in yesterday's leining, we're told "hotziakha H' E-lokekha loylah" (Devarim 16:1) Rashi ad loc (based on Sifrei Devarim 128:5, Barakhos 9a) says that we got permission from Par'oh at night (Shemos 12:31). So there was, as you write, PLENTY of warning. But they also had get their neighbors' valutables, pack, get the animals in hand, find Yanky's favorite bottle, figure out who was getting custody of those kids wandering around that neighborhood that choshekh obliterated... So, little things like what to pack for lunch was rushed, and in most cases, that meant they were left with matzah. (Despite likely promising themselves that if they ever got out of Egypt, they would never eat lechem oni again!) Your 1 mil assumption, BTW, might come from the matzah of the seder they were commanded to make, and that this matzah was not necessarily KLP. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 11:02:42 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:02:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <24.27.04381.9FB540B5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:27 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls >will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. >It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim >around, etc... The question was asked about girls' high schools, not yeshiva boys! Do you really think he was concerned about the reduction in learning for the girls! I think not! He held that Niagara is "nothing" something that makes no sense to me in light of the fact the Falls are one of Hashem's wonders. [Email #2.] Here is what R. Miller actually said in response to a question about going to Niagara Falls. the question was asked about high schools taking girls to the Falls. As you can see, his statement about Niagara Falls being "nothing " had nothing to do with bitul Torah. I find his response baffling to say the least. YL Rav Avigdor Miller on Niagara Falls Q: What is your opinion of the importance of a high school taking their students on a trip to Niagara Falls? A: My opinion is that it's nothing at all. You have to travel so far, and spend so much money to see Niagara Falls?! Let's say, here's a frum girls' school. So they have the day off, or the week off, whatever it is. And where do they go? To Niagara Falls. What's in Niagara Falls?! A lot of water falling off a cliff. Nothing at all. Nothing at all! It's the yetzer harah. The yetzer harah makes everyone dissatisfied. People who are really happy with what they have are almost impossible to find. They may say, "We're happy," but they're not. And therefore, they're always seeking something else. And so, they travel to Niagara Falls. You might say differently, but I'm telling you, that's the reason why people travel to Niagara Falls. It's the yetzer harah that is making you dissatisfied. So you have to go to see water falling off a cliff. But really it's nothing at all. Of course, you yield a little bit to the yetzer harah in order that more girls should come to your school. You have an outing every year to get new talmidos, new students. But really it's nothing at all. TAPE # E-193 (June 1999) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:41:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522184112.GC16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 03:28:24PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to : be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to : area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume : measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they : were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. >From what I posted in the past from the AhS (OC 373:34), is seems the definitions themselves were not constants. A person is supposed to be using their own thumb, fist or forearm when the din is only about them. And standardized numbers are only invoked for things like eiruv where one has to serve many people and "ameru chakhamim denimdod lechumerah" -- use an ammah that covers a very high percentile of the people relying on it. And I tried to discuss what this would mean for shiurim like kezayis, where a person isn't using his own body or something he could only own one of, as a measure. But the discussion went in its own direction. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, micha at aishdas.org if only because it offers us the opportunity of http://www.aishdas.org self-fulfilling prophecy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:33:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:33:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:10:28AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : > By 2025, 10,000 satellites will provide constant Israeli video : > surveillance of the Middle East sufficient to carry out targeted killings ... : What effect does this have on shabbat How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space that has security camteras? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue May 22 16:41:12 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 19:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> References: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 22, 2018, 2:33 PM Micha Berger wrote: > How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space > that has security camteras? No major difference except that some people still avoid security cameras. As they become more common it will be harder to do. It is already difficult to go to many hotels over shabbat. As these devices appear everywhere some argue that poskim will be forced to accept some minority opinions or else we all stay home From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 23 07:53:38 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 14:53:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: From today's Hakhel email bulletin. THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 23 10:12:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:12:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:53:38PM +0000, Professor L. Levine forwarded (from Hakhel, who were forwarding as well): :> THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted :> at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. :> http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg It's very al-menas-leqabel-peras collecting a list of havtachos and segulos.. There is the stretch from the Rambam onward talking about how davening haneitz is better, or how one should daven as soon after as possible. (Which implies kevasiqin is superior, but not actually saying that.) But the general tenor of the list is about mystical rewards; even the references to the gemara. I didn't think it would be your speed. Also, Hakhel pushed my button on a pet peeve. Whomever at Hakhel writes titles knows diqduq better than whomever sent in about the poster. (Compare the subject line of this thread'S "K'Vosikin" with the quoted text's "VASIKIN".) "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. The words are "kevasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. No "the" there to remove; omitting the "ha-" is just wrong. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The meaning of life is to find your gift. micha at aishdas.org The purpose of life http://www.aishdas.org is to give it away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Pablo Picasso From zev at sero.name Wed May 23 10:21:31 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:21:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2f7061f4-8f98-52f7-67af-3204e6dd8b76@sero.name> On 23/05/18 13:12, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. That would be davening *laneitz*. I'm not sure what "davening neitz" might mean, but whatever it is, it's not AZ. I wonder about those who, on a plane going directly to or from EY, daven out the side windows. Are they davening to the Great Penguin Spirit at the South Pole? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed May 23 10:23:14 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 17:23:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <0A36D278-B7B9-4326-9245-B993DE48CB97@tenzerlunin.com> ?I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you?? I am certainly no chassid if Rav Miller. But criticizing anyone, and certainty not criticizing a Talmid chacham, for personal feelings about a family matter, seems to me to be in poor taste. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed May 23 12:42:02 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:42:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin References: Message-ID: At 01:12 PM 5/23/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >The words are "KEvasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, >and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. I use the terminology K'Vosikin, but Hakhel used Vasikin so I left it. I have often quipped that the only people who know Dikduk are maskilim! >:-} (Note the wicked grin.) Regrading segulos, I found the following of interest. From a footnote to letter 15 of the 19 Letters of RSRH "Segulah" denotes a property belonging permanently to an owner, to which no one else has any right or claim (cf. Bava Kamma 87b). YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 05:59:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 12:59:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? Message-ID: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 06:01:44 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 13:01:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life by a community. Do you agree? It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit and then no more rain falls. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 24 10:39:09 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 17:39:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Does_Ru=92ach_Ra=92ah_=28negative_spiri?= =?windows-1252?q?ts=29_still_exist_today=3F?= Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru?ach Ra?ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra?ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra?ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye. Scientists have revealed the presence of numerous invisible forces in the universe, such as gravity and electromagnetic waves. In fact, scientists today theorize that dark matter, which no one has ever seen, accounts for 80% of the matter in the universe. Just as G-d created indiscernible physical forces in the universe which physicists have shown to exist, Chazal identified invisible spiritual forces that potentially impact negatively on both the body and soul (see Teshuvos Vihanhogos 1:8). The Gemara (Shabbos 109a) states that when awakening in the morning, a person must wash his or her hands (three times) to remove Ru?ach Ra?ah. Until one does so, one must be careful not to touch the mouth, nose, eyes or ears so as not to allow the Ru?ach Ra?ah to enter into the body. Also, one may not touch food, since the Ru?ach Ra?ah will spread to the food. Although the Maharshal (Chulin 8:12) questions whether any form of Ru?ach Ra?ah still exists today, the consensus of most poskim is that this is still a concern. The Halachos of removing Ru?ach Ra?ah from one?s hands are codified in Shulchan Aruch (OC 4:2-5). If one touched food before washing in the morning, the Mishnah Berurah (4:14) writes that bedieved (after the fact) the food may be eaten, but if possible the food should be rinsed three times. The Gemara warns us about other forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah (damaging spirits). However, the Magen Avrohom (173:1) writes that there are some forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah that no longer pose a danger. For example, the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru?ach Ra?ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru?ach ra?ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one?s hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Fri May 25 00:10:22 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:10:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were > all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, > a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype > (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and I cringe every time I go past. But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 04:51:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 07:51:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 03:10 AM 5/25/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: >This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards >went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing >towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and >I cringe every time I go past. > >But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" >from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun >"netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There >certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 >in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not found in TANACH, so why not this one? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 06:49:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 09:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 07:51:45AM EDT, Prof. Levine wrote: : Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not : found in TANACH, so why not this one? Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different topic. People are trying to "do halakhah" without understanding the language the categories they're trying to implements are labeled in. Without understanding the language of Chazal, we are missing a lot of subtlety about what they meant. With bigger problems (if less about din) if you don't know the workings of the language of Tefillah, Tehillim or Chumash. Judaism without diqduq is a paler, less nuanced, thing. I expect you have a LOT from RSRH in your cut-n-paste library on this. Earlier, at 10:10:22AM IDT, Simon Montagu wrote the post that Prof Levine was replying to: : But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from : the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the : root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word : meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's : description of his dream and in Hazal. Nitzotz. Yeshaiah 1:31 uses it to refer to a spark, as it's something that starts a fire. Comes up a number of times in Chazal. Most famously to people who daven Ashkenaz, Shabbos 3:6: nosenin keli sachas haneir leqabeil nitzotzos. There is a beis hanitzotz in the BHMQ. Libun requires nitzotzos coming out of the keli. "Nitzotzos ein bahen mamash". (Shabbos 47b) BUT... getting back to that nuance theme... Haneitz is when there is enough light to make things like that sparkle. It's before alos, which is when the first spark of the sun is visible. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, micha at aishdas.org Our greatest fear is that we're powerful http://www.aishdas.org beyond measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anonymous From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 07:38:32 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:38:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:49 AM 5/25/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This >is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. >There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh >and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from >English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different >topic. Sadly, with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and texting, the English language is, IMO, going down the drain. People do not spell properly, write things that are not words, etc. This is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 08:22:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:22:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525152241.GC9702@aishdas.org> This isn't an MO issue, even if the subject line mentions the affiliation of the mechaneikh. For many people in yeshivish minyanim I attend, davening with a tzibbur is something one does between gaps in looking at a seifer. And among the yeshivish-lite (Shababnikim?), minyan is an excuse to get together for the qiddush. We really don't know how to daven. And all the time we spend teaching how to learn contributes to that. Defining religious inspiration in terms of learning, new knowledge, makes it hard to find what the point is in saying the same words yet again. When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. We define it those terms, tefillah won't get anywhere. On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:01:44PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have : the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community : and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that : did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their : prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life : by a community. Do you agree? I think so, because gap year subtlely teaches the message that true spirituality is incompatible with "reeal life". And that's why they need to go to a 1 year religious experience, with no job, no secular studies, no other concerns, not even the usual setting, in order to get inspiration that is supposed to last year the rest of your life. I believe it's an underdiscussed factor (among the many others) as to why so many MO youth go yeshivish during gap year or upon return. That implied message is not fully compatible with TuM or TiDE. That said... There are other factors. Telecom means you can hear from a famous rosh yeshiva regularly, and don't need to "settle" for someone local as a role model. Never mind that you can regularly connect with the LOR, so that he is actually in a position to better model the role. Also, the whole universal post-HS yeshiva thing feeds the RY-centric view (outside of chassidishe admorim) of religious leadership now prevalent, rather than the rabbinate. The shift from Agudas haRabbanim to the Agudah's (or in Israel, Degel's) Mo'etzes haRabbanim. Secondary effects: There is less tie and sense of belonging to a particular qehillah. More and more people daven in a handful of places, because this one is more convenient Fri night, another Shabbos morning, a third for Shabbos afternoon, Sunday, weekdays... Qehillah could be a source of positive peer pressure when inspiration is running low. But only if you feel attached to one. (An LOR mentioned to me this effect as a factor in OTD rates...) As per the famous machgich line: It's chazaras hasha"tz, not chazaras haSha"s! : It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately : go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit : and then no more rain falls. Although it's less that no more rain falls as much as the crops no longer accept irrigation water. Okay, the metaphor doesn't really work. A good rav who one can interact with regularly may be more useful :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals micha at aishdas.org is not as important as http://www.aishdas.org what you become by achieving your goals. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Henry David Thoreau From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 25 08:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos Message-ID: Halacha L'kovod Shabbos - "Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos" According to some Poskim it is prohibited to intentionally tan in the sun on Shabbos. Nevertheless it is permitted to walk or sit outdoors on a sunny day even if there is the probability of becoming tanned (even if one would be pleased that this happened - so long as one is not intentionally tanning) because the tanning is not intentional. One may also apply a thin and pourable suntan lotion for protection against sunburn when walking or sitting outdoors. However, one may not use a cream. S'U Minchas Yitzchok 5:32, Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchasa 18:70, Sefer 39 Melochos YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri May 25 08:56:20 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:56:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Questions on Theologically Motivated Message-ID: <3CB5DF8F-56E4-482D-BA72-9328800F007E@cox.net> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. 1) What is the difference between ?The religious person? and ?the truly religious person?? 2) What exactly do you mean by "cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:11:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:11:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: In this case, the problem pre-dated the smart? (or cell) phone. On 5/25/2018 4:38 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Sadly,? with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and > texting,? the English language is, IMO,? going down the drain.? People > do not spell properly,? write things that are not words,? etc.? This > is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:05:52 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:05:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular Message-ID: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Ever wonder what is the nafka mina of deciding if secular people are tinok sh'nishba or not? Here is a biggy. There is (apparently) a machloket between Rav Kanyevski and Rav Edelstein if it is permitted to donate a kidney if it may end up in someone secular. RK believes it shouldn't be done because he paskens like Rav Elyashiv that no one today has the din of tinok sh'nishba and therefore they shouldn't get this type of help from the religious. RE paskens like the classic Chazon Ish psak that today's secular people do have the tinok din? and therefore it is permitted to donate a kidney to a secular person. See the article (Hebrew) for more details. http://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/558795 From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 09:31:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:31:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? In-Reply-To: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525163124.GF9702@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:59:56PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious : person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are : theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic : inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral : creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a : Supreme Law?" : Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would : be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a : judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? I think it's self-evident. If the gov't is "of the people and by the people" (regardless of "for the people", appologies Pres Lincoln), then the only way to really seperate church and state would be to separate church and people. And "church" here includes not only all religion, but all religious stances. Including atheism, agnosticism, apathy and Sherleyism. A person's vote should be informed by their values. And a person's values by their religious stance -- whether religious, "truly religious", or an atheist. After all, an atheist cannot phrase abortion or end-of-life issues in terms of souls and therefore their etheism will inform their vote when Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice is a key issue. (Looking at you, Ireland!) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man micha at aishdas.org is how he treats someone http://www.aishdas.org who can do him absolutely no good. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Samuel Johnson From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:11:20 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:11:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Professor L. Levine" T >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra'ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra'ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye....? .....the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru'ach Ra'ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru'ach ra'ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one's hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL ? >>>>> ? It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children.? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:05:24 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:05:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398431932-c8d-935e@webjas-vaa194.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Rich, Joel" >From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" ? Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich ? ? >>>>> ? There is no constitutional requirement, no legal requirement, no ethical requirement and no logical requirement for each individual to erect a wall of separation between church and state in his own heart and mind.? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:52:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:52:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> >>>>> It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ============= IIRC R? A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 12:26:01 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:26:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525192601.GC25353@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 05:52:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : IIRC R' A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. It was ruach ra'ah, as per our discussion. Thus, neigl vasr. I think RAS's understanding was that Chazal were using evidence-based reasoning. People were getting sick, and since bad vapors were believed to be the cause of disease, Chazal presumed there was a ru'ach ra'ah. Which means that given that we today attibute disease to microbes, we would transvalue ruach ra'ah to refer to germs. I don't think too many others understand ru'ach ra'ah as a physical threat. Rashi (Taanis 22b "mipenei ruach ra'ah") understands ru'ach ra'ah to be a sheid entering the person -- "mipenei ruach ra'ah: shenichnas bo ruach sheidah..." and then he might drown or fall and die. Perhaps psychiatric illness? In which case, there is no clear transvaluation to today's science, as minds kind of straddle the physica - metaphysical fence. Sheidim /are/ intellects; so how do we map sheidim talk to rationalist psychology talk? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. micha at aishdas.org If you want time, you must make it. http://www.aishdas.org - Charles Buxton Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 09:30:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:30:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2 Message-ID: It is often confusing when trying to determine whether an item is subject to bishul akum or not. This article should help. YL Click here to download "Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2" From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:50:45 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:50:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular In-Reply-To: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> References: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <8849942693d54a55aab7bd43e07dddc7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/901388/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/from-the-rabbis-desk-choosing-a-recipient,-diverting-tzedakah/ Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz-From The Rabbi's Desk - Choosing a Recipient, Diverting Tzedakah Listen to the 1st part-lots to discuss KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 26 12:17:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:17:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Ben On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Toby Katz via Avodah wrote: > >>>>> > > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? > So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their > children. From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 14:07:40 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:07:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? Message-ID: <1639920e25b-c96-3738@webjas-vaa110.srv.aolmail.net> From:?"Prof. Levine" Date:?Wed, 22 Aug 2012 Subject:?Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? One may download this article that appeared in Tradition at http://www.mesora.org/mezuza-gordon.pdf Towards the end of this article the author writes To claim, then, that the Divine inscription, which directs the attention of the Jew to God, is possessed of its own potency, generating protective benefits, perverts a spiritual instrumentality into a cultic charm.... YL >>>> ? I hope I will be forgiven for resurrecting an old, old thread -- from 2012.? But I recently came across something when I was preparing for my Pirkei Avos shiur, and it made me think of this old thread. ? This is from _Ethics From Sinai_?by Irving Bunim.? On Pirkei Avos 5:22 he talks about the difference between the disciples of Avraham and the disciples of Bilaam.? The former have a sense of security; the latter have no sense of security in the world.?? ? ---quote-- Today we have all sorts of insurance policies: fire insurance, flood insurance, life insurance. On one level they represent a wise precaution [but mainly] the man of piety places his trust in the Almighty. When he closes his place of business at night, he knows there is a mezuzah on the door, to betoken His protection. At bedtime he recites the Shema, to invoke His protection. This is his basic insurance policy.... . The Sages tell of Artaban IV, the last King of Parthia, who sent his friend Rav a priceless jewel, with the message, << Send me something equally precious>>; and Rav sent him a mezuzah.? The king replied, <> Answered Rav < >> --end quote-- ? In a footnote, Bunim explains that that last sentence is a pasuk, Mishlei 6:22, and it applies to the mezuzah. This doesn't make the mezuzah an but does say that the mezuzah is protective. . (I am using << and >> instead of quotation marks in the hope of minimizing the number of random question marks AOL strews in my path.? If anyone can help me solve this problem please let me know.) . --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri May 25 13:29:34 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 16:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: . R' Simon Montagu wrote: > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards > went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing > towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", > and I cringe every time I go past. > > But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. ... I used to cringe too. But then I thought of a different limud zechus, and it's not just an excuse. I really believe this: They are not speaking the language that you'd like to think they are speaking. We are in the process of developing a new dialect, or creole, ... I don't know or care what the technical term might be, but consider the following phrases: making kiddush will be davening had paskened was mekadesh Technically speaking, I do concede that "davening k'vasikin" is meaningful, while "davening vasikin" is bizarre. But the truth, whether you like it or not, is that when someone says "davening vasikin", EVERYONE knows what the speaker meant. In this new language, there's nothing wrong with saying "davening vasikin". It is (I think) EXACTLY like the phrase "Good Shabbos", when the first word is pronounced "good" (and not "goot") and the second word is pronounced "SHABbos" (and not "shabBOS"). What language is that???? It's not Hebrew. It's not Yiddish. It's not English. It's something new. (Where "new" can have values of 50 to 100 years. Maybe more.) I am reminded of going to the bakery when I was twelve years old, and the sign by the brownies said that the price was: .10? each (If your computer messed that up, it is a decimal point, followed by a one, and a zero, and a "cents" sign. You know, a "c" with a line through it.) Twelve-year old me looked at the decimal point, and noted that the sign had a cents sign, and not a dollar sign. So I concluded that the price for the brownies was one-tenth of a cent each. I tried to buy ten of them for a penny. It didn't work. And I was pretty upset about it too. I knew I was right. Plenty of people tried to console me, but no one could explain my error. I was right, and everyone seemed to agree. It took about 40 years, but I finally figured out the lesson of that incident: What people SAY is not nearly as important as what they MEAN. Focus on the ikar, not the tafel. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sat May 26 19:46:16 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 22:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <68109a23-b784-405e-60d5-b1c30853273a@sero.name> Think of saying "netz" instead of "honetz" the same way you do about saying "bus" instead of "autobus", "phone" instead of "telephone", or "flu" instead of "influenza". I recently saw "'bus" written with an apostrophe, but that's very unusual. Most people have no idea that these are abbreviations of longer words. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Sun May 27 05:00:54 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 12:00:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is the meaning of Cholov Yisroel? Message-ID: Please see the video at https://goo.gl/S5mPTn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat May 26 18:36:57 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:36:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Behaaloscha YOU CAN'T WIN 'EM ALL Message-ID: <89C443B9-BCD6-4E3D-A485-59F3CF2C7515@cox.net> Both dedications, the dedication of the Mishkan by the Nesiim and the dedication of the Menorah by Aharon were required. The Midrash mentions that Aharon was depressed that neither he nor his tribe was included in the dedication of the Mishkan. This brings to mind the time when I gave a student of mine a part in the family service that he considered inferior and unimportant. Convinced I had the perfect answer, I confindently and proudly informed him about the dedications of the Mishkan and of the Menorah and how God comforted Aharon by saying that his part of the dedication ceremony was the greatest of all, in that he was charged with the kindling of the Menora. I was sure that would make my pupil feel much better but without batting an eyelash, my student immediately retorted: "Yeah, but you're not God!" I ended up being more depressed than Aharon! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:25:32 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:25:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? Message-ID: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and Reuvain claims insolvency. Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an ongoing business for Pesach? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:27:43 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:27:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? Message-ID: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose. (The gemara in b"b is worth looking at-what exactly is the halachic force of "people don't sell their homes"). Two items: 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? 2. What if the other fundraising fails-would the community sell the Beit Knesset? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 31 11:22:30 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:22:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns > beer over pesach), one source quoted is S?A C?M 99:7, which deals with a > case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows > money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din > is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and > Reuvain claims insolvency. > Do you think it?s a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an > ongoing business for Pesach? Not at all, for two separate reasons. First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. So in this case where the Jew sold not the chametz but the entire business, there's nothing to indicate that the sale was anything but serious and effective. Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to "pierce" it in the name of equity. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 1 03:28:46 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 06:28:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra Message-ID: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> With discussed "Higher" Bible Criticism before, we've discussed the IE on the topic before, RGS went the next step -- the Ramban on the IE on Bible Criticism. I am includng the comment, and I would have written something similar. :-)BBii! -Micha Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student R. Avraham Ibn Ezra has long been a controversial figure. R. Shlomo Luria (Yam Shel Shlomo, intro to Bava Kamma) respectfully but strongly rejects his entire approach to Torah commentary. What does the Ramban, one of the classical commentaries whose work serves as a foundation for modern Jewish thought, think of his predecessor, Ibn Ezra? He certainly disagrees often with Ibn Ezra, sometimes sharply. But there may be a more fundamental reason for opposition. At the end of Ramban's commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim, he writes that anyone who says that Ezra the scribe added to the Torah -- such as Gen. 13:6 or Deut. 3:11 -- is a heretic (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 p. 548). Ibn Ezra famously suggests that four verses imply post-Mosaic interpolations -- Gen. 12:6, 22:14, Deut. 3:11, 31:22. Ramban, who shows clear expertise in Ibn Ezra's Torah commentaryn quotes two of these four verses in describing the heretic! Coincidence? R. Betzalel Naor, in his annotated edition of Rashba's Ma'amar Al Yishma'el (Orot: Spring Valley, NY, 2008, pp. 25-27) finds this correspondence convincing. The author of the commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim must have been condemning Ibn Ezra as a heretic. Even though some supercommentaries and scholars dispute the claim that Ibn Ezra ever intended anything other than that Moshe wrote those verses prophetically, many believe he made the more radical claim.[1] If so, this passage from the Shir Ha-Shirim commentary condemns him as a heretic. However, R. Naor points out that Ramban did not write that commentary. R. Chaim Dov Chavel argues cogently in his introduction to that work that it was written by the earlier, kabbalist R. Ezra of Gerona (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 pp. 473-475). If so, we can ask whether Ramban agreed with R. Ezra's evaluation. R. Naor (ibid., pp. 136-143) makes the following points and suggestions: 1- Even in his introduction to his Torah commentary, Ramban expresses his mixed attitude toward Ibn Ezra, which he calls "a public rebuke and private affection." This might be used to describe a commentary that is both brilliant but occasionally sacrilegious. However, Ramban calls him "Rabbi" Ezra, a term of respect. 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him about Ibn Ezra. 3- Ramban unquestionably rejected any post-Mosaic interpolations into the Torah, as seen in his general introduction to his commentary. While hiss attitude toward the level of prophecy of the Torah varies (commentary to Num. 16:5), that is nowhere near the claim that any verse postdates Moshe. 4- Rabbeinu Tam wrote a poem in praise of Ibn Ezra. Perhaps this influenced Ramban to judge him favorably as an inadvertent heretic, which was a status that, according to the Ra'avad (Hilkhos Teshuvah 3:7), even great scholars fell into. 5- The Chida (Shem Ha-Gedolim, part 1, alef 89) quotes R. Binyamin Spinoza, a late eighteenth century rabbi, who deduces from Ramban's failure to argue against Ibn Ezra's radical suggestions that those comments must be late forgeries (interpolations?). Had Ramban seen them, he would surely have objected. In the end, once we determine that the commentary to Shir Ha-Shirim is misattributed, we can only speculate about Ramban's attitude toward Ibn Ezra. Maybe he agreed with R. Ezra of Gerona's condemnation or maybe he felt the belief was wrong but not heretical. Or maybe, as R. Naor suggested, he rejected the belief as heretical but not the person. (Republished from May '13) [1] On this disagreement, see R. Yonatan Kolatch, Masters of the Word, vol. 2 pp. 310-318. ------------------ J. C. Salomon May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late addition to the text. I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 1 08:03:13 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:03:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <70c7cc6f-c870-c610-b592-25a81940172f@sero.name> I find the entire idea that RABE's "secret of twelve" was a secret heresy to be without foundation, and think it more likely that this is wishful thinking by heretics who would like to find "a great tree" on which to hang their heresy. We don't know what the secret was, because it was a secret, but his comment on Vayishlach makes it unlikely to be what the "bible critics" claim it is. On Bereshis 12:6, he simply says: "If it is not so, then there is a secret here, and the intelligent person should be silent". On Bereshis 22:14, and Devarim 3:11 and 31:22 he makes no comment at all, and indeed there's nothing unusual to hint at, no reason to even suppose these pesukim might not have been written at the same time as what surrounds them. The "secret of the twelve" is in Devarim 1:1, on the words "Eleven days out of Chorev", which makes me think whatever this secret is relates to that, and perhaps to a mystical "twelfth day". It's there that he cryptically mentions these four pesukim, with no context or explanation; the theory that he was hinting at a deep secret heresy in his heart is therefore pure speculation and should be rejected. The Ramban's (or whoever wrote it) comment in Shir Hashirim only means that there existed such heretics in his day; there is not even the hint of a hint that RABE might have been among them. These are the same heretics who claimed him; there's no reason to suppose the Ramban agreed with that claim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sat Jun 2 20:49:06 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2018 23:49:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: >From R'Micha (Avodah V36n64): > When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? > We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. < If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; and "vaya'as kein Aharon." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 00:42:20 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 10:42:20 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua Message-ID: In last weeks parsha we have the Torah stating that Moshe's nevua was unique that Hashem spoke to him directly (see Rambam Yesodei Torah for the list of differences). However, I was bothered by the following question. A number of times the Torah writes Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe v'Aharon leimor where certain halachos are given over to both Moshe and Aharon. The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? In Behaalosecha it is clear that Aharon and Miriam dd not know that Moshe's nevua was different then theirs, yet, if Aharon heard these like a regular nevua as a vision not clearly then how did he not realize that Moshe got a clearer nevua then he did? The first thing Moshe did after getting halachos from Hashem was go over them with Aharon and his sons. Also, the pasuk says that Hashem called out to all 3, Moshe Aharon and Miriam to go out, and Rashi comments that it was one dibur something that a person cannot do. If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 01:54:52 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 11:54:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? Message-ID: At the beginning of Bamidbar the Meshech Chochma asks the following question. A Baal keri is prohibited from being in the machane leviya, if so how could the Leviim ever live with their wives (in the machane leviya) and become a baal keri? Ayen sham his answer. Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A Baal keri is prohibited from going there. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Jun 4 11:24:18 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:24:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> Message-ID: On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns >> beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a >> case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows >> money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din >> is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and >> Reuvain claims insolvency. >> Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an >> ongoing business for Pesach? [Zev Sero:] > Not at all, for two separate reasons. > First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones > property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a > going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and > continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected > to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. AIUI there was no change in the business other than the 'titular" ownership > Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get > away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently > made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of > the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that > the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he > still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity > the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the > Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that > he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So > none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not > an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own > chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, > and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that > CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to > "pierce" it in the name of equity. https://headlinesbook.podbean.com/mf/download/reyy6b/headlines_6-2-18.mp3 6/2/18 Owning Businesses in Halacha and Hashkafa: People who are making a difference- Freddy Friedman, Elchonon Schwartz, Rabbi Yosef Kushner, Nesanel Davis, Shimon Webster, Mr. Sol Werdiger The first half deals with a similar type of arrangement for nursing homes-so aiui you're saying it's up to the Rabbis to evaluate the "need" in each case to determine if haaramah is allowable? KT Joel Rich From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 13:46:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:46:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180604204625.GA25546@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:28:46AM -0400, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : : Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student ... : 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, : as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could : agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him : about Ibn Ezra. ... : J. C. Salomon : May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm : Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that : the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, : before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late : addition to the text. : I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that : certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might : have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate : extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight : verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. Except that the tell-tale idiom is "sod ha-12", not 8. From Devarim 1:1: ... And if you understand sod hasheneim asar... Pit stop: the standard text doesn't even say that, it says "(hasarim) [tz"l hashneim] asar". So there is a slight chance it doesn't even say 12. Back to the IE: ... also "Vayikhtov Moshe" (31:22), "VehaKenaani as Ba'aretz" (Bereishis 12:6), "Har H' Yeira'eh" (Bereishis 22:14), and also "arso eres barzel (Devarim 3:11), you will regonize the truth. If it does refer to the last 12 pesuqim (from Moshe going up Har Nevo), then there are 5 quotes in discussion. 4 refer to the future, likely quotes for someone to say were actually written later. But Og's iron bed? And besides, it's the last 8 pesuqim that amoraim argue how and if Moshe could have written them. Now, if Moshe couldn't write "and Moshe died", then it makes sense to argue that he couldn't write "and Moshe went up Har Nevo" if he never came back. But that is more conjecture, that this "12" is "12 pesuqim", and the last 12 pesuqim at that, and that it is related to chazal's discussion of last 8 pesuqim, and all this despite one of the quotes not having this "problem" of not being true when Moshe left us. And for all we know, the secret could be about prophecy. Even if all 5 were about the future, who knows what secret the IE posited to explain them? One of the parts of the Torah that is NOT in this list is the list of kings of Edom "lifnei melokh melekh liVnei Yisrael", Bereishis 36:31. On which the IE qrites: Some say that this parashah was written bederekh nevu'ah. And Yitzchaqi says in his book that this parashah was written in the days of Yehoshafat, and he explains the generations as he wished. This is why his name was called Yitzchaq -- kol hashomeia yitzachaq li. .. Vechalillah chalilah that the matter is as he said about the days of Yehoshafat. His book is worth burning... And he explains that the kings ran in rapid succession, this being warrior tribes of Edom. And the melekh Yisrael in the pasuq was Moshe, "vayhi bishurun Melekh. A lot of work if the IE was okay with later interpolations of narrative snippets of 12 pesuqim or less. In 2002, RGStudent reposed something from Cardozo at . See fn 50: Most enlightening is Spinoza's observation that some texts of the Torah, such as the ones in Genesis 12:6; 22:14, and Deuteronomy 1:2, must have been written many years after Moshe's death, since they reveal information that refers to latter days. Spinoza relies here on the famous Jewish commentator Ibn Ezra (1088-1167), who wrote that these verses were "mysteries" about "which the wise should be silent" (on Deuteronomy 1:2). The traditional understanding of Ibn Ezra, as also confirmed by the modern Jewish scholar Samuel David Luzzatto (ShaDaL) (1800-1865), is that these passages must be understood as prophetic and anticipating the future. .... However, in RGS's own essay on that web site writes: Also, phrases and even verses were added to the texts that perhaps even these prophets could not have written. For example, Ramban explains (Genesis 8:21) "G-d said in His heart" as meaning that this was only revealed to Moshe at the time of the writing of the Torah. See also Ralbag there and Moreh Nevuchim 1:29. Another case is Genesis 32:33, "Therefore the Children of Israel are not to eat the gid hanasheh." According to the Mishna and Gemara in Chullin 101b, as explained by Rashi, this verse was a later insertion by Moshe. See the Radak's commentary to this verse. It is possible that Ibn Ezra, in his "secrecy", believed that many more verses fall into this category and were inserted into pre-existing narrative by G-d to Moshe. His thesis there is that the Torah was redacted from pre-existing scrolls during the Exodus; that it was this redaction that was dictated to Moshe in Sinai. Since such megillos are named in a few places, it's a pretty hard thesis to totally dismiss. The only question is how much was already given in writing in texts like Seifer Milkhamos Hashem (cf Bamidbar 21:13). Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 14:21:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 17:21:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 11:49:06PM -0400, Michael Poppers via Avodah wrote: : If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two : recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; : and "vaya'as kein Aharon." But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. Y-mi Nedarim 9:4 (violna ed. 30b) has the famous machloqes between R' Aqiva and Ben Azai about whether the kelal gadol baTorah is "ve'havta lerei'akha" or "zeh seifer toledos adam". In the version in the introduction to the Ein Yaaqov, he quotes Ben Zoma, attributes Rav Akiva's opinion to Ben Nanas, and then adds a new opinion: Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi says: We have found a more inclusive verse than that, and it is, "The first lamb you shall sacrifice in the morning and the second lamb you shall sacrifice in the evening." Rabbi Ploni stood up and said: The halachah is like Ben Pazi as it is written, "As all that I show you, the structure of the Mishkan and all its vessels: so shall you do." That makes constancy kind of important. FWIW, here is how my discussion (ch 2. sec. 3) of that quote goes: There are two interesting implications to Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi's and Rabbi Ploni's words. First, Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi could be making the point that Rabbi Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov found in Ben Azzai's position -- the role of personal development. After all, there are a number of verses that discuss this offering; Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi chose a verse that discusses its constant and regular nature. In his opinion, this is the most important verse in the Torah -- even in his or our day, after the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash and there are no korbanos. Perhaps the point here is consistency in avodas Hashem in-and-of-itself, not limited to this one mitzvah. Just as service in the Mishkan has its schedule and routine, so too our observance must be a discipline with well-defined structure and consistency. Second, the anonymous rabbi endorses this view by quoting a verse about the Mishkan and its vessels' structure, their composition, not their service. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi statement is about something done in the Beis HaMikdash as part of its daily service, but the proof is about its structure. This rabbi is relating "so shall you do" not only to following the description of that structure Hashem gave us when building it but also to the discipline of the ritual within it. The discipline in avodas Hashem of the previous implication is a taken as fundamental part of what the building is. At least homiletically, we can say this is true of both microcosms -- not only the Mishkan, but also the human soul, as Rav Shimon ben Pazi is giving importance to structure and consistency even in our era, without a Mishkan or Beis HaMikdash. Discipline in avodas Hashem is not only part of the structure of what the Mishkan is, but also our own soul's structure. This homily would be consistent with Rav Shimon's statement ... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search micha at aishdas.org of a spiritual experience. You are a http://www.aishdas.org spiritual being immersed in a human Fax: (270) 514-1507 experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 15:06:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:06:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180604220616.GC25546@aishdas.org> On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Rn Toby Katz Avodah wrote: > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be > bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before > feeding their children. According the Tosafos (Yuma 77b) and the Yam Shel Shelomo (Chulin 8:31) there isn't any ru'ach ra'ah anymore. Unsurprizingly, the Rambam (Rotzeiach 12:5) doesn't mention ru'ach ra'ah when he discusses not putting food under your bed, his reason is "shema yipol bo davar hamaziq". If it is a modern and mundane issue, I would think ru'ach ra'ah is depression, not a physical illness. The day after Shaul learns he lost his throne, "vatilach ruach E-lokim ra'ah el Sha'ul". (Shemu'el I 18:9) On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:17:24PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Actually, you need to do both for neigl vasr, as you need to get rid of chatzitzos. AhS 161:1, MB s"q 7,10. So the question might be... What's the problem with chatzitzos? Can someone make an argument that it's about places where disease can hide? Then why haqpadah? I really don't know what to do with RASoloveitchik's suggestion that ru'ach ra'ah can be things like germs. If it's a saqanas nefashos thing, then pesaqim should indeed be more maqpidim about things like soap than about using a cup, koach gavra, etc... BUT... this is RAS. I am assuming he did indeed have an explanation. Keeping the discussion alive (and CC-ing R Harry Maryles) to see if we can get down to one. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water micha at aishdas.org that softens the potato, hardens the egg. http://www.aishdas.org It's not about the circumstance, Fax: (270) 514-1507 but rather what you are made of. From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Tue Jun 5 19:06:11 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 22:06:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. < Agreed, and both examples I mentioned are examples of doing, not knowing. The point is that not just "v'halachta bidrachav" but also that "v'halachta" in the path of the noted examples, that one should imitate paragons of *derech H'*. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 05:07:43 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah Message-ID: The article below gives many halachas that are applicable to situations where gentile workers are employed in one's home. IMO it is worth reading carefully. YL Click here to download "Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 6 10:49:54 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:49:54 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Why I support the private kashrut initiative of Tzohar rabbis Message-ID: <628e074c-450f-a464-ed95-2eca5d3ed825@zahav.net.il> Placing this article in Avodah because Rav Melamed uses the model of the 70 elders to show how differences in community leadership should be handled. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22250 A few critical paragraphs: But when groups and institutions try to impose their opinion on members of another circle, and abolish the status of their rabbis (and to boycott them from becoming rabbinical judges and rabbis) we are no longer speaking of a situation where the rabbis of Tzohar should also establish a kashrut organization, but rather a situation in which it is almost obligatory for them to establish one, just like other accepted rabbinic organizations, in order to give halachic and Torah expression to their part in the Torah. If they do not, then they are similar to a prophet who suppresses his prophecy, or as our Sages said: ? Yea, all her slain are a mighty host? ? this refers to a disciple who has attained the qualification to decide questions of law, and does not decide them? (Sotah 22a). How Does a Difficult Dispute Develop? At first, there is an argument over a focused halakhic issue. However, when an agreement is not reached, instead of agreeing to disagree and continuing to respect each other, one side thinks that the other has no authority to retain his position, because, essentially, his position is inferior, since he belongs to a liberal circle, or his position differs from that of most rabbis. Then, that same party departs from the particular halakhic issue they have debated, and moves on to a more acute arena, in which the main argument is that the rabbi against whom he is arguing with is not authorized to express a halachic position, for in any case, who appointed him to be a rabbi who can express a position at all? Since this argument is not convincing enough, and the rabbi who is being attacked remains in his position, consequently we are now moving over to a dispute of a different magnitude ? since we are no longer dealing with a person who rules on a matter without authority, but with a person who undermines the foundations of authority as a whole, and thus, it is compulsory to wage an all-out war against him? From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 11:31:07 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 18:31:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: Please see the article at Eretz Yisroel, Zionism,and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH This article is from The Jewish Observer Vol. 23 No. 6 September 1990/Adar 5751 and is available at https://goo.gl/LNRpZZ YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 7 01:06:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 08:06:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra Message-ID: The letter below appears on pages 113 - 114 of this week's Flatbush Jewish Journal. It is not clear to me that all FJJ readers appreciate the gadlus of Rabbi Shamshon Raphael Hirsch when it came to Torah. Indeed, last week MW (whomever this may be) referred to RSRH as "Reb Shamshon Refoel Hirsch" rather than as Rabbi or Rav or even Rabbiner. Therefore, I feel that I should refer FJJ readers to Rav Yaakov Perlow's article Rav S. R. Hirsch - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra that appears in The World of Hirschian Teachings, An Anthology on the Hirsch Chumash and the Hashkafa of Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, Published for the Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer Foundation, Feldheim, 2008. Reading this article will give one a true understanding of how great a Torah scholar RSRH was. Moreover, the following is from page 102 of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, Architect of Torah Judaism for the Modern World by Rabbi Eliyahu Meir Klugman. We also have the assessment of the K?sav Sofer, Rabbi Avrohom Shmuel Binyamin Sofer, Rabbi of Pressburg and leader of Hungarian Jewry. The K'sav Sofer first met Rabbi Hirsch in Vienna, not long after the latter assumed his post in Nikolsburg. On the first Shabbos after his return to Pressburg, a large crowd came to his home for Shalosh Seudos in order to hear his observations about the new Chief Rabbi. Their curiosity was understandable, since, as followers of the Chasam Sofer, the K'sav Sofer's father, they harbored deep suspicions of anyone versed in secular studies, which they considered a potent danger to the Jewish people. The K?sav Sofer described his meeting with Rabbi Hirsch in the following terms: ?We spoke at length on Torah subjects with the new ?Rosh Medinah? and whatever topic we discussed, his reply showed that he had Shas and poskim on his fingertips. We, the rabbonim of Hungary, have to consider ourselves very fortunate that he holds us to be his superiors as scholars, for if he were only aware of the extent of his own scholarship, we would have no rest from him.? Finally, a talmud muvhak of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, ZT"L, told me that Rav Hunter once told him that anything that Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch wrote is Kodesh Kedoshim. Based on this It should be clear to all that what RSRH wrote about one going to see the wonders of nature is to be taken very seriously. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 7 06:02:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 13:02:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? Message-ID: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, how else might the desired result be accomplished? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 7 07:48:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 10:48:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: [VBM] Chassidic Service of God (continued) Message-ID: <20180607144830.GA19716@aishdas.org> This is where our compartmentalization into camps holds us back. The Piaseczner Rebbe (the "Aish Qodesh", R' Kalonymous Kalman Shapiro zt"l Hy"d) is largely reinventing Mussar. Admittedly his goals are different; the elements of the ideal Jew that are emphasized in Chassidus and Mussar differ. But he procedes to build and advocate from scratch a toolset for somthing that another tenu'ah invested the lion's share of their effort on -- self-awareness. To quote RYGB's loose translation of REEDessler (MmE vol 5 pp 35-39), cut-n-pasted from : In our times: The qualities of "Emet" that personified the Ba'alei Mussar [Mussar Masters] are already extinct. We no longer find individuals whose hearts are full with profound truth, with a strong and true sense of Cheshbon HaNefesh [complete and rigorous reckoning of one's spiritual status and progress]... Contemporary Chassidus lacks the component that was once at its core: Avodas Hashem with dveykus... For today's era, there remain only one alternative: To take up everything and anything that can be of aid to Yahadus; the wisdom of both Mussar and Chassidus together. Perhaps together they can inspire us to great understandings and illuminations. Perhaps together they might open within us reverence and appreciation of our holy Torah. Perhaps the arousal of Mussar can bring us to a little Chassidic hislahavus. And perhaps the hislahavus will somewhat fortify one for a Cheshbon HaNefesh. Perhaps through all these means together we may merit to ascend in spirituality and strengthen our position as Bnei Torah [adherents of a Torah centered lifestyle] with an intensified Judaism. May G-d assist us to attain all this! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight, micha at aishdas.org and he wants to sleep well that night too." http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok Fax: (270) 514-1507 Yeshivat Har Etzion PHILOSOPHY > Great Thinkers > The Piaseczner Rebbe > Shiur #24: Chassidic Service of God (continued) Dr. Ron Wacks Ways of Achieving Hitragshut (continued) The Importance of Self-Awareness One of the primary keys for entering the gates of inner service is self-awareness. Remarkably, although a person is generally concerned for his own wellbeing, he is not always aware of what is happening in his own inner world. His psyche is in constant movement, expressing its will and its aspirations, but even though the person may sense something going on, he is not equipped to interpret it and to take the appropriate steps: The hiddenness and imperceptibility of what is happening inside him distances a person greatly from himself. He is unfamiliar with himself and ignorant of what goes on inside him. Even the psyche of the simplest person never ceases its restlessness and writhing, crying out in supplication over its lowliness, and over all the blows and trials and tribulations that he causes it through his foolish actions, speech, and thoughts. The fact that he senses none of this is because he gives no thought to listening to this tempestuous wretch.[1] A person naturally tends to occupy himself with matters external to himself; he is not attentive to his own inner workings. It is easier to engage with the outside world, with its affairs of greater and lesser importance, than it is to listen inwardly. Even when he detects inner movement, he is unable to decode and make sense of it: For that is the way of man: he always strive for that which is extraneous to himself, the affairs of the world, both those that are vital and those that are not. He interests himself in what happens at the end of the world, but he pays no heed to his own psyche, and does not listen and give attention to the business that is within him. Or he may sense it, but since even at the moment that he senses it his desire, his attention, and his thought are turned to the lowly muck of this world, he hears the moaning and its voice only weakly. This may be compared to a person who is asleep and a mosquito bites him on his forehead. If he is a merchant, he dreams that a bag of his merchandise has fallen on his forehead and struck him; if he is a tailor, he dreams that his needle has pricked his forehead, etc. Each individual perceives his inner workings in the guise of his own dreams.[2] The psyche expresses its longings in different forms, but often a person is unable to decode any of these spiritual needs, such as a desire for teshuva and the fear of God. Sometimes, when he feels something oppressive inside him, he goes to the refrigerator and takes out a bottle of sweet drink and some cake, or he tries to distract himself by joking with his friends. Often, a person makes the mistake of thinking that it is his body that is suffering physical hunger, and he believes that he can satiate it by filling his stomach - while in fact it is his psyche that is starved and crying out in distress: Sometimes the psyche of a Jew is animated by regret, teshuva, submission, fear of God, and so on, and the person feels some sort of movement and restlessness within himself, but he has no idea what the problem is. He thinks he may be hungry, or thirsty, or in need of some wine and wafers, or he may think that he has fallen into melancholy, and in order to lift his spirits he chatters playfully with the members of his household, or goes over to a friend to joke and engage in lashon ha-ra, gossip, foolishness, etc.[3] R. Kalonymus's grandfather, author of Maor Va-Shemesh, also addresses the connection between an unhappy psyche and stuffing oneself with food. Attention should be paid to the chain of wrongdoing: Bnei Yisrael complain, convincing themselves of how bad things are for them. This leads them to melancholy, which gives rise to the craving for meat and the punishment that follows: "And when the people complained, it displeased the Lord" - This means that they fell into melancholy... and the Lord's fire burned amongst them, for black bile is detestable and abhorrent, for it is a tinge of idolatry... and for this reason they were punished. And Moshe prayed, and the fire subsided, but it continued through their melancholy, for they felt a lusting and they said, "Who will feed us meat?" For as we explained, the lust for food is drawn from black bile... Therefore, one has to distance oneself far from melancholy, for it brings a person to all sorts of sins. And despondence begins with a growing desire to eat, as we see when a person is mired in black bile, heaven forfend, he eats with lust, ravenously, and very quickly.[4] When a person tries to "quiet" his inner distress with sweets and snacks, not only has his psyche not received what it really wanted, but it is greatly pained by his failure to understand its true needs. Sometimes, after a person continually ignores and steamrolls his inner voice, it simply grows silent: Sometimes, after all of these actions which he has done, he still feels inner discomfort, since with these worthless medicines not only has he not cured the sores of his psyche, nor given it relief from the blows that he has administered to it, but he has in fact added further injury and assault. But sometimes it happens that after these misguided actions he actually feels better, and his spirit is quieted within him, because the blows and injuries and sores that he has added through his actions have rendered his psyche unconscious, or he has piled mounds of dirt and refuse over it to the point that it is completely hidden. Then he will no longer hear even the slightest peep out of it - and he can relax.[5] The psyche also transmits signals of joy, not only distress. A person often misses these signals too, failing to give them expression. For example, when a person fulfills a mitzva or rejoices in his prayer, and his psyche awakens with joy and hitragshut, he will fail to notice this - both because of his general insensitivity to his inner world and because his attention is oriented elsewhere. R. Kalonymus argues that the way to achieve hitragshut and hitlahavut is not by "importing" new feelings from outside of oneself; they are already to be found inside him. However, they must be given more powerful expression and allowed to effect a greater influence on his consciousness: It is not new excitements that you need to seek, nor a heavenly-initiated awakening. First and foremost, the work is required of you yourself, for everything exists within you. You are capable of hitragshut, and you are a person who is able to attain fervor; you simply need to try to get to know yourself and what is going on inside. Your psyche is full of signals, shouts, and supplications, and all you need to do is to provide space within yourself within which it can be revealed and strengthened. Then you will come to know and feel your natural hitragshut, with no need to garb yourself and your needs.[6] R. Kalonymus not only demands self-awareness, but also explains how to attain it. A person has to learn to listen to his own inner world and ask himself questions: Is my psyche happy, and if so, about what? Is my psyche sad, and if so, why? What are the inner feelings that accompany me in this situation, and how did they come about? At first, this work will involve only the major movements of the psyche. It is not advisable to start with weaker movements, since, owing to their delicate nature, their meaning is not always clear. Attention should therefore be paid to the stronger signals, and when one notices them, he should "provide space" and allow them expression. This is facilitated through paying attention to them, strengthening them, and allowing them to reveal themselves through our power of imagination. We will now elaborate on each of these tools individually. (To be continued) Translated by Kaeren Fish _______________________ [1] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 29. [2] Ibid., p. 40. [3] Ibid. [4] R. Kalman Kalonymus Epstein Ha-Levi, Maor Va-Shemesh (Jerusalem, 5748), Parashat Beha'alotekha. [5] Ibid., p. 29. [6] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 30. Copyright ? 1997-2017 by Yeshivat Har Etzion From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 7 21:17:05 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 06:17:05 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <950f4b82-36d2-0f57-abef-73c113119730@zahav.net.il> RSH's third objection to Rav Kalisher is the key one (RSH couldn't imagine that non-religious Jews could be the vehicle for redemption). Once you say that "I can't imagine. . . " than everything else has to fit into that paradigm that you just set up for yourself. The author's conclusions are also strange. To mention all the benefits and great things that have come from the state but to still look at it as if it is a treif piece of meat boggles my mind. I would also add that if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - he should move here. Like I always tell my Reform Jewish friends - If you move here, you get a vote which is 10,000 times (at least) more important than Facebook posts. Ben From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 07:09:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:09:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi Sacks on 'The Great Partnership' Message-ID: <20180608140928.GA11777@aishdas.org> R/L J Sacks on Science and Religion. In short: It's Gould's notion of non-overlapping magesteria -- they can't contradict, the discuss different topics. But RJS says it so well, giving the idea emotional "punch". And sometimes even maaminim need a reminder that the point of religion isn't to fill in the gaps in our scientific knowledge. (I know I do.) Our rishonim offer answers to the question of why an Omnicient and Omnipotent G-d would create a universe that requires His intervention once in a while. His Wisdom inheres more in the things science CAN explain than in the miracles that even in principle can't be studied scientifically. (Pace the Ralbag, whose actual position on nissim is a longer discussion.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LltoUg_WL2k That said, I think this is overstatement, as they do overlap when it comes to discussion of origins. I would instead posit "barely overlapping magesteria" -- they only overlap at the fringes, where no open question can threaten my trust in either. Yahadus explains the "why?" of life to well to question, and many scientific theories do too well at the "how?" I have a question about where they seem to contradict? Nu nu. Scientists believe that quantum gravity has an answer, and don't expect either QM or Relativity to be overturned just because we have a question where their fringes overlap. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 09:19:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 12:19:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? Message-ID: From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) apply only to male Kohanim, or does it also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V?kidashto applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K?Hilchaso 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash. This description applies only to men and not to women. Although the daughters of Kohanim are entitled to eat Teruma and may eat from certain Korbanos that are designated only for Kohanim, they are not eligible to serve in the Beis Hamikdash. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:48:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:48:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? Message-ID: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> I wanted to talk this out here, as this se'if in the AhS appears to use the kind of reasoning that is exactly what I argued for decades with C rabbis (and more recently with one or two of the more innovative OO rabbis) isn't how halakhah should be done. AhS CM 89:2 discusses the reason for a taqanah that if a sakhir and the BhB disagree about whether the sakhir had been paid, the sakhir can make a shevu'ah binqitas cheifetz, and the employer would have to pay. Normally, f two sides make conflicting unsupported claims, the rule would be that the defendent (the nitba) would make a shevu'as heises (which is a less demanding shevu'ah than the shevu'ah BNC) and not pay. A taqanah beyond the usual hamotzi meichaveiro alav hara'ayah to disuade liars. The stated reason for treating the sakhir as a special case is that many times the employer has many workers, and it's more likely he wouldn't remember the details of who he paid what than the employee not remembering the details of getting paid. However, the AhS continues, this doesn't explain why chazal worried more about employers than salespeople. Someone who has a lot of customers is prone to the same parallel likelihood of confusion. So, he explains that the iqar haataqanah is because employees have a lot riding on getting paid, "nosei es nafsho lehachayos nafesho venefesh benei beiso, chasu chaza"l alav..." And therefore even if it's a boss who has only one employee, and he isn't overhwlmed keeping track of vay, lo chilqu chakhamim. Doesn't this sound bad? Chazal really had some social end in mind, so they invented some pro forma excuse to justify their conclusion. I guess that in dinei mamunus, Chazal can do whatever they want -- hefqer BD hefqer -- and therefore on /that/ ground they can force payment of a worker for the sake of social justice. But that's not what the AhS invokes. Thoughts? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 12:15:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:15:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din but a takanah. By definition, takanos are ends-driven; they're made not because this is what we believe Hashem ordered, nor to avoid some issur, but in order to achieve some desirable goal. The same applies to the usual shvuas hesses that Chazal instituted; it's to achieve the two desirable goals of creating a disincentive for defendants to lie, and of assuring the plaintiff that the courts are not biased against him. So I see no problem with Chazal making a special takana for the benefit of employees, since the Torah itself gives their needs priority, and gives the reason that employees often risk their lives for their livelihood. And just as the Torah does not distinguish between those employees who actually do risk their lives and those who sit on comfortable chairs in air-conditions offices and risk nothing more serious than a paper-cut or RSI, Chazal saw no need to distinguish between a lone employee and one among many. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 12:53:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:53:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:35PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din : but a takanah... Not just a taqanah, a taqanah that needs an justification for why they're not following the din deOraisa. And so simply saying "it's a taqanah" doesn't really satisfy me. DeOraisa, the employer would have the right to not pay the money. The usual taqanah for conflicting claims would require he make a shevu'as heises first. Here, we're putting the power to extract the employer's money despite the deOraisa. Had the taqanah not violated the deOraisa, but went "beyond" it, I wouldn't have asked. And as I said, had the AhS invokved hefqer BD hefqer, we would need no excuse for how Chazal can move money despite the deOraisa. But he doesn't. Instead, he says they came up with a justication that isn't real. That opens a whole pandora's box of ascribing hidden "social justice" reasons for legislation that has an explicit explanation already given. And it makes it sound like legal mechanism can indeed be nothing more than a hopp to jump through, rather than justification in-and-of itself. So my question isn't "how did they make this taqanah", but "how can you claim that they wanted to ignore a deOraisa because they thought they had a 'more moral' alternative, and then just found some way to legally justify it?" :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the micha at aishdas.org second time and as if you had acted the first http://www.aishdas.org time as wrongly as you are about to act now! Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 12:15:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 15:15:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:52 PM 6/8/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's >OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: >: A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto >: applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso >: 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he >: offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... > >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to be "honored" like all other Kohanim? I recall that there was a Kohein when I lived in Elizabeth who had a deformed hand. However, I think that he still got the first aliya. However, I do not think that he duchened. He left the shul right before duchening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:52:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:52:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: : A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto : applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso : 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he : offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 13:21:23 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:21:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:09PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to : >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. : : If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability : that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to : be "honored" like all other Kohanim? ... I think aliyah laTorah is different than duchaning because it's not about the kohein as a kohein, but mishum tiqun olam. So, we divy out the kavod according to strict rules, so that society runs smoother. Not based on qedushah. Maybe it's even kavod vs qedushah. Tangents: BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not a kofer. There is also a separate discussion is someone who is wheelchair bound can get an aliyah at all, or if the chiyuv for an oleh to stand is me'aqiev. From the pasuq "amod imadi". The accepted pesaq really only permits calling someone who can't stand if their reason for not being able to stand is obvious or known to the tzibbur. IOW, oneis Rachamanah patrei for his non-standing, but the kavod haTorah is an issue if it looks bad to the tzibbur. I didn't spend the same time researching this tangent, as you can tell by the lack of a single source. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe micha at aishdas.org you can be certain of improving, http://www.aishdas.org and that's your own self. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aldous Huxley From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:41:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9e545852-4e47-2e1a-0f1b-f6fe418d3daa@sero.name> I don't think it's accurate to say that mid'oraisa he doesn't have to pay. If he really does owe the money then mid'oraisa he has to pay, and has an *additional* obligation to pay this debt over all other debts, because of "lo solin". The only question is whether he really owes the money or not. Normally, the way the Torah left things, we can't be sure he owes it, so we can't *force* him to pay; we have to leave it up to his own conscience. But his obligation (or lack thereof) is unchanged. Now Chazal come along and meddle with that setup, for social reasons. In order to discourage defendants from falsely denying their liability, and in order to give plaintiffs a sense that justice has been done, they instituted the sh'vuas hesses. If you don't swear we'll make you pay, despite the Torah saying we can't. According to you, how could they do that? Here Chazal went a bit further: We can't make the defendant swear, because he may honestly have forgotten or got confused, so we tell the plaintiff that if he's willing to swear, not just hesses but binkitas chefetz, then we'll believe him, and once we do believe him the *Torah* says the defendant must pay. Comes the Aruch Hashulchan and asks, what about the exceptional case where the defendant is not confused and unlikely to have forgotten? And what about other defendants who may be confused or have forgotten? And he answers "lo plug" because there's a deeper reason for the takana here. It's not just that we're worried about the defendant inadvertently making a false oath; if he's really worried about that let him pay up, but if he's not worried we won't be. The deeper reason why we've given the plaintiff a slight edge here is that we're emulating the Torah itself, which made the "takana" of "lo solin" for the explicit reason that employees *in general* risk their lives and so deserve extra protection. And just as it did not distinguish between employees, so we won't either. I have a bigger question, though: This takana seems to be biased *against* the employee whose employer is a yerei shamayim. Without the takana the employer would decline to swear because he can't be sure he's right, and he'd have to pay. Now we say no, you don't have to pay until we test the employee, more rigorously than we were going to test you. So mah ho'ilu chachamim betakanasam? It seems as if our real concern here is not for the employee's welfare but to protect honest employers from employee fraud! That's surely a worthy goal, but opposite to the one the AhS posits. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 9 20:19:14 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2018 23:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Korach "There's Good Even In The Worst Of Us" Message-ID: The rabbis saw a hint that while the Korah rebellion ended so tragically, it had the seeds of redemption. In the Shabbos Maariv we recite Psalm 92: Tzaddik katamar yifrach, the righteous will blossom like the palm tree (v. 13). The last letters of those 3 Hebrew words (kuf, reish, chet) spell Korah. Although blinded by anger and envy, Korah's egalitarian vision will indeed be established. Then the "righteous will blossom like the palm tree, and grow mighty like a cedar in Lebanon, planted in the house of the Lord." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:47:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <36fd05b2-e021-0e98-cdcc-6e84353eb84b@sero.name> On 08/06/18 16:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. > Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the > first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not > a kofer. This is not just RMF, it's the plain halacha. A kohen who eats treif and breaks shabbos can even duchen, let alone get the first aliyah. Even if he's living with a nochris he can still duchen. But the moment she converts and marries him he can no longer duchen. And if he can't duchen then of course he can't get the first aliya either. (The baal mum is different. The only reason he can't duchen is because the deformity is in his hand; if it were anywhere else he could duchen. And even so he still has a *chiyuv* to duchen, which is why he has to leave before retzei in order to avoid it. A cohen married to a grusha doesn't have to leave, since he is a temporary chalal and thus has no chiyuv.) It seems to me that "vekidashto" *does* apply to the wives of cohanim, because for purposes of kavod the general rule is ishto kegufo, and a wife who marries up gets her husband's social status. As for his unmarried daughters, it seems to me that they too are included in their father's status for this purpose, since they are called by his name. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 11 08:07:53 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:07:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. There are two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Should the Kohanim be asked to leave the shul during Kriyas HaTorah, so that both Yisroelim will receive aliyos? A. The Mishnah Berurah (135:9) writes that a Kohen may not give up his aliyah because we are obligated to honor a Kohen. This is the case not only on Shabbos or Yom Tov when the Shuls are crowded and it will be noticeable, but even on a Monday or Thursday when it is less obvious. However, many poskim, including Igros Moshe (OC 3:20), write that if there is a pressing need on a Monday or Thursday, a Kohen may be mochel (forgo) his kovod and give up his right to the first aliyah. In such a situation, the Kohen exits the Shul before the Torah reading so as not to cast any doubts on his lineage. In contrast, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt?l held that it is not proper for a Kohen to relinquish his aliyah. Aside from the issue of the Kohen being mochel (forgoing) the honor of receiving the first aliyah, there will also be a deficiency in the Kriyas HaTorah itself. The Gemara (Megilla 21b) states that the three aliyos on Monday and Thursday and on Shabbos Mincha were instituted to correspond to the three categories of Jews: Kohanim, Levi?im and Yisroelim. If a Kohen is not called up for an aliyah, the Kriyas HaTorah is lacking this kiyum (fulfillment) of reflecting the three categories of Jews. Therefore, one should not ask a Kohen to forgo his aliyah, since this would diminish the fulfillment of the mitzvah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Jun 11 19:53:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:23:36 +0930 Subject: [Avodah] Kashrus - Wooden Sticks and Feathers Message-ID: If a wooden stick is used to stir a hot pot of non-K meat, it becomes non-K. It will in turn, render a pot of hot Kosher food non-K, if it is used, whilst fresh, to stir that pot. But, wood is not a food. May one eat the shavings of that wooden stick? Probably yes. Hog hair is not a food and it cannot be deemed to be non-K. Therefore one may sprinkle hog hair on ones food, or cook it in ones soup. Does it get worse if the hog hair is first cooked in a pot of non-K meat? Probably yes. This is an issue faced today by Kashrus agencies regarding food ingredients/additives that are extracted from non-foods, like bird feathers. In order to facilitate plucking, the dead, non-Shechted birds have been plunged into a tank of boiling water. Thus the feathers have absorbed the non-K taste of the birds. Although the feathers are dissolved in acids in order to extract what will be used as food additives, this consideration is not accepted regarding gelatine since gelatine is a 'food' at the conclusion of its processing, and it is similarly not accepted by the Kashrus agencies for feathers. Some suggest that there is a difference between the two. Gelatine is worse because it is extracted from the non-K item itself i.e. the skin and bones, whereas the non-K absorbed in the feathers, is not the source of the extracted food/additive which are derived exclusively from the feathers that are a non-food. Therefore, even though skin and bones do become inedible during their processing, this is just a temporary state, generated by acids and alkali, which are removed from the finished product and the finished product is essentially still the same skin and bones. Whereas the product extracted from feathers is entirely disassociated with the absorbed non-K flavour and is therefore K. Nevertheless, a well known Rav argues that in any case where the chemical is removed, the product returns to its non-K status, even in the case of feathers. It will permitted only if the chemical remains but is camouflaged by other additives. Therefore, feathers and what is derived from them remain prohibited because whatever chemicals are used to process and extract the foods/additives, are removed. Is it possible that the foods/additives extracted from the feathers are permitted because all, or almost all of the absorbed non-K flavour is removed - in other words, just as we can Kasher our wooden stick, so too we can deem the feathers to have been Kashered? Now if we were to actually Kasher the feathers or the wooden stick, we require 60 times the volume of the stick. For example, a 500g stick requires 30 litres [500gX60=30,000g] and 3 tonnes of feathers would require [3,000litresX60=500,000 litres] which we obviously dont have in the normal processing. Now the only reason we cannot Kasher in less than 60 is ChaNaN [ChaTiCha NaAsis Neveilah] This means, Kashering is not a process of dilution of the prohibited component that is absorbed until it is less that 1:60, in which case we could immerse the non-K spoon or feathers in 100 small pots of boiling water and each dip would further dilute the concentration of the absorbed Issur Kasheing is rather a process that MUST revoke the prohibited status. If it is not revoked - i.e. it is immersed in a pot that does not have more than 60, then EVERYTHING becomes non-K and the spoon is just as non-K as it was before it was immersed. In other words ChaNaN applies to Kelim. And yet the Kosher agencies permit the additives extracted from non-K feathers because the feathers are not food but a Keli, and are therefore not limited by ChaNaN. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Jun 11 11:09:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:09:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:19 PM 6/11/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would also add that >if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >he should move here. Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who come here collecting for all sorts of things? What would they do if there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious community of Jews in the US? Indeed, how many religious Jews living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things. Is this not a huge mitzva? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 11 20:48:41 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 05:48:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <4a055873-1dcb-8b0f-2b31-69cec4cbdb81@zahav.net.il> 1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. 2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - what does that mean? Ben On 6/11/2018 8:09 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the > frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who > come here collecting for all sorts of things?? What would they do if > there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious > community of Jews in the US?? (1) Indeed, how many religious Jews > living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things.? Is > this not a huge mitzva? (2) > > YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 12 05:36:49 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah Message-ID: Please see the article at Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah by Dr. Leo Levi This article appeared in the December 1988 issue of the Jewish Observer which is available at https://goo.gl/9JUkt4 YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 11:25:42 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:25:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? In-Reply-To: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <10180612182542.GA32068@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 01:27:43PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a : Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) : but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose... However, when fundraising, pidyon shevuyim comes first, even after the funds were raised and the building materials bought for the not-yet-existent shul. SA YD 252:1. And the Tur says this is the only mitzvah we may sell those building supplies for. : 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities : and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent : in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? Is this distinction more than semantic? You are asking whether the "other priorities" are outside the label "tzedaqah" and therefore "other halakhot", or within the label, and therefore tzedaqah's priorities would be "multivariate". But the word "tzedaqah" has multiple usages. For example, in the sense we have been using it, we've been including pidyon shevuyim and binyan bhk"n. But it could be used to refer to supplying the poor with their needs exclusively. Or to mean their needs and dei machsero. Etc... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. micha at aishdas.org I awoke and found that life was duty. http://www.aishdas.org I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:31:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 10:42:20AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like : Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem : spoke to both? ... : If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would : seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply : they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. Like "shamor vezakhor bedibur echad"? There is no proof they all heard the same thing, never mind in the same way. But that's not where I wanted to go. If we take the Rambam's approach to the uniqueness of Moshe's nevu'ah, then the difference isn't in the "Dibbur" (which didn't actually involve heard words, leshitaso). It's in the shomeia'. Moshe's seikhel was able to accept the nevu'ah unmediated. Others, the same message could only be received via koach hadimyon so that it reaches the navi's conscious mind cloaked in visions and metaphoric sensations. So, if Hashem did make one dibbur to both, Moshe would still receive it Peh-el-peh and Aharon would experience the revelation as a prophetic vision. OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then we are left with two possibilities: - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, and passing Torah down the generations, etc... - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording the kelal, there could be others. There are other potential exceptions, most enigmatically Bil'am (Yalqut Shim'oni 966) on the very pasuq that describes Moshe's nevu'ah as being "Panim al panim" -- "velo qam navi od beYisrael keMoshe", but among the other nations, there was Bil'am. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that micha at aishdas.org a person can change their future http://www.aishdas.org by merely changing their attitude. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:39:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:39:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? In-Reply-To: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180612203937.GB20060@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 01:02:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 : minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority : of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to : reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish : the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, : how else might the desired result be accomplished? Through unofficial norms. It wasn't all that long ago (at most a couple of decades) when speed was left to the chazan watching the rav (or the chazan himself, if the rav is at another minyan), and the norms of the minyan set the chazan's pace without a watch and often without conscious thought. But then, even in those days people were coming late. I think you're dealing with a misdiagnosis. To my mind, the only real way to get people to come on time and to stay for davening and not spend the time learning with breaks for prayer is to offer programming that helps people relate to davening. If you don't cure the problem of boredum, people will come late regardless of the scheduling system, and find excuses to step out, whether physically or mentally. I would suggest the minyan in question explore in that direction, rather than worry about how Yishtabach time is determined. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. micha at aishdas.org - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 12 14:24:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 17:24:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> References: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <233e14ea-9b86-d3dc-f8fc-2d8bb4c8c50c@sero.name> On 12/06/18 16:31, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part > of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah > itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, > and passing Torah down the generations, etc... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording > the kelal, there could be others. Other possibilities: * Moshe told Yehoshua what he should write the next day. * The Rambam says that after a navi's vision a mal'ach explains it to him. I see no reason why the mal'ach in Yehoshua's vision could not have told him exactly what he should write. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Wed Jun 13 06:07:13 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:07:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW SHOULD COME FROM THE LETTER Message-ID: <9D3675F5-16E2-4542-A632-D76A033B1BCE@cox.net> There?s the story of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi who, when studying Torah, heard the crying of his infant grandson. The elder rebbe rose from his studying and soothed the baby to sleep. Meanwhile, his son, the boy?s father, was too involved in his study to hear the baby cry. When R. Zalman noticed his son?s lack of involvement, he proclaimed: ?If someone is studying Torah and fails to hear the cry of a baby, there is something very wrong with his learning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 13 12:29:17 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 21:29:17 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Perhaps there are several aspects of nevuah. One is the hearing, which Moshe did better. Another is the experience itself.? Here, it doesn't matter if Moshe's experience was "better" than Aaron's and in fact the word better doesn't apply. Aaron experienced this totality called nevuah and he did it his way. After doing that, he isn't the same person, or the same cohen. The same would apply to the hundreds of thousands of people who experienced nevuah but didn't have anything recorded. They became different people, and their avodat Hashem was completely upgraded as a result of the experience. Ben On 6/3/2018 9:42 AM, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was > the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 13 12:51:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:51:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah Message-ID: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> >From your friendly neighborhood clipping service. Taken from , with transliteration added for Avodah digest purposes. R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" of "Torah lishmah" means. I intend to reply, once I have time to collect a mar'eh maqom or two. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Tvunah in English Beit Midrash for Birurei Halachah Binyan Zion Under the Leadership of Maran HaRav Asher Weiss Shlita Learning Torah L'Shma Introductory Note Our Sages[1] have greatly commended one who learns Torah Lishmo -- literally, for its own sake.[2] Many times in the Talmud [Pesachim 50b, Nazir 23b, Horiyos 10b, Sotah 22b, Sotah 47a, Sanhedrin 105b, Erchin 16b] they have stated that one should always learn Torah, even if it not Lishmo, for through this one will eventually reach Lishmo. The goal, though, is total Lishmo. Two questions have to be dealt with: Firstly, is there anything negative or positive if one enjoys one's learning? Secondly, what precisely is Torah Lishmoh? Position One -- Enjoyment Is Not Ideal The Agrah D'Kallah[3] states that the disciples of the Ba'al Shem Tov asked their master if there is a problem if one enjoys learning Torah. He answered that since this is the very nature of Torah, as is written in Tehillim[4], "the statutes of Hashem are straight, [they] gladden the heart," Hashem will not act unfairly towards a person[5] and punish him for having had such enjoyment. This statement seems clear that the ultimate aim would be not to derive any enjoyment from one's learning. A similar sentiment seems to have been echoed by Rav Chaim Volozhiner. He seems to writes[6] that one who enjoys his learning does not commit a sin.[7] On the other hand, the Eglei Tal[8] writes that he has heard some people make a grave mistake, thinking that the ideal is for one to learn without enjoyment. He argues vehemently that one must love and enjoy one's learning. The one whom the Eglei Tal was arguing with was the Yismach Yisrael. He writes[9] that the true learning of Torah is only when one learns with no intention of any enjoyment at all. My feeling is that there is room for both the position of the Eglei Tal and that of the Yismach Yisrael to be correct. On one hand, Hashem wants us to enjoy His Torah, and, as we shall discuss in length soon, it is the proper way for one to study Torah. However, there are many instances where one does not enjoy learning, either because one has had a bad day, or because it is a piece of material which really does not grab his interest. In such a case, one needs to recall the words of the Yismach Yisroel that one needs to study Torah even if one does not have any enjoyment. Position Two -- Enjoyment Is Ideal In my opinion, it seems clear from many Rishonim that enjoyment and pleasure in one's learning is an integral part of the process of Torah study. Firstly, the Mishnah in Avos[10] states that when one studies Torah one needs to know in front of Whom one toils. Rabbeinu Yonah[11] explains that just as the Torah was the plaything of Hashem[12], so to speak, before the creation of the world, so too one's Torah should be one's own plaything. This seems to state clearly that deriving pleasure for Torah study is an ideal. Secondly, the general rule regarding commandments is that they were not given for pleasure[13], and therefore the pleasure of having fulfilled a commandment is not Halachikally considered pleasure. For example, if one took a vow not to derive pleasure from one's fellow, one's fellow may still blow the Shofar on his behalf, since the mere fact that one's fellow is enabling the fulfilment of one's commandment is not considered pleasure.[14] However, regarding the commandment of Torah study, Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar writes[15] that the essence of the commandment is to enjoy one's learning. Therefore, says Rabbeinu Avraham, if one forbade one's fellow from using one's Torah scroll, one's fellow may not use it. Again, this is a clear statement that enjoying one's learning is ideal. [A note of explanation is in order. It is difficult to understand how Rabbeinu Avraham can state that enjoyment is the essence of learning Torah. It is understandable how it is an integral part -- but to be the essence? I think his intent is as follows. The Shulchan Oruch HaRav[16] argues that there are two separate commandments of learning Torah. One is to study the Torah, and the other is to know the Torah. In my opinion this particular formulation is difficult, since we do not find that the Rishonim count the commandment of Torah study as two separate commandments.[17] Rather, it seems that these two categories make up the commandment. The commandment is to learn, while the essence and purpose of this learning is in order to know the Torah. The proof to this understanding of the commandment is that the commandment of Torah study is the verse veshinantam levanekha -- "And you shall teach your children,"[18] and our Sages explain[19] that the word veshinantam is to be expounded from the root shinen -- sharp. The words of Torah should be totally clear to oneself, to the extent that if one is asked about a given Torah matter one should be able to answer immediately, without babbling. This teaches us that the essence of the study is to achieve clear knowledge. Since the clarity of Torah knowledge is the essence of the commandment of Torah study, and this clarity of knowledge brings one great pleasure, Rabbeinu Avraham writes that the essence of the commandment of Torah study is to have pleasure from it.] A third proof: If deriving pleasure from the study of Torah is not the ideal state, how could it be that our Sages instituted the words, "veha'arev na es divrei Sorasekha befinu" in the morning blessing on the Torah? However, it could be that this is not a proof. The Avudraham[20] cites two verses to explain the word ????? in this context. The first is from Malachi[21] -- Ve'orvah Lashem minchas Yehudah viYrushalayim kiymei olam ukhshanim qadmonios -- "And the flour-offering of Yehudah and Yerushalayim will be pleasing to Hashem as the days of old and the years past." However, his second verse is from Tehillim[22] -- arov avdekha letov, which the Ibn Ezra[23] explains is the same root as an areiv -- a guarantor -- "Guarantee Your servant for good". Accordingly, the blessing is to be understood as a request from Hashem that He should act as a guarantor that our children should know the Torah, and does not refer to a request for having pleasure from the Torah. On the other hand, Rashi[24] explains that this blessing is a request that the study of Torah be with the tremendous pleasure of loving, feeling loved by, and being close to, Hashem. His interpretation is also cited by the Avudraham.[25] According to this interpretation, there is strong proof that pleasure is an ideal part of the study of Torah. Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind on this thought. 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must learn Torah in order to fulfil it. Support for these Positions All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the Rishonim. 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov. 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Uniting the Opinions However, in my opinion, it seems that these are really three sides to one coin. Before I demonstrate this, I would like to show some indications in this direction: 1. Although Rashi in Brachos[38] writes that Lishmo means in order to find out what to do, however in his commentary to Ta'anis he writes[39] that Lishmo means to fulfil Hashems will. 2. Although the Ba'al Shem Tov seems to be of the opinion that Lishmo means in order to fulfil the will of Hashem, however two of his main disciples[40] write that one must learn in order to act. Therefore it seems to me that all these three interpretations are really three parts of one whole. The first step is that one has to learn in order to fulfil the will of Hashem. However, what is His will? It is that one should learn and know clearly His Torah. What is the purpose of us knowing his Torah? In order that one should know what to do. In light of this, it would seem that we can understand that which we quoted from Rav Chaim Volozhiner in the beginning of the Shiur[41], even though at face value his statement that "there is no sin," seems to contradict that which we quoted later in the Shiur from him.[42] According to my understanding of Lishmo it is not a contradiction. The earlier quote is directed at one for whom part of his motivation to learn is because of his enjoyment. The motivation, ideally, should be purely because Hashem said so. But one should most definitely enjoy one's learning when one is learning. [1] For example, Mishnah Avos 6:1 and Sanhedrin 99b [2] We shall later discuss another manner to translate this word. [3] Agrah D'Kallah Parshas Chayei Sarah d"h BeMidrash BeParsha Zu Kad Damich Rebbe Avahu [4] Tehillim 19:9 [5] Avodah Zarah 3a [6] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [7] We shall return to this statement in the end of the Shiur [8] Hakdamah to Eglei Tal [9] Yismach Yisrael Parshas Bechukosai [10] Mishnah Avos 2:14 [11] Rabbeinu Yonah ibid d"h VeDah Lifnei Mi [12] Mishlei 8:30 [13] Rosh HaShannah 28a [14] Ibid, as explained by Rashi d"h Mutar Litkoah Lo [15] Peirush Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar Nedarim 48a d"h Sefarim [16] [Blank on web. -mb] [17] See, for instance, Rambam Sefer HaMitzvos Mitzvah 11 [18] Devarim 6:7 [19] Kiddushin 30a [20] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [21] Malachi 3:4 [22] Tehillim 119:122 [23] Ibn Ezra ibid [24] Rashi Brachos 11b d"h Ha'arev [25] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [26] Degel Machane Efraim Parshas Vayishlach d"h Ba Na El Shifchasi [27] Yosher Divrei Emes Os 7 [disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch, who was a major disciple of the Ba'al Shem Tov]; Ma'or VeShemesh Parshas Vayetzei d"h Vayomer Eilav Lavan [disciple of the Noam Elimelech, who was a major disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch] [28] Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 2 and 3 [29] Chiddushei Chasam Sofer Nedarim 81a d"h Shelo Borchu [30] Reishis Chochmah, Hakdamah [31] Shnei Luchos HaBris, Chelek 1, Ba'asarah Ma'amaros, Ma'amar 6, Os 187 [32] Yerushalmi Brachos 1:2 [33] Peirush HaRosh Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen [34] Mefaresh (Rashi) Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen. [There is doubt whether the commentary printed as Rashi on Nedarim is actually from Rashi, hence this commentary is commonly referred to as "the Mefaresh (commentator)"] [35] Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah 10:5 [36] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [37] Tosfos Pesachim 50b d"h Vekan [38] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [39] Rashi Ta'anis 7a d"h Lishmo [40] Likutei Amarim of the Maggid of Mezeritch (otherwise known as Maggid Devarav LeYa'akov) Siman??, Sod Yachin U'Boaz Perek 2 [41] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [42] [Ed. Note] According to the later quote, as is clear from the end of Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 4, learning for the love of the pure understanding of Torah is Lishmoh. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 04:22:44 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:22:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How to pour nesachim, major differences between the first and the second beis hamikdash Message-ID: Yesterdays daf (Zevachim 61b) says that the mizbeach in the first beis hamikdash was 28x28 amos and in the second beis hamikdash was 32x32 amos. Rabin explains the difference as follows: In the first Mikdash, Nesachim would flow into Shisim (a pit south-west of the Mizbe'ach) down the wall of the mizbeach. In the second Beis Hamikdash they enlarged the Mizbe'ach in order that the Shisim would be within (under) the Mizbe'ach and they made the corners of teh mizbeach hollow so that they could pour nesachim in the mizbeach. At first (during the first Beis Hmikdash), they learned from the words "Mizbe'ach Adamah" that the mizbeach has to be completely solid. In the second beis Hamikdash they thought that drinking ('consumption' of libations) should be like eating (Korbanos that are burned, i.e. within the boundaries of the Mizbe'ach) and therefore made the holes to pour the Nesachim as part of the mizbeach. Therefore, they understood that Mizbe'ach Adamah" teaches that the Mizbe'ach cannot be built over domes or tunnels (that are not needed for the Mizbe'ach). According to the Rambam in Hilchos Mamrim, this is perfectly standard practice. Any Beis Din can come and darshen the pesukim differently then a previous beis din. However, according to others this is not so simple. For those who hold that there is one halachic truth, this would seem to be very difficult, in either the first or second beis hamikdash they did the avoda of the nesachim wrong. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 05:50:21 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:50:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40a627c0-37a1-a74d-6f72-165b6d6d9469@gmail.com> On 6/14/2018 8:17 AM, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org wrote: > Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 From: Micha Berger > ...who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah? If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah ... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. ... Another possibility: Hashem dictated the last pesukim about Moshe's death to Moshe beforehand, even before Moshe ascended the mountain, and Moshe dictated them to Yehoshua, who did not write them down until after Moshe's death. Thus, all the Torah, to the last letter, was revealed to Moshe, but it was Yehoshua who put the last pesukim in writing. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Jun 14 06:47:54 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: At 08:17 AM 6/14/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you >regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. >2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That >isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >what does that mean? I am going to give you an answer that I know you will not like and will dismiss out of hand, but IMO, it is the truth. Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to Eretz Yisroel. After all, I said, Orthodox Jews are interested in doing mitzvahs, and one can certainly do more mitzvahs in Israel. He responded by pointing out that the additional mitzvahs that one can do in Israel are only of rabbinical origin at this time. Furthermore, he went on, one has to keep in mind the following. The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the right spiritual level before you go." While reciting the Shema twice a day we say, ?Beware lest your heart be seduced and you turn astray And you will swiftly be banished from the goodly land which G-d gives you.? Thus it is clear to me that one must be on the appropriate spiritual level to live in Eretz Yisroel. Encouraging those who are not on this level to settle in Eretz Yisroel was and is perhaps a mistake. This is a radical statement, and many will react strongly to it. However, is it possible that part of the reason for what is going on in Israel today is a result of the fact that the vast majority of Jews living in Israel are not properly observant, and the statement quoted in Shema is being, G-d forbid, fulfilled? I am not the one to judge anyone else, but each person should look in the mirror and ask themselves if they are sure that they are spiritually elevated enough to live in Eretz Yisroel. As Reb Dovid said, "You just don't go to Israel." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:19:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:19:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? Message-ID: We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping that stringency. Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? KT Joel Rich From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:18:14 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:18:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? Message-ID: The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases (each iteration away from the primary source can cloud fine points, or Godel's incompleteness theorem at play?). I also see much more of the implicit sociological assumptions made over time (and wonder how we define the community [e.g., town, city, continent...] and time [every decade, exile...] that we measure). Two examples: 1) S"A O"C 153:12 (MB:76) discusses an individual who had a stipulation with a community to build a Beit Knesset (synagogue), it stays with him and his family but it's not transferable. Why not? "Mistavra" (it's logical) that that's what the community had in mind unless specifically stipulated differently at origination (me -- who measured? How?) 2) S"A O"C 153:18 (MB:95) concerning a private object (e.g., Menorah) used by the synagogue. Originally, the assumption was they became kodesh once used, however, "now" it's assumed that they remain totally private (as if this were the original stipulation). So how, when, and where did this change? Were the first people who acted this way sinners, but enough sinners makes it OK? KT Joel Rich From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:35:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:35:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17593052-ba12-6371-5050-960187b566d0@zahav.net.il> Yes we have heard this answer before, several times. Putting aside its multiple problems, it is basically rejecting the paper you linked, given that the paper's author supports the state albeit with several large reservations. You can't say that the aliya of the vast majority of people to Israel is a mistake and support the state at the same time. Ben On 6/14/2018 3:47 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if > one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the > exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D > forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong > deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be > on the right spiritual level before you go. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:36:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:36:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. ?Ben On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > > Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? > From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 14 15:07:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:07:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, micha at aishdas.org but it's smarter to be nice. http://www.aishdas.org - R' Lazer Brody Fax: (270) 514-1507 From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 14:18:33 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 21:18:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: , <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. > Ben ?1?/??? Which raises a question I?ve been thinking about lately. When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From zev at sero.name Thu Jun 14 15:39:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:39:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <76b76294-55ee-c10b-66b4-858544078685@sero.name> On 14/06/18 18:07, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the > : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to > : Eretz Yisroel... > > : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one > : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact > : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, > : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed > : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the > : right spiritual level before you go." > > This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It's much earlier than that. It's a Tosfos (Rabbenu Chaim, quoted in Tosfos, Kesubos 110b, sv Hu Omer). -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 22:37:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 07:37:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> Message-ID: <1d515cf4-41e6-53ed-9246-feaee76b81cd@zahav.net.il> I'd guess the latter - the Gemara is telling us you have to decide for yourself and that while the Gemara will give values and weight, it? leaves the final choice up to you. On 6/14/2018 11:18 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 15 01:27:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 04:27:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 06:07 PM 6/14/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the >: Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to >: Eretz Yisroel... > >: The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one >: does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact >: same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, >: in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed >: here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the >: right spiritual level before you go." > >This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. If so, then why are there Satmar Chassodim living in Israel? Are they all on a high spiritual level? And could it be that the Satmar Rebbe left Israel, for this reason? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmeisner at mail.gmail.com Fri Jun 15 05:27:58 2018 From: jmeisner at mail.gmail.com (Joshua Meisner) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 08:27:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > Question -- is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? On Jun 14, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Ben Waxman wrote: > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a > bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. The implication of this sugya is that given that one has made a neder, it is better not to keep it than to keep it. Clearly, it is not suggesting that one violate the neder but rather that one be matir it before a chacham. The meforshim provide different reasons why this is the case -- e.g., because the neder was made out of anger that would hopefully subside or because the neder is characteristic of ga'avah -- but a chumra taken on because a person perceives a need for a s'yag or similar reasons (or, for that matter, a neder bish'as tzarah) may not be what the gemara is referring to. Going back to RJR's question, to provide a few data points, while on the one hand offering a korban without making a neder is assur, one tanna used to be makdish his korban only after he brought it to the mikdash to avoid the possibility of stumbling. Not sure if these cases can be translated into nidrei issur. Josh From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 15 12:02:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 15:02:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Referring to "the holy month of Ramadan" In-Reply-To: References: <163fc9b81f2-c8f-124c4@webjas-vaa038.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180615190235.GA17319@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:18am EDT, Prof. Levine wrote on Areivim: : What about referring to the "holy month of Ramadan"? Aren't their : restrictions regarding what a Jew is allowed to do when it comes to : non-Jewish holidays? Interesting question... Yes, if Moslems are aku"m. But Islam is monotheistic. In fact, they're more pedantic about it than the Torah requires. E.g. Many Moslems believe that the Torah's use of "Yad Hashem" et al even acknowledging they are meant as metaphors shows Shaitan's alleged corruption of the text. So, it's not yom eideihem in the normal sense. For that matter, one might even argue that many versions of Ramadan observance are actually qadosh (in our sense of the word). They fast to learn self-discipline and empathy for those who are less fortunate, they give sadaqah to the poor (I'm bet you can guess that Arabic) and there is a point of having a nightly meal, iftar, in fellowship with the broader community, not alone or as a nuclear family. All values the Beris Noach would want them to be fostering. So, the previous intentionally provocative paragraph aside, is there really a problem talking about Ramadan or referring to it as they do, as "the holy month of"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The trick is learning to be passionate in one's micha at aishdas.org ideals, but compassionate to one's peers. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 12:09:48 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:09:48 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? Message-ID: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with whom did the PC disagree? Ben From hanktopas at gmail.com Sun Jun 17 18:49:29 2018 From: hanktopas at gmail.com (Henry Topas) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch Message-ID: Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in a din Torah pls? Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. Thank you and kol tuv, HT Sent from my iPhone From zev at sero.name Sun Jun 17 21:42:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:42:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? In-Reply-To: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> References: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 17/06/18 15:09, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. > In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered > putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim > on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with > whom did the PC disagree? The issue was the way he wrote about gedolei haposkim, especially the Bet Yosef. http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1640&pgnum=250 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 23:10:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 08:10:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] machloquet - good or bad Message-ID: <5c275a89-82ba-3763-db85-3c8663f1b5a9@zahav.net.il> Summary of a talk given on Shabbat and then my commentary: According to the Rambam, machloquet is a fashla, something we don't want. It started when students didn't properly learn from their teachers. Had they done so, Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai would not have had so many disagreements. Rav Kook and Rebbe Nachman had a much more positive approach to machloquet. According to RK, when say that talmidei chachamim bring peace to the world, it is because they know how to argue with someone yet respect him and his opinion. A talmid chacham knows how to be inclusive, how to allow for and even want other opinions. According to RN, machloquet is a reenactment of Creation. God created the world through tzimmzum, allowing space for others. When there is one opinion only, that opinion fills the entire space so to speak. When someone else comes up with a different opinion, the first person has to contract to allow room for the new idea. This in turn allows for even more opinions. Ad kan the class. Today we don't do machloquet very well or at least we struggle with it. We try and either destroy the other side or we say that the other position doesn't really exist. This week a rav made a statement about Rav Lichtenstein tz'l and his position regarding (a very minor) women's issue. The easiest thing to do if one wanted to know RL's opinion about something is to pick up the phone and ask his sons, his daughter, an extremely close talmid. Instead the rav simply heard something and made a conclusion. When he was shown that his conclusion was incorrect, he pontificated that RL really didn't accept the more liberal position, he simply gave in to pressure. Occam's razor says that if RL said something and did something, it is because RL believed that to be the right thing to do. There is no need to come up with any explanation. Simply accept that there is a machloquet in the matter. Similarly, there is a mechina whose rosh yeshiva said things about women's role in society which people in the left wing MO world don't accept. No one says that anyone needs to send their kid there, but to try and work to shut down the mechina? You can't accept that someone, who BTW probably agrees with the LW on a whole bunch of other subjects, differs with you? You want to shut them down? Come on people, get a grip. From yherczeg at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:15:11 2018 From: yherczeg at gmail.com (Yisrael Herczeg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:15:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Re: Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." ::This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It is also in the Tashbetz Kattan. Yisrael Herczeg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:53:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:53:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is One Required To Live In Israel? (Bava Batra 91a) Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NKZ2eR by Raphael Grunfeld. (Note: Raphael Grunfeld is a son of Dayan Dr. Grunfeld who translated the Horeb and other works by RSRH from German into English.) First, it is not universally accepted that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel. Rashi?s commentary on the Torah as understood by the Ramban implies that there is no obligation to live in Israel. Rabbeinu Chaim, one of the Tosafists of the twelfth century, states clearly that following the destruction of the Second Temple and the exile from Israel, there is no longer any requirement to live in Israel. The Rambam agrees with Rabbeinu Chaim and accordingly did not include living in Israel in his list of the positive commandments. In more contemporary times, the Rebbe of Munkatch, in his responsa Minchat Eliezer, endorses Rabbeinu Chaim?s position. The Rebbe of Satmar, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, points out that the Shulchan Aruch does not include the mitzvah of living in Israel in its code of law. The majority opinion prevailing in the halacha, however, follows the Ramban and maintains that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel today. Although it is preferable to live in Israel, there is no obligation to go. However, once you live in Israel, there is an obligation not to leave. In fact, the language used by the Ramban in his supplement to Sefer Hamitzvot is that ?anyone who leaves Israel? ? ?kol hayotze mimenah? ? is like an idol worshiper. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:56:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:56:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In just a few weeks, we will observe Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av. This particular Rosh Chodesh is always only one day long, and this year it happens to fall on Erev Shabbos. This means that when Shabbos occurs, Rosh Chodesh will be over. I want to discuss the ramifications of a person who begins Shabbos early in this situation. Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal. (I know that there are poskim who advise one to eat a kezayis of bread after tzeis, but they don't require it.) In my experience, mealtime goes much quicker when there are fewer people at the table. This past Friday, for example, I went to a very nice minyan, beginning Kabalas Shabbos and Maariv shortly after Plag, I took a leisurely stroll home, and despite our best efforts at taking our time through the meal, my wife and I were still ready for Birkas Hamazon a full five minutes before shkiah. In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? I don't recall ever learning about this particular situation. There is an analogous but very different situation that I *have* seen discussed, namely that of a Seuda Shlishit that begins on Shabbos Erev Rosh Chodesh, and continues into Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos. In that case, the poskim give a wide variety of answers, but (among the poskim who *don't* pasken to say both) it is not always clear whether their rule is to base oneself on the beginning of the meal, or the end of the meal, or the holier of the two days. Further, some of them make a distinction, paskening differently for one who is merely benching after tzeis but didn't actually eat after tzeis, as opposed to one who actually ate [food in general or perhaps bread specifically] after tzeis. All that is a good starting point for my situation, but it is only a starting point. A tremendous difference between the two cases is that in the more common case, the calendar day DID change during the meal, to some extent or another. But in the case that I'm asking about, the calendar day did not actually change, only that the people involved are doing the mitzvah of Tosefes Shabbos. To be more explicit: Imagine a couple that goes to an early minyan on Erev Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Av. They daven Maariv, make Kiddush, and say Birkas Hamazon, all before shkiah. Then, after benching but still before shkiah, imagine that the wife gives birth to a boy. This boy will have his bris milah a week later on *Erev* Shabbos, and his bar mitzvah will be on Rosh Chodesh. Is it possible that his parents should have omitted Yaaleh V'Yavo from Birkas Hamazon? Of course, I understand that the answer may depend on details like whether or not the meal continued after shika, or even past tzeis. But I am most curious about the simple case, where benching was before shkiah. And the other cases will perhaps flow from that one. Any and all sources are appreciated. Thanks in advance. (Disclosure: I have other questions about the calendar and a person who begins Shabbos early, but I'm starting with this one, and perhaps I'll open new threads later about the others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:10:57 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:10:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What to do with old pots Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I found an old set of pots in my parents' basement. They have not been used in many years. No one remembers if they were milchig or fleishig. I would like to use them for milchig. May they be kashered and used for milchig? A. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Commentary on Nidah 27a) writes the pots may be designated for meat or dairy without kashering. The pots have not been used in more than 24 hours. After 24 hours any taste that was absorbed in the pot becomes foul, and on a Torah level the pot can be used for meat or dairy without kashering. Nevertheless, there remains a Rabbinic obligation to kasher pots even after 24 hours have elapsed. However, in this case, we may apply the principal of ?safek d?rabbanan l?kula? (in cases of doubt that pertain to a Rabbinic prohibition one may be lenient). Additionally, Igros Moshe (Y.D. II:46) writes that if a utensil is not used for more than a year, there is an opinion that holds that it does not need kashering. Although we don?t follow this opinion, it can act as an additional mitigating factor. However, since one can avoid the doubt by kashering the pot, it is proper to do so. Although the Magen Avrohom (OC 509:11) writes that the custom is not to permit kashering a fleishig pot to use it for milchig, in this case kashering is acceptable since it is only a chumra (extra stringency). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 04:30:24 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:30:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder Message-ID: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don?t know the exact reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That?s only known by HQBH. However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah that you?ve taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 07:50:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:50:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Learning, Spirituality, and Neo-Chassidus In-Reply-To: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> References: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180618145018.GE28907@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 1:14pm, R Aryeh Stein wrote on Areivim: > Rabbi Shafran's letter to Mishpacha included the following paragraph: >> It's easy to say that a person has a relationship with Hashem wherever >> he is, regardless of what he is doing, but it's not true. Many of us break >> that connection through destructive habits and the like, and sugarcoating >> them doesn't make them any less destructive. "Feeling spiritual" may >> be better than feeling bad about yourself, as quoted in the article, >> but are we to be content with feeling spiritual? I think the real problem with R' Avi Shafran's article was picked up in the replies. It's not an either-or. Rather, people whose core learning is the regular gefe"s or shas-and-posqim aren't getting inspired by intellectual pursuit *alone* and are looking for a better connection to the emotional and experiential aspects of Yahadus. Addition, not replacement. The question is more: Are we content with thinking the right thoughts while being parched spiritually? > Rabbi Moshe Weinberger was very disturbed by this paragraph in which > Rabbi Shafran seems to state that one's relationship with God can be > severed if one engages in destructive behavior. > He didn't discuss this specific point in his response to Rabbi Shafran > that was printed in Mishpacha, but he dedicated two shiurim to > demonstrate that Hashem's love for every Jew is eternal and > unconditional (see links to shiurim below) At 03:59:40PM -0400, Zev Sero via Areivim wrote: : To Hashem's love may be unconditional, but the direct connection a : person has with Him can certainly be severed; that is what kares : means. See Igeres Hateshuvah ch 5-6: : https://tinyurl.com/y9hckn5t : https://tinyurl.com/y6wtghxf But on another level, I don't think a person or even an object can be fully severed from the Borei, because withough Or Ein Sof, there is no such thing as existing. This fits kareis as per the Rambam, that the onesh after misah is ceasing to exist. (Except that we would have to translate the Baal haTanya's "Or Ein Sof" language into the Rambam's chain of sikhliim.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:14:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:14:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180618151454.GF28907@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:49:29PM -0400, Henry Topas via Avodah wrote: : Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in : a din Torah pls? : Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. A to'ein is a plaintiff. Could you ever have a din Torah in CM without a to'ein and nit'an? Ah, just googled. I take it you mean a to'ein rabbani, a modern Israeli coinage in order to avoid calling someone an oreikh din, since the job was defined in a way so as to avoid violating "al ta'as atzmekha ke'orkhei hadayanim" (Avos 1:8). The Yerushalmi, Kesuvos 4:10 and BB 9:4 (same quote; both gemaros are short and it's easy to find the quote), says the issur in the mishnah is telling only one side the law when they're still trying to phrase their claim. See also Kesuvos 52b and the Ritva d"h "asinu". So, while I don't have a maqor for when it became normal to have to'anim rabbaniim, I would think the place to look is the earliest shu"t that explain how they're not orkhei din. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, micha at aishdas.org The end is near. http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Moshe Sherer Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:57:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:57:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms Message-ID: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> See "Hezekiahs Religious Reform -- In the Bible and Archaeology" on the Biblical Archeology Society web site at . Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to get rid of everything hidden in private homes. A large 9th-century horned altar was discovered [in Beersheba] -- already dismantled. Three of its four "horns" [rectangular projections on the four corners of the top of the altar] were found intact, embedded in a wall. Their secondary use indicates that the stones were no longer considered sacred. The horned altar was dismantled during Hezekiah's reign, which we know because some of its stones were reused in a public storehouse that was built when the Assyrians threatened Judah and was destroyed by the Assyrian army in 701.... Next we move to Lachish. The second most important city in Judah after Jerusalem, Lachish was a military and administrative center in the Judean hills.... In 2016, an 8th-century BCE cultic place at Lachish was uncovered next to the main city gate. Archaeologists have called this cultic place a "gate-shrine." In it were found two small horned altars, whose horns had been cut off and embedded in an adjacent wall. Further, a square toilet was found installed in the shrine but was never used. The toilet was more of a symbolic act of desecration (see 2Kings 10:27) -- part of Hezekiah's cultic reforms. The best candidate for the elimination [of these cultic sites and others] is King Hezekiah, who probably ordered the abolition of all official cultic sites. Only the Jerusalem Temple and small, household shrines were spared. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. micha at aishdas.org Life is about creating yourself. http://www.aishdas.org - George Bernard Shaw Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:48:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:48:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder In-Reply-To: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> References: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180618154848.GG28907@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 07:30:24AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don't know the exact : reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That's only known by HQBH. : However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah : that you've taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. To do a mitzvah Hashem obligated you in, yes. But one you've taken on yourself? I don't know. As for untuitiveness, see my 9/8/2001 post at . But it ties together why Hashem would command men in something He didn't command women to that mitzvah likely being of more value to a man, to the greater reward. A line of reasoning that doesn't apply to volunteerism. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten micha at aishdas.org your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, http://www.aishdas.org and it flies away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 18 12:50:21 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:50:21 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? On 6/18/2018 5:57 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's > portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the > archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to > get rid of everything hidden in private homes. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 12:13:52 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:13:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chukas Message-ID: <0955AA8C-8FE3-48BA-A965-3E9AA6A10782@cox.net> 1) Four Torah laws cannot be explained by human reason but, being divine, demand implicit obedience: a) to marry one's brother's widow (Deut. 25:5); b) not to mingle wool and linen in a garment (Deut. 22:11); c) to perform the rites of the scapegoat (Lev. 16:26, 34); and d) the red cow. Satan comes and criticizes these statutes as irrational. Know therefore that it was the Creator of the world, the One and Only, who instituted them. Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 19:8). 2) [Ch.19:1] "Hashem spoke to Moses and to Aaron saying:" Symbolically the cow came to atone for the sin of the Golden Calf, as if to say let the mother come and clean up the mess left by her child. If this be the case, this explains why the commandment was directed to Aaron, the one who made the calf. 3) [19:2] "Zot chukat ha-Torah...." This is the statute (also translated as "ritual law," or "decree") of the Torah......" This unusual expression occurs only once more in Bamidbar 31:21. The rabbis have commented that it should have said ?Zot chukat ha parah.? Why does it sound as if this chok is the whole Torah? There are several explanations such as only Jews can be ritually impure. A non-Jew cannot have tum?ah. Also, since a chok is incomprehensible, it is as if you have observed the whole Torah if you follow an irrational, illogical commandment. 4) The Midrash to this chapter focuses primarily on one paradox in the laws of the Red Cow: Its ashes purify people who had become contaminated; yet those who engage in its preparation become contaminated. I thought of a contemporary example of something that would appear just as paradoxical. Radiation treatment is used to treat many forms of cancer, and yet, the same radiation can cause cancer. For someone who has no knowledge of medicine, this would appear as irrational as the paradox of the Red Cow. In a similar vein, the Midrash notes a number of such paradoxical cases of righteous people who descended from wicked parents, such as Abraham from Terach, Hezekiah from Ahaz, and Josiah from Ammon. The Talmud adds the paradox that it is forbidden to drink blood, but an infant nurses from its mother, whose blood is transformed into milk to become the source of life (Niddah 9a). You won?t go broke if you follow the chok. But if you don?t keep trying, you?ll end up dying. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 12:24:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:24:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180618192417.GC12350@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:50:21PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, : had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real : reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split : with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have : been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira : in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? I dunno. Look at David haMelekh. He had what to do teshuvah for as well. (Yeah, yeah, I know, kol ha'omer David chatah... But let's look at the navi's presentation of David, if not the historical figure.) However, he owned his mistakes, did teshuvah. And indeed, excelled at singing shirah. It seems there is a big difference between someone who errs, but stays connected to the Borei through it all well enough to be moved to song, and someone who doesn't. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, micha at aishdas.org and after it is all over, he still does not http://www.aishdas.org know himself. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Jun 19 00:15:18 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:15:18 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive into a hostile Arab town? Ben From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 19 03:01:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 06:01:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive : into a hostile Arab town? I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, no? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 19 06:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Used Metal Pots Bought From a Non-Jew In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Q. I bought a set of used metal pots from a non-Jew. Do I kasher them first or do I tovel them first? A. Shulchan Aruch (YD 121:2) writes that one should first kasher the pot and afterwards immerse it in a mikvah. If one toveled the pot first before kashering, it is a matter of dispute among Rishonim whether the tevila was effective. The Rashbam (cited in Beis Yosef YD 121) writes that toveling a pot before kosherization is like immersing in a mikvah while holding a sheretz (unclean item) and the tevila is ineffective. However, other Rishonim disagree and maintain that tevila is a separate mitzvah and is not connected with kashering. The Shach (YD 121:5) writes that if one was to tovel a pot before kashering, tevila should be repeated without a bracha because of the uncertainty. Nonetheless, the Dagul Merivava writes if the pot had not been used in the past 24 hours, one may tovel before kashering. After 24 hours, the non-kosher taste that had been absorbed in the pot is ruined. At that point the absorbed taste is no longer similar to a sheretz. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 19 08:17:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:17:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <3cd91821-d660-3a72-164e-c3abb8aaf807@sero.name> On 19/06/18 06:01, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone > : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the > : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the > : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive > : into a hostile Arab town? > > I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, > no? I don't know the answer, and wouldn't dare try to pasken it, but I do see a big question. The person is in no danger now. He will be in danger only if he chooses to drive on Shabbos. Is it permitted to help him do so safely? Does it make you an accomplice to his avera? Does hal'itehu larasha' perhaps apply here? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ydamyb at mail.gmail.com Tue Jun 19 05:19:56 2018 From: ydamyb at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:19:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 6:17 PM Akiva Miller wrote: > Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and > begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal > before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal... > In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a > regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling > Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Akiva Blum From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jun 19 09:44:50 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 16:44:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10d8a9cc4d8f47e593bd2928a907b8fd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. -------------------------- I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you can daven maariv after plag-would he say if you did that you don't say retzeih if you ate later? BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 05:11:06 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 08:11:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some degree or another. Would they pasken the same way if the Seuda Shlishis was earlier, and - for whatever reason - he had davened maariv and said birkas hamazon on Saturday afternoon after Plag Hamincha? I concede that it is a bizarre example, but the boundaries of halacha are defined by exactly this sort of situation. It's not done nowadays, but a person *IS* allowed to daven maariv on Shabbos afternoon after Plag. If someone did so, and did it during seudah shlishis, and then chose to say Birkas Hamazon while the sun was still above the horizon on Shabbos afternoon, perhaps he should indeed say Retzeh? Perhaps not, but I'd love to know what a posek might say. Summary: The question in this thread concerns someone who is benching on Friday afternoon which is Rosh Chodesh but he already said the non-RC maariv. This is VERY analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday afternoon which is Shabbos but he already said the non-Shabbos maariv. It is NOT so analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday night and he already said the non-Shabbos maariv, and the only argument in favor of saying Retzeh is that the meal began on Shabbos. I just thought of another difference between Friday Rosh Chodesh and the situation cited by RAB. If a person davened Maariv during seuda shelishit - and presumably included Ata Chonantanu - then he has verbally and explicitly declared Shabbos to be over, and it would be contradictory to reverse this by saying Retzeh in the benching (even if the sun is still shining on Saturday afternoon). BUT: When someone says maariv on Motzaei Rosh Chodesh he merely omits Yaaleh V'yavo, and there is no explicit declaration that RC has ended, so perhaps he could still include Yaaleh V'yavo on Friday afternoon. [There would still be a problem of including both Retzeh and Yaaleh V'yavo in the same benching, but some poskim do allow that in the Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos situation.] Akiva Miller From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 20 13:47:08 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:47:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi S. R. Hirsch Takes On The Rambam Message-ID: My grandson Daniel Levine who is studying in Yeshiva KBY and I are in the process of reading RSRH's Nineteen Letters with the notes written by Rabbi Joseph Elias. Today we read part of letter 18. While I knew that RSRH criticizes the RAMBAM, I was surprised at how strong this criticism is. Some of what is in letter 18 is posted at https://goo.gl/o3uXdg Below is a sampling. "Pressure of the times demanded more: the underlying ideas of the Tanach and the Talmud were recorded in the aggados, but again, in a veiled form, requiring of the student an active effort on his part in order to grasp the inner spirit, which really can be passed down only by word of mouth." "However, not everybody grasped the true spirit of Judaism. In non-Jewish schools Yisrael's youth trained their minds in independent philosophical inquiry. From Arab sources they drew the concepts of Greek philosophy and came to conceive their ultimate aim as perfecting themselves in the perception of truth. Hence rose conflict. Their quickening spirit put them at odds with Judaism, which they considered to be void of any spirit of its own; and their view of life was in contradiction with a view that stressed action, deeds, first and foremost, and considered recognition of the truth to only be a means toward such action." And so the times brought forth a man of spirit who, having been educated within an uncomprehended Judaism as well as Arab scholarship, was compelled to reconcile this dichotomy within himself. By giving voice to the way in which he did this, he became the guide for all who were engaged in the same struggle. It is to this great man alone that we owe the preservation of practical Judaism until the present day. By accomplishing this and yet, on the other hand merely reconciling Judaism with the ideas from without, rather than developing it creatively from within, and by the way in which he effected this reconciliation, he gave rise to all the good that followed- as well as all the bad. His trend of thought was Arab-Greek, as was his concept of life. Approaching Judaism from without, he brought to it views that he had gained elsewhere, and these he reconciled with Judaism. Thus to him too, the highest aim was self-perfection through recognition of the truth; and the practical, concrete deeds became subordinate to this end. Knowledge of God was considered an end in itself, not a means toward the end; and so he delved into speculations about the essence of God and considered the results of these speculative investigations to be fundamental axioms and principles of faith binding upon Judaism. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ydamyb at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 21:34:54 2018 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:34:54 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, 4:46 p.m. Akiva Miller via Avodah, < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > R' Akiva Blum wrote: > > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. > > Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are > presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and > benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some > degree or another. > > Please see the MB 424:2 where he quotes the MA specifically about where one davened maariv while still day that he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. I wonder about a case where one said kabolas shabbos, then ate and davened maariv later. I would think that too would be sufficient. Akiva -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 21 03:56:40 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:56:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Timeless Rav Hirsch Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/ZEcnxP The writings of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (RSRH) deeply resonate with many people today, as they have since the time he penned them in the middle of the nineteenth century, using them to recreate a community of modern, Torah-faithful Jews in Frankfurt that had all but disappeared. Many find that, ironically, his words seem more suited for our times than when he composed them. He stands almost alone among commentators in dealing with many themes of modernity: cultural evolution; our relationships with non-Jews; the Jewish mission to the rest of civilization; freedom of the will versus determinism; autonomy and totalitarianism; understanding the impact of paganism on the ancient world. Of course, his treatment of symbolism. This web page contains links to commentaries on the parshios by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein based on the writings of RSRH. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 06:00:23 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:00:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: Perhaps the machmirim would say to respond, "It is Shabbat and it is assur to drive, so I cannot tell to how to go. BUT I will tell you this: Do not go on such-and-such a road, because it will take you through such-and-such a dangerous area." That would not be a problem by those who the OP refers to as machmirim, it seems to me. (Of course, personally, I would label Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as the machmir, and would use the response he suggests: "It pains me that you are driving on Shabbat, so to minimize the Chilul Shabbat, I will give you the very best directions...") Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 21:02:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:02:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. And R' Joel Rich asked: > I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent > and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you > can daven maariv after plag - would he say if you did that > you don't say retzeih if you ate later? This situation is raised by Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen in "The Radiance of Shabbos" (ArtScroll). He writes (pg 95?), "If one interrupts a prolonged meal to daven Maariv or recite Havdalah, he does not say Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon afterwards. If one merely said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, he should still recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon. Rabbi Cohen cites MB 263:67 that if one said "Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol" during the meal, it is a "Tzorech Iyun" whether he can say Retzeh. Then he cites Eliya Rabba 299:1, Petach Hadvir there, Chayei Adam 47:24, Kaf Hachayim Palagi 31, and Rav Moshe Feinstein all as saying that one *can* still say Retzeh, but that Shulchan Aruch Harav 188:17 says not to. Personally, I am surprised that so many poskim distinguish between Maariv/Havdala on the one hand, vs. Omitting Shem Umalchus on the other hard. Here is a situation which will illustrate this point: Suppose someone had a long seuda shlishis, and after Tzeis he said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, and then he actually did a melacha. Would those poskim still say that he should recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon? Akiva Miller From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 21 18:01:47 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 01:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Individualism? Message-ID: <6b39dd928de144b0ba94b9a16c4318c5@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Anecdotally, it seems to me I've seen an increase in "individualistic" practices across the orthodox spectrum [e.g., davening at one's own pace with less concern as to where the tzibbur is up to (shma, shmoneh esrai, chazarat hashatz . . .), being obvious about using a different nusach hatfila, wearing tfillin at mincha . . .] I'm curious as to whether others have seen this? If yes, any theories as to why? (e.g., outside world seeping in?) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Jun 22 13:51:26 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:51:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In Avodah V36n72 (to which I'm humming "Chai, Chai, Chai/Am Yisrael Chai" :)), RJR asked: > BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? < Iff we're considering when one ended the meal; but then you're comparing unlike items (BhM vs. Ma'ariv), not to mention that BhM is a Torah-level *mitzva* while Ma'ariv is .... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 23 19:24:37 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 22:24:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BALAK "JACOB'S TENTS, ISRAEL'S DWELLING PLACES, MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD" Message-ID: "How goodly are your tents, O Jacob; your dwelling places, O Israel." [Num. 24:5] Why the repetition? What does each of these terms [tents and dwelling places] represent? And furthermore, why is the first appellation used "Jacob" and the second one "Israel?" In addition to the sensitivity and modesty demonstrated by the arrangement of the tents and camps, the Sages (Sanhedrin 105b) expound that these terms refer to the habitats of Israel's spiritual heritage. Tents (Ohalecha), alludes to the study halls, and dwelling places (Mishk'nosecha), which is related to Shechinah, or God's presence, alludes to the synagogues and Temples (Sforno). Rav Kook has a novel interpretation. He says that the verse, which mentions tents first, reflects a lower level and hence, uses the name Jacob, the first and lesser name. However, the verse which mentions dwelling second, reflects a higher level. Thus, it uses the name Israel, Jacob's second and more elevated name. The reason Rav Kook considers "tents" to reflect a lower level and "dwelling places" a higher level is because the tent is inherently connected to the state of traveling. It corresponds to the aspiration for continual change and growth. The dwelling is also part of the journey, but is associated with the rests between travels. It is the soul's sense of calm, resting from the constant movement, for the sake of the overall mission (sort of a parallel to Shabbos). I delved into the gematria aspect of this and came up with some heavy, mystical stuff. The gematria for "Ohalecha Ya-akov" (your tents O Jacob) is 248. There are 248 positive mitzvot. The word 'Avraham' and 'bamidbar' (In the wilderness) is also 248, as is the phrase 'Kol Adonai Elohim' (the voice or sound of Hashem, God). The word 'romach' (spear) is also 248. Now to tie all this together-- Balaam had intended, in a manner of speaking, to use a 'spear' to harm the Jewish people and curse them 'in the wilderness.' However 'the voice of Hashem, God' caused Balaam to turn the negative to the positive, (symbolized by the 248 positive mitzvos). Thus when Balaam said "How goodly are your tents O Jacob," he was blessing the Jewish people completely right from 'Abraham.' The gematria for "Mishk'nosecha Yisrael" (Your dwelling places, O Israel) is 1,381. As Rav Kook said, this part of the verse was on a higher level. In Gen: verse 25 (last part) and verse 26 (first part) we have: "Vayar Elohim ki tov. Vayomer Elohim na-a-seh Adam b'tzalmeinue" ("And God saw that it was good. And God said: "Let us make man in Our image..."). The gematria for this is also 1,381 as is the word "Ha-ashtaroth" (the principal Phoenician goddess, the consort of their chief male deity, Baal). Though Balaam was steeped in idolatry ("Ha-ashtaroth"), when he pronounced the second part of the phrase, ("mishk'nosecha Yisroel") God 'saw that it was good.' And so, the "image of God" wins out! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 25 07:17:25 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:17:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Waiting After Some Cheeses Before Eating Meat Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I know that we are supposed to wait after eating certain cheeses, before we can then eat meat. After which cheeses should one wait, and what is the basis for this practice? A. The Rama (Yoreh Deah 89:2) writes that the custom is not to eat meat after eating hard cheese. The waiting time for this is equivalent to the amount of time that one waits after eating meat, before then eating dairy foods. (See Taz ibid. 89:4, Aruch HaShulchan ibid. 89:11, Chochmas Adam 40:13.) There are two reasons that one needs to wait after meat before then partaking of milk; these two reasons apply as well to eating certain cheeses after meat. The first reason is that of basar she?bein ha-shinayim ? meat that gets stuck between the teeth ? which takes a considerable amount of time to dislodge or disintegrate, before which one may not consume milk. (Rambam, Hilchos Ma?achalos Asuros 9:28) The second reason for waiting after eating meat is meshichas ta?am ? an aftertaste left in the mouth, due to meat?s fattiness; only after a substantial lapse of time does this aftertaste dissipate, whereupon one may then consume milk. (Rashi in Chullin 105a s.v. ?Assur?) Poskim apply both of these reasons to cheese: Hard cheese, due to its firm and brittle texture, is like basar she?bein ha-shinayim, and is termed gevinah she?bein ha-shinayim ? cheese that gets stuck between the teeth. One therefore needs to wait a considerable amount of time for such cheese to dislodge or disintegrate before then consuming meat. (Sifsei Da?as Yoreh 89:2) Also, cheeses that are very pungent and leave a noticeable aftertaste are like meat that has meshichas ta?am; one must wait for the aftertaste to dissipate before then eating meat. (Taz Yoreh Deah 89:4) Although some classical poskim argue as to whether one or both of the above rationales for waiting apply to cheese, contemporary poskim rule that both apply. The next installment of Halacha Yomis will discuss further details. View OUKosher's list of Aged Cheeses. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sun Jun 24 23:26:22 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:26:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] [Commentary] Rabbi Meir Soloveichik: Why Christians Are Reading the Rav In-Reply-To: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: [RET emailed me this under a subject line that began "Too long for Avodah thought you might be interested..." But I thought his reluctance was missplaced. I just held on to the piece for its own digest. -micha] Jun 20, 2018 The nature of the dilemma can be stated in a three-word sentence. I am lonely. - Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik In 2015, I was invited to a conference held at a Catholic University in Spain, celebrating the first Spanish translation of *The Lonely Man of Faith*, the seminal philosophical essay of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik (my great uncle), reverently referred to by many Orthodox Jews as "the Rav." Published 50 years earlier, the essay contrasts two biblical accounts of the creation of man and teases out two personas, known as Adam the First and Adam the Second. In the first chapter of Genesis, humanity is created in the image of God and instructed by the Almighty to "fill the world and subdue it." Adam the First, Rabbi Soloveitchik suggests, is majestic; through his God-like creative capacities he seeks scientific breakthroughs, to cure disease, to build cities and countries, to advance the health and comfort of mankind. But then there is Adam the Second, who in Genesis 2 is created from the dust of the earth and remains in the sanctity of the garden of Eden, "to work and protect it." This represents the religious aspect of man, man who is ever aware of his finitude, who finds fulfillment not in majestic achievement but in an intimate relationship with a personal God. These two accounts are given, Rabbi Soloveitchik argued, because both are accurate; both Adam I and Adam II are divinely desired aspects of the human experience. One who is devoted to religious endeavors is reminded that "he is also wanted and needed in another community, the cosmic-majestic," and when one works on behalf of civilization, the Bible does not let him forget "that he is a covenantal being who will never find self-fulfillment outside of the covenant." The man of faith is not fully of the world, but neither can he reject the world. To join the two parts of the self may not be fully achievable, but it must nevertheless be our goal. In his letter of invitation to the conference, the president of the Spanish university reflected on how Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings spoke to his own vocation. As a leader of a Christian school, he said he grappled constantly with the challenge of being an *hombre de fe* in a Europe that, once the cradle of Christendom, was now suddenly secular: As Adam the First understandably and correctly busies himself with the temporal concerns of this world, we encourage our students to not lose sight, within their own hearts, of Adam the Second, the thirsting Adam that longs for a redemption that our technological advances cannot quench. We hope that our students, who come to our university seeking degree titles that will translate into jobs, will leave it also with awakened minds and hearts that fully recognize the deep aspirations that lie within their youthful spirits, and which *The Lonely Man of Faith* so eloquently describes. The letter reflected a fascinating phenomenon. As Orthodox Jews mark this year the 25th anniversary of Rabbi Soloveitchik's passing, more and more of his works are being studied, savored, appreciated, and applied to people's own lives -- by Christians. As interesting as this is, it should not be surprising. *The Lonely Man of Faith* actually originated, in part, in a talk to Catholic seminarians, and today it is Christians who are particularly shocked by the rapidity with which a culture that was once Christian has turned on them, so that now people of faith are quite lonely in the world at large. In his essay, Rabbi Soloveitchik notes that though the tension between Adam I and Adam II is always a source of angst, "the contemporary man of faith is, due to his peculiar position in secular society, lonely in a special way," as our age is "technically minded, self-centered, and self-loving, almost in a sickly narcissistic fashion, scoring honor upon honor, piling up victory upon victory, reaching for the distant galaxies, and seeing in the here-and-now sensible world the only manifestation of being." Now that the world of Adam I seems wholly divorced from that of Adam II, people of faith seek guidance in the art of bridging the two; and if, 70 years ago, Reinhold Niebhur was a theologian who spoke for a culture where Christianity was the norm, Rabbi Soloveitchik is a philosopher for Jews and Christians who are outsiders. The Catholic philosopher R.J. Snell, in a Christian reflection inspired by the Rav's writings, wrote that "like Joseph B. Soloveitchik in *The Lonely Man of Faith*, I am lonely," and he tells us why: In science, my faith is judged obscurantist; in ethics, mere animus; in practicality, irrelevant; in love, archaic. In the square, I am silenced; at school, mocked; in business, fined; at entertainment, derided; in the home, patronized; at work, muffled. My leaders are disrespected; my founder blasphemed by the new culture, new religion, and new philosophy which...suffers from an aversion to the fullness of questions, insisting that questions are meaningful only when limited to a scope much narrower than my catholic range of wonder. Yet Rabbi Soloveitchik's thesis remains that even when society rejects us, we cannot give up on society, but we also cannot amputate our religious identity from our very selves. Adam I and Adam II must be bridged. This will not be easy, but a theme throughout Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings is that all too often religion is seen as a blissful escape from life's crises, while in truth the opposite is the case. In the words of Reuven Ziegler, Rabbi Soloveitchik insisted that "religion does not offer an escape from reality, but rather provides the ultimate encounter with reality." Traditional Jews and Christians in the West face cultural challenges to their faith -- disdain, scorn, and even hate -- but if the challenge is faced with fortitude, sophistication, and honor, it will be a religious endeavor worthy of being remembered. And as both traditional Jews and Christians face this challenge, it will often be as compatriots, in a fellowship that we may not have foreseen 50 years ago. After attending the conference, I was emailed by another member of the administration, the rector of the university. He thanked me "for the pleasure of sharing that deep friendship which is a sign of the community inspired by the principles of the second Adam," and added, "[I] really enjoyed the time we passed together and the reading of the book of Rabbi Soloveitchik," which was, he reflected, "so stimulating for a better understanding of my own life and my faith." To be a person of faith is indeed to be lonely in this world. But more and more, lonely men and women of several faiths may be brought together by *The Lonely Man of Faith.* From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:42:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:42:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627194234.GE22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:18:14PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand : the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic : sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's : underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases... This is why the Maharal (Be'er 1, ch 19 or so) says that the Tur is only usable because of the BY, and SA, because it comes with the suite of nosei keilim. Speaking after years of learning AhS daily... There is a strong feel for the flow of the pesaq and how each area of halakhah is reasoned through by going to Tur, BY, SA, nosei keilim, AhS. It could be the Maharshal too would be more bothered by the Yad than by the other codes, IFF once studies the Tur or SA (or MB) with the other texts that explain how we got there. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The worst thing that can happen to a micha at aishdas.org person is to remain asleep and untamed." http://www.aishdas.org - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:36:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:36:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627183655.GC22635@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 11:54:52AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At : the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking : against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi : comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas : keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same : question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A : Baal keri is prohibited from going there. Or to put it less obliquely... The pasuq there (Bamidbar 12:4) refers to their location as Ohel Mo'ed. But the idiom is not necessarily referring to the Mishkan. Moshe went to the Ohel Mo'ed to get nevu'ah *outside* the camp. (Shemos 33) It had a pillar of cloud at the door, not at a mizbeiach. In Bamidbar 11:16 we learn that the 70 zeqeinim, after getting ruach haqodesh at the Ohel Mo'eid, returned to the camp. The Sifrei Zutra where (Bamidbar 11) writes: And he set them round about the tent the tent for speaking which was outside the camp. They made two tents, a tent for service and a tent for speaking. The outer tent had the same dimensions as the inner one, and the Levites served in both with the wagons. Two ohel mo'eds, the mishkan, and the nevu'ah center. The Ohel Mo'eid in this story also has a cloud at the door. So, I would think it was Moshe's place of nevu'ah, not the Mishkan. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and micha at aishdas.org this was a great wonder. But it is much more http://www.aishdas.org wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a Fax: (270) 514-1507 "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:38:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:38:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627193824.GD22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:19:19PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency : greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? It depends why gadol hametzuveh ve'oseh. The accepted theory is that it's because the YhR chimes up when a prohibition -- issur or bitul asei -- is involved (what pop-psych would describe as the attractiveness of "forbidden fruit"), so so one gets greater sekhar for winning the greater battle. Lefum tzaara agra. In which case, the YhR would work against keeping a neder, and so one should get more sekhar for fighting that battle. I argued that it's that someone we are obligated to do is indeed obligated because we need its effects more than someone who isn't. In which case, no one *needs* the chumerah for basic development; because if they did, it would have been obligatory. Then there would be no added value for keeping the chumerah in terms of the substance of what he's doing, but there is added value to keeping a neder. Meanwhile, it's subject to the Chullin 2a: "Tov shelo tidor mishetidor velo meshaleim." (Qoheles 5:4) Utanya: Tov mizeh umizeh, she'eino nodei kol iqar. -- Divrey R' Meir. R' Yehudah omer: Tov mizeh umizeh, nodeir umeshaleim. The gemara then continues by limiting R' Yehudah to nedarim of "harei zu" not shavu'os of "harei alai". Which would appar to include maintaining a chumerah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:07:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:07:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah In-Reply-To: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> References: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180627180708.GB22635@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 03:51:17PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote: : ... : R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" : of "Torah lishmah" means. ... :> Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions :> :> We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing :> opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. :> :> 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion :> of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent :> generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to :> fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice :> was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind :> on this thought. :> :> 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing :> in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo :> [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, :> one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is :> learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] :> :> 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh :> means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to :> learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah :> is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- :> i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar :> with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must :> learn Torah in order to fulfil it. :> :> Support for these Positions :> :> All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the :> Rishonim. :> :> 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara :> in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir :> bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the :> commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, :> that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." :> :> 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text :> reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake :> of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, :> for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out :> of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of :> the Ba'al Shem Tov. :> :> 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] :> and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Along the lines of #3, Yesushalmi Beraikha 1:1 (vilna 1a), Shabbos 1:2 (vilna 7b): One who learns but not in order to do, would have been pleasanter that his umbilical cord would have prolapsed in front of his face and he never came into the world. The Meshekh Chokhmah, Devarim 28:61, explains this in terms of the idea that the soul learns Torah with a mal'akh before birth. Someone who wants to learn as an end in itself would have been better off staying with that mal'akh! And (citing the intro to Qorban Aharon) a soul that was not born is a seikhel nivdal who grasped his Creator. All that is being given up by being born. But, if one is learning al menas laasos, which one can only do after birth, then their birth had value. The other opinion in the Y-mi is that someone who is lomei shelo al means lelameid is better off not existing. Again, the MC, notes, because the point of learning is to bring it into the world. The MC also gets this from Sanhedrin 99b, where the gemara concludes that "adam la'amal yulad" is for amal peh -- speaking Torah. While the gemara doesn't say al menas lelameid is a definiition of lishmah, the transitive property would lead me to conclude that's the implication. Al menas and lishmah... can they be distinguished? And if not 4. Al menas laasos. (I have discussed this MC before. He ends up showing that in terms of priorities, one who is going somewhere to teach doesn't have to stop to do mitzvos maasiyos; but someoen who is actually learning (and not teaching) has to stop even for a hakhsher mitzvah (maasis). This is one of my favorite shtiklach; worth a look! (There is a complete copy with a bad translation scattered among .) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jun 29 11:07:36 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 18:07:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? Message-ID: >From OU Kosher Yomis Q. What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? A. Chazal, the Talmudic Sages, prohibited cheese that is not made under the special supervision of a Jew (Avodah Zarah 29b, 35a-b). Various reasons are advanced for this rabbinic prohibition, but the reason accepted by most halachic authorities is the concern for the use of rennet enzymes from the stomach flesh of neveilah/non-kosher animals. Unsupervised cheese is termed Gevinas Akum. Cheese is only permitted if it is Gevinas Yisroel ? Jewish-supervised cheese (Yoreh Deah 115:2). This rule is unrelated to the rules of Cholov Yisroel (Jewish-supervised milk) and Cholov Akum/Cholov Stam (milk not under Jewish supervision). Therefore, even if a person eats Cholov Stam dairy products, he may only eat Gevinas Yisroel cheese. According to the Rama (Yoreh Deah 115:2) and many other poskim, Gevinas Yisroel is obtained by the mashgiach visually supervising the incorporation of the enzymes into each vat of milk in the cheese-making process; this way, the mashgiach will verify that the enzymes are kosher. According to the Shach (ibid. 20) and many other poskim, the mashgiach must manually add the enzymes to each vat of milk in the cheese-making process. The Vilna Gaon (ibid. s. 14) provides the rationale for this: Gevinas Yisroel is similar to Pas Yisroel (bread with onsite Jewish involvement) ? just like Pas Yisroel means that a Jew actually participated in the baking process, so too does Gevinas Yisroel mean that a Jew actually participated in the cheese-making process. Contemporary poskim rule that the basic halacha follows the Rama, although kashrus agencies typically endeavor to fulfill the Shach?s requirement as well. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:00:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:00:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Game Theory and Bankruptcy Message-ID: <20180629190056.GA23432@aishdas.org> Nobel Laureate R/Dr Robert Aumann famously (in our circles) explained the distribution of funds in the mishnah on Kesuvos 93a. In that mishnah, a man left behind 3 wives -- but the case works for 3 debts in general. Whatever wife 1's kesuvah is worth in the mishnah would be the same as if 1 of 3 creditors were owed the same amount. It is the creditor version that is the topic of AhS CM 104:15. But it only holds in cases where the assets aren't real estate, or if the debts are loans without certified contracts, if all the debts' contracts have the same date -- in other words, in cases where one doesn't pay the oldest loan fast. Creditor A is owed 100 zuz, creditor B is owed 200 zuz, and creditor C, 300. And the debtor has left than 600 zuz to divide. The AhS notes that there is a minority opinion that would have them divide as we today would probably consider more intuitive -- proportionally. A gets 1/6 of the assets, B gets 1/3 (ie 2/6) and C gets 1/2 (=3/6). And in his day this was a common practice. So, while one may say this became minhag hamaqom and thus a tenai implicitly accepted when doing business or lending money, the AhS recommends that if the creditors assume this division, beis din seek pesharah and divide this way. However, iqar hadin is as per the mishnah. Which the gemara tells us is R' Nasan, and R' Yehudah haNasi disagrees. (Stam mishnah, and the redactor of mishnayos doesn't mention his own opinion???) The first 100z has three claims on it and is divided in thirds. The second 100z has two claims on it, and is divided equally between B & C. And whatever is left is given to C. What this means is that whomever has the biggest loan is most likely to absorb the loss. RRA explains this case in two papers. The first, aimed more at mathematicians, invokes the Game Theoretic concept of nucleolus. (R.J. Aumann and M. Maschler, Game Theoretic Analysis of a Bankruptcy Problem from the Talmud, Journal of Economic Theory 36, no. 2 (1985), 195-213.) In the second, written for people who learn gemara, he avoids all the technical talk. ("On the Matter of the Man with Three Wives," Moriah 22 (1999), 98- 107.) The second paper compares this mishnah to the gemara at the opening of BM, and derives a general rule, RAR saying that no other division in Qiddushin would follow the same principles as the 2 person division in BM. Here is an explanatory blog post on Talmudology blog ("Judaism, Science and Medicine"), by R/Dr Jeremy Brown. (The blog would particularly be interesting to someone learning daf who is interested in science or math.) The aforementioned AhS gives two sevaras for R' Nasan's position: The first is that the first division is taken from the beinonis (mid-quality property) of the debtor's or the estate's holdings. Therefore, it has to be divided separately from the rest of B & C's debt. Each has claim to the full 100z, so each gets equally. The second division is taken from the beinonis of what the person owned that the time he started owing B & C money, and if there is non left, from the ziburis (lesser quality). Again, different material, so it is divided without consideration to the remainder of the debt to C. merchandise. Therefore, it is accounted for separately The second explanation focuses on why this case is different than shutefus, where the shutefim do divide proportionally to their investments. The debtor's assets are entirely meshubadim to A just as much as to B or C. C can't get his 300z until A's 100z is accounted for, no less than the other way around -- each has full power to halt distribution of any of the man's assets. So the division is by shibud, which is equal. But with shutefim, the profit is clearcut. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late micha at aishdas.org to become the person http://www.aishdas.org you might have been. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - George Eliot From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Migo vs Chazakah Message-ID: <20180629194917.GA8106@aishdas.org> AhS 82:18 is a qunterus on migo. Looking at #6 (within se'if 18), RYMEpstein looks at two gemaros that discuss migo bemaqom rov -- BB 5a and Qiddushin 64. In BB, Raza"l say that while rov adif meichazaqah, this is not true for every chazaqah. Chezqas mamon outranks rov (you don't make someone pay up on a "probably"), because the mi'ut yeshno ba'olam, so we can't take something out of his hands -- maybe he is of the mi'ut. This is true even though chezas haguf adif mechezqas mamon and migo adif meichezqas haguf. So chazaq IOW: rov > migo rov > chezaqa chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon So rov > chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon But chezqas mamon > rov -- where mi'ut yeshno be'olam, without bitul Acharei rabim lehatos is a case of bitul, so if the majority of dayanim rule that the nit'an has to pay up, that rov does trump chezqas mamon. Hoserver the gemara in R' Nasan says: "Mah li leshaqer?" ki chazaqah dami. Lo asi chazaqah ve'aqrah chazaqah legamrei. (R' Nasan shows up in two of my posts in a row!) Migo doesn't trump chazaqah, because assuming a person wouldn't give that particular lie is itself a chazaqah. Which is it? Another related issue that confuses me is what kind of chazaqah is a chezqas mamon: One could say it's a chazaqah demei'iqara -- preserving the status quo of who has the money. One could say it's a chazaqah disvara -- normally property belongs to the person holding it. Now, say the to'ein is tofeis the money he claims. This can at times work, because it shifts which is hamotzi meichaveiro when they get to BD. However, we know this is a normal case of the person holding the money, we know how he got it. So how would my chazaqah disvara apply? OTOH, it's not your usual case of presrving the old halachic state, because everyone agrees that before the dispute, the property was the nitan's. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger How wonderful it is that micha at aishdas.org nobody need wait a single moment http://www.aishdas.org before starting to improve the world. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anne Frank Hy"d From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jun 30 21:01:59 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? Message-ID: Naaah, of course he was not Jewish. The subject line was just to get your attention. But then again.... I would not have surprised me if Bil'am had said, "I can't do what my god doesn't let me do." After all, religious people of *any* religion generally refrain from going against the will of their god. Likewise, I would not have been surprised if he said, "I can't do what Hashem doesn't let me do." He is a professional, and he knows the rules of the game (most clearly seen in maftir). He knows who he is dealing with, and if he is trying to curse the Jews, it would be a good idea to follow the rules of the Jewish God. But Bil'am didn't say either of those things. What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase. There have been plenty of polytheists who accept the idea that there are many gods, One of them being Hashem, the God of the Jews. But in this pasuk, we see that Bil'am goes beyond accepting Hashem as *a* god - he accepts Him as "my God". I checked my concordance and found about 50 cases in Tanach of the phrase "Hashem Elokai", spelling "Elokai" with either a patach or a kamatz. It seems that this was the ONLY case where this phrase was used by a non-Jew. Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Sat Jun 30 22:44:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 01:44:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180701054415.GA28439@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 12:01:59AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me : do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase... : Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding : has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply : spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now : it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not : have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I : guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. This works well with my recent (few minute old) blog post. I argue that the whole point of Bil'am might have been to illustrate how monotheism and deveiqus don't guarantee being good people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Aspaqlaria Bil'am the Frummy by micha ? Published 18 Tammuz 5778 - Sun, Jul 1, 2018 Sun, Jul 1, 2018 The Medrash Tankhuma (Balaq 1) says: And if you ask: Why did the Holy One blessed be He, let his Shechinah rest upon so wicked a non-Jew? So that the [other] peoples would have no excuse to say, `If we had nevi'im, we would have changed for the better', He established for then nevi'im. Yet they [these nevi'im] broke down the moral fence of the world... For that matter, the Sifrei says on the last pasuq of the Torah: And another navi did not arise again in Israel like Moshe: In Israel, [another] one did not arise, but among the nations of the world, one did arise. And who was it? Bil'am ben Be'or. So here you have a prophet with the abilities of Moshe (whatever they meant by that) and yet he was no paragon of moral virtue. He didn't teach them how to lift themselves up, but how to corrupt the Jews. So how does that address the complaint of the nations? They had their navi, but they said it was unfair that they didn't have nev'i'im to give moral instruction -- and Bil'am wasn't capable of leading them in that way. Perhaps Bil'am stood for them as an example to teach them just that point. The nations are described as complaining that if they only had a navi they would have been as good as the Jews. But Bil'am was there to show them nevu'ah wasn't the answer. Even being a navi and having the Shechinah rest upon them is not sufficient to make an ideal person. The whole detour into telling us about an event in the lives of Balaq and Bil'am is such a departure from the rest of the Torah, it is considered a separate book. "Moshe wrote his book and Parashas Bil'am" (Bava Basra 14b) So why it it included? Based on the above suggestion, the section teaches us about the dangers of frumkeit. We can get so caught up in the pursuit of deveiqus, one's personal relationship with G-d, one can end up as self-centered and honor-seeking as Bil'am. We need to start out pursuing moral and ethical behavior, ehrlachkeit, and then the connection with the Divine can be harnessed to reach those goals. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 30 21:01:27 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pinchas Message-ID: <56A42568-E095-442F-A19F-017F306492C3@cox.net> ?Pinhas? has turned back Chamasi, my wrath, from the people of Israel.? (Num.25:11) Pinhas has proven his unusual power to turn back God?s wrath from Israel through a very courageous, difficult and controversial act. The Vilna Gaon brilliantly observes that in the word chamasi (my wrath), the two outside letters ches and yud read chai ? life ? while the inside letters mem and sav read meit ? death. The hidden meaning is that by Pinchos facing squarely what has taken place on the outside, he has miraculously turned back the wrath of the Almighty. In doing so, he has removed death (meis) from the inside, replacing it with life (chai). Why do we pray with a set text? An opinion recorded in the Talmud states that prayers correspond to the daily sacrifices offered in the Temple which are mentioned in this coming week's portion of Pinchas. (Numbers 28:4) It has been argued that this opinion may be the conceptual base for our standardized prayer. Since sacrifices had detailed structure, so too do our prayers have a set text. If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 08:09:35 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 01:09:35 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: This year's incarnation of the Gebrochts discussion attempts to discuss the Halacha and I think traverses territory not clearly enunciated in the past. Also I would not characterise this as Gebrochts-bashing; I dont believe anyone is troubled by those who say, "My Rebbe/My tradition is not to eat whatever it may be" the issue is that Gebrochts is promoted as Halachically legitimate and therefore preferred if not mandated. The ShA HaRav declares firstly, that as far as the Halachah is concerned, there is no concern with Kneidlach during Pesach, see the link - http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=25074&st=&pgnum=486 He does however advise that it is a valid stringency his first observation/proof however is that flour can be found on the surface of the Matzos and later on says this is quite common However, A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years B] no other Posek ever verified this claim this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within the finished Matza - but C] there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already been made D] even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link provided - It is universally accepted these days that flour is not added to a dough already made and there is no Matza baking program that permits adding flour to the already made dough Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 18:30:38 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 21:30:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The not-Korban Pesach Message-ID: I had asked: : It has come to me attention recently that the Torah never refers to : the Pesach as a Korban... : My question is this: Whatever reason it was, why the Torah avoided : using that word in this context ... why did Chazal feel differently? Upon further research, it seems that my question was based on the *mistaken* assumption that the Pesach was unique in this regard. It turns out that while the Torah does use the word "korban", it never uses phrases such as "Korban Tamid", "Korban Todah", or "Korban Musaf". These were referred to simply as the Tamid, the Todah, and the Musaf, just as the Pesach was. Apparently, construction of the phrase came much later, and was applied to them all. Exception: The "Korban Mincha" is mentioned three times in Vayikra 2, but that would change the whole question drastically. I should also clarify: these phrases aren't missing only from the Torah, but from the whole Tanach. They seem to have arisen after the Tanach. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sun Apr 1 20:40:08 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 23:40:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b27445d-5dde-c27e-a809-871e12258604@sero.name> On 01/04/18 11:09, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years Who is "we"? > B] no other Posek ever verified this claim > this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within > the finished Matza - but > > C]? there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not > thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product > the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already > been made Perhaps you mean no *other* posek, because this one clearly says it. It's no surprise that nobody before him mentions it, because he says it's a recent phenomenon. > D]? even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link > provided - This is a bizarre claim. The teshuvah "admits" no such thing. First of all, the footnote is obviously not part of the teshuvah, not by its author, and thus completely irrelevant to anything. Second, the footnote does not "admit" such a thing either. It brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 1 21:12:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 06:12:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions, one that basically is an exception that proves the rule and the other is a real exception. 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. 2) Powered chalav nochri. Labels here are supposed to state that a product containts powered chalav nochri (if it does). This was the result of a lawsuit.? I guess that no one wants to start listing every possible kula that goes into a food product. OTOH? if meat isn't halaq, labels generally don't state it. They only state the meat's halaq status if it is halaq. Ben On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: > I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the > lines to fine, or it becomes unusable. Once it's certifying a product > as lacking qitniyos, it might as well stick to avoiding all qitniyos > rather than having a confusing (to some) explanation on each package > which minhagim can or can't use the product. > > The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that > in a number of ways. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 1 18:58:35 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 21:58:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which >is eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give >his full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are >15,000 Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. Have patience and watch developments. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 2 07:10:57 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:10:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 01/04/18 21:58, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >> I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which is >> eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give his >> full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are 15,000 >> Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. > > Have patience and watch developments. Do you claim prophecy, or are you breaking silence on some vast and hereto unsuspected conspiracy? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 3 08:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180403150030.GA23693@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 06:12:23AM +0200, Ben Waxman wrote: : On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: :> I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the :> lines to fine, or it becomes unusable... :> The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that :> in a number of ways. : I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions... I think what I said is really particular to the US, or maybe chu"l as a whole. Where people who keep kosher will suffer with less, and people who don't won't care what has a hekhsher and what doesn't. Few people will make a less observant choice if an Amerucan hekhsher chooses to be more machmir than their own minhagim require. Non-Mehardin rabbanut has a strong motive away from least common denominator. They have a responsibility to a large population that will buy with a hekhsher IFF and only if the sacrifice is not too onerous. : 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that : they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that : proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any : case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically : stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. I recall the marshmallows sold in the US with a long explanation as to why the mei qitniyos they contain are a non-issue. Tha candy with a teshuvah on every wrapper. (Even better than Laffy Taffy or Bazooka Joe!) Unfortunately, they all have the same one. Pretty much the same thing. But didn't work in the US in the long run, as the rightward drift continued. :-)||ii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 3rd day micha at aishdas.org in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Chesed: What is perfectly Fax: (270) 514-1507 balanced Chesed? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 3 21:58:05 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:58:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin Message-ID: One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, he does this privately, since the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was sitting up front without wearing tefillin. When I asked his brother, who does put on tefillin during Chol Moed, about this, he told that the rabbi put on tefillin during Chol Moed until he married. "Our minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed," he said. My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in the ladies section. Thus I do not understand how the rabbi of the shul that I davened in yesterday could sit up front facing everyone without wearing tefillin. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 06:28:11 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:28:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Professor L. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 12:58 AM > My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them > in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put > on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should > not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in > Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in > the ladies section. This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom came from different places with different minhogim. According to halokho, what the acharonim say about wearing t'fillin or not halakhically does not apply here. Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where there was a mnhag hamokom. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 4 07:44:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:44:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin References: Message-ID: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 09:28 AM 4/4/2018, Mandel, Seth wrote: >This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." >But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from >Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom >came from different places with different minhogim.... >Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where >there was a mnhag hamokom. If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 08:07:12 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 15:07:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: , <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: From: Prof. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 10:44 AM > If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section > than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin > can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section Any shul has the right to set up its own rules, and anyone who davens there has to follow its rules. That is also halokho. Even if they were to make a rule, for instance, that one must wear green on Chanukka. Or that the shul must say the prayer for the State of Israel. But to claim that it is halokho that in America people who daven with t'fillin may not daven together with people who do not is wrong. There is no such halokho in America. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 4 20:58:28 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 05:58:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6b0af463-987c-0e3e-d5a2-27cb630b86ba@zahav.net.il> On 4/4/2018 6:58 AM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is > to put on tefillin during Chol Moed,? he does this privately,? since > the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. > > > Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin > during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was > sitting up front without wearing tefillin.? When I asked his brother . > . . . . > Wouldn't the rav in question be the proper person to ask? ?Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at mail.gmail.com Wed Apr 4 23:46:31 2018 From: meirabi at mail.gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: The ShA HaRav does not initiate this ban on Gebrochts as his own, rather he bases himself upon the propositions of Poskim which we are now exploring, and it seems that they actually do not support the proposition to create a ban against Gebrochts. A] The observation made by the ShA HaRav, which is central to his anti-Gebrochts argument - is un-supported. Our Poskim and our personal experience, has verified that there is no such thing as flour being found on the surface of baked Matza. B] The ShA HaRav does not issue his own assessment [other than observing flour on the surface of baked Matza] but relies upon other Poskim to support the proposition that flour remains within the finished Matza. However, no such thing is found in the Poskim, other than in situations where flour is added to a dough which is ALREADY formed. No Posek ever suggested that a normal dough may not be thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product. And the ShA HaRav admits this by saying that nowadays the dough is made very hard, dry, with very little water i.e. it is not surprising that Poskim have not discussed this as it is a concern that is due only to this recent change. But no other Poskim from his time endorsed the reasoning that flour is found on the surface of baked Matza etc. C] it is surprising to hear a devoted Chabadnik suggesting that the footnotes found in the KeHos, the official Chabad publishers' publication - are completely irrelevant to the Teshuvah. There are 2 versions to understanding note 33 on the link provided = here is the gobbledigook version - "it brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions" = here is the plain speak version - "this is the best we can find to support the proposition" which is, however which way you turn it, no support at all for this new concern of flour remaining within the baked Matza. One can hardly but suspect that the footnote was added because the Taz and MaAv that the ShA HaRav next refers to, is no support at all for banning Gebrochts, because their observations are exclusively applicable to thick soft Matzos that were under suspicion of having had flour added to the dough during its kneading - and as we mentioned - this had already been comprehensively stamped out by the times of the ShA HaRav. Remember, they were kneading soft dough for soft Matza and it was quite likely that the dough may have been a little too loose and one would be tempted to add more flour to it. So there we have it - if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not - then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha - then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Apr 7 20:38:51 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 23:38:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Isru Chag Message-ID: <64A81636-64D4-4FF1-B35D-C25381E32A1C@cox.net> The gematria for Isru Chag is 278, the same gematria for l'machar found in Bamidbar, Ch.11, vs.18. This is in the Sidra, Beha'alotch, where God has Moshe establish a Sanhedrin because Moshe complained that he could not carry on alone. God says to Moshe: "To the people you shall say, 'Prepare yourselves for tomorrow and you shall eat meat..." There is an interesting tie here. The day after a festival is the "morrow" and even though the holiday is over, we must always be preparing ourselves. As a matter of fact, in counting the omer, we are preparing ourselves for mattan Torah in 50 days. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Sat Apr 7 21:15:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 14:15:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 "Rabbi Meir G. Rabi" wrote: > So there we have it -- if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your > parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o > Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and > enjoy Pesach Is RMG Rabi's post on Gebrokts consonant with the comment of the Mishna Brura. The Chafetz Chaim stated that even though one may have doubts as to the Halachic imperative of being careful (yes, perhaps needlessly) about Matza Shruya, nevertheless, "one should not be MAZNIACH [translate as you will] those who have this Chumra" In particular, it seems to me that the practice of actually keeping Shruya is very much in line with many other Chumras that people have. Consider Garlic on Pesach, for example. I would posit that today the chance of garlic inducing Chametz is akin to itinerant matza flour being present on a baked Matza. Nonetheless, those who have this Chumra, keep it. They keep it because of the Minhag to be Machmir on Pesach! That Minhag, by its nature is concerned with the infinitessimal. There are many other examples. The Belzer don't eat carrots because of a Chametz incident. They were Machmir from then on. Lubavitchers has an incident with sugar and were Machmir from then on to pre-cook it. Halacha on Pesach does admit the concept of remote Chumras! Yes, for those who look at things from a non Pesach purist halachic view, may well scratch their heads. Nonetheless, the Chafets Chaim taught us that we should not be Mazniach. The idea that Pesach cannot be enjoyed without Kneidlach is fanciful, and not directly born out by plain Halacha. The Halacha specifies Meat and Wine as primary inputs from Gashmiyus food that give rise to happiness. Yes, B'Sar Shlomim (not chicken) and wine (good enough for Nisuch Hamizbeach?) To state "if you are CONCERNED about Halacha... eat Kneidlach" is perhaps a worse actualisation than "Mazniach" as it implies that such people are acting in perhaps some antinomian-like chassidic voodoo practice. [ One can argue quite cogently, for example, that wearing a Gartel today is also "not in line with the Halacha". (We wear underpants!) We do not, however, dismiss such practices. [On Shruya see also Gilyoney Hashas from Rav Yosef Engel Psachim 40b]] The Ari z'l stated that he would never 'talk against' a minhag yisrael/chumra on Pesach. In summary, and I've felt that RMG Rabi, Halacha is not a pure science which leads to a true/false conclusion for every question that is investigated using the rules of the Halacha. Admission: My father a'h had the Minhag from his family (likely via Amshinover fealty) not to eat Gebrokts. This is Toras Imecha for me, especially on Pesach, and whilst I know that in general this practice is unique to families who follow the minhogim of the Talmidei HaBaal Shem, and is most minor, I state quite openly that deciding NOT to follow a family minhag/chumra on Pesach would be FAR more upsetting and disturbing to me than not eating Kneidlach. I'm happy to wait for the last day, and for the record, I am not a fan of them, despite my wife being a superlative cook. Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a "hot dog roll". "It is only the anticipation of redemption that preserves Judaism in Exile, while Judaism in the Land of Israel is the redemption itself." Rabbi A.I. Hacohen Kook From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 8 05:55:41 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 12:55:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent actions of Simcha Felder. >From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv "Using his leverage as the swing vote in the divided State Senate, Sen. Simcha Felder appears to have strong-armed a provision into the budget that significantly changes state oversight of yeshiva curricula, political observers say. " I have talked to some people who live in Willimsburg, and the picture they paint of the level of secular education in Hassidic yeshivas is not a good one. One Satmar woman who lives in Williamsburg told me that her sons received no secular education in the Satmar yeshiva they attended. For the record NYS law requires that all children receive a secular education. What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf R. Barukh Schick of Shklov (d. 1808): When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . . . He urged me to translate into Hebrew as much secular wisdom as possible, so as to cause the nations to disgorge what they have swallowed, making it available to all, thereby increasing knowledge among the Jews. Thus, the nations will no longer be able to lord it over us-and bring about the profaning of God's name-with their taunt: "Where is your wisdom?" R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. I:Iayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, 6 through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash. The Gaon of Vilna's sons: By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... 8 First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): I cannot refrain from repeating a true and astonishing story that I heard from the Gaon's disciple R. Menachem Mendel. . . . 10 It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. This included its inner and outer manifestations. He explained: All secular wisdom is essential for our holy Torah and is included in it. He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. He especially praised music, explaining that most of the Torah accents, the secrets of the Levitical songs, and the secrets of the Tikkunei Zohar could not be comprehended without mastering it. ... He explained the significance of the various secular disciplines, and noted that he had mastered them all. Regarding the discipline of medicine, he stated that he had mastered anatomy, but not pharmacology. Indeed, he had wanted to study pharmacology with practicing physicians, but his father prevented him from undertaking its study ,fearing that upon mastering it he would be forced to curtail his Torah study whenever it would become necessary for him to save a life. . . . He also stated that he had mastered all of philosophy, but that he had derived only two matters of significance from his study of it. . . . The rest of it, he said, should be discarded. To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw for this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 8 05:22:36 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 08:22:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Message-ID: <9ABBE35B-0F5B-4CD1-917D-550FD3E33394@cox.net> 9:1 "Vay'hi bayom hashemini..." The Sages teach that the word "vay'hi" often indicates that trouble or grief is associated with the narrative (Megillah 10b). What trouble or grief could there have been on that joyous first day of Nissan? It presages the tragic deaths of Aaron?s sons, Nadav and Avihu. Another explanation: Even in the midst of our greatest rejoicing, a Jewish wedding, we pause for a moment to recall the destruction of the Temple and the fragility of life through the breaking of the glass. Here, too, we have such a happy occasion, but the "Vay'hi" is to remind us of our fallibility and the frailty of life. There are many commentaries on Aaron?s response when told of his sons' deaths: Vayidom Aharon, ?and Aaron was silent.? It is somewhat coincidental that the third syllable of vayidom sounds a little like the English word ?dumb.? One of the literal meanings of the word ?dumb? is mute and unable to speak. It seems to me that Aaron?s silence was his inability to speak due to shock. Many people would faint dead away if told of such news. So it really isn?t surprising that his reaction was one of a deafening silence. When two egotists meet "It's an I for an I" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 8 12:08:57 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2018 21:08:57 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rabbis Ben Nun, Sherlo, and Rimon have come out strongly against the wheat substitutes and feel that they should be banned. In their opinion, the primary reason for the kitniyot minhag is to prevent mixing up the various grains. Eating these types of products will lead to the same confusion. Ben On 4/8/2018 6:15 AM, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: > Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they > essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and > pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are > quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a > "hot dog roll". From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 07:29:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 10:29:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180409142919.GG25254@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 12:55:41PM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects : in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent : actions of Simcha Felder. : : From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv ... : What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular : studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept : only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time : studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, rather than the one you're critiquing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 07:54:47 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:54:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: Message-ID: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:29 AM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with >the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? > >You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh >in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, >rather than the one you're critiquing. And what do you do with the GRA's statement When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . simply ignore it? This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech cannot go against the facts. Also from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf Friesenhausen's critique, however, was hardly confined to the left; he also had to contend with the right: I appeal especially to all those who fear God and tremble at His word, that they not heed the false claims of those who plot against secular wisdom . . . , unaware that those who make such claims testify against themselves, saying: "We are devoid of Torah, we have chosen folly as our guide." For had the light of Torah ever shone upon them, they would have known the teaching of R. Samuel bar Nachtmeni at Shabbat 75a and the anecdotes about Rabban Gamaliel and R. Joshua at Horayot 10a. Also, they would have been aware of the many talmudic discussions that can be understood only with the aid of secular wisdom. Should you, however, meet a master of the Talmud who insists on denigrating secular wisdom, know full well that he has never understood those talmudic passages whose comprehension is dependent upon knowledge of secular wisdom. . . . He is also unaware that he denigrates the great Jewish sages of the past and their wisdom, as well. Worst of all are those guilty of duplicity. They speak arrogantly in public, either to appease the fools and gain honor in their eyes, or out of envy of the truly wise, disparaging those who appreciate secular wisdom, yet in their hearts they believe otherwise. See in the above link the Chasam Sofer's evaluation of Rabbi Friesenhausen. He was indeed a talmud Chacham. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 08:17:47 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:17:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:54:47AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : And what do you do with the GRA's statement .... : simply ignore it? Yes, that's exactly what the Chassidim who run the mosedos in question do with many of the Gra's statements. Why would it surprise anyone if they ignore this as well? As for me, as in your question, "what do you do", that's an entirely different issue. : This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree : with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech : cannot go against the facts. It may be more productive to ask about 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on and 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. Being surprised when Chassidim don't see the world the way the Gra did isn't really useful or warranted. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 11:28:06 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 14:28:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 1144 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 13:30:59 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:30:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180409203059.GB4975@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is : not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with : what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find : that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Or any of a million other things someone who disagrees with the Gra might suggest. A few years back there was a storm, and my son's grade school rebbe ended up losing a son to a downed power line. The friend who tried saving the son died immediately. The boy lingered for about 2 weeks. We attended the levayah. The father was proud that his young son went to his Maker pure, unsullied even by learning the alphabet. Alef-beis, yes, the child knew; but they hadn't yet begun the English alphabet. Not a sentiment I would share. In fact, hearing it from a rebbe who taught my son in a MO school, I found it kind of startling. But it's a perspective. And if it fosters accepting ol malkhus shamayim and ol mitzvos, raising children who are "ohavei H', yir'sei E-lokim, anshei emes, zera qodesh..." who am I to say it's not the right answer for someone else? :> It may be more productive to ask about :> 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on :> and :> 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. : Rabbi Dr. Shnayer Leiman, who wrote the article from which the : quotes come... I meant in each point something different than what your responses reflect. To spell out further: 1- The reports that lead you to believe the norm for secular education in chassidishe chadorim today is actually as weak as you believe. Rather than the likelihood that the more extreme stories are the ones more often reported. They could all fully be true, and yet not reflect the experiences of a statistically significant number of American students. Or perhaps they do. I would want statistics, not anecdotes, before judging. For example, I did not notice it any easier to teach Sukkah 7b-8a "sukkah ha'asuyah kekivshan" and the diagonal of squares vs circles or their areas to MO Jews who weren't themselves in STEM fields than to American chareidim. And if things were so bad, how do so many end up "in computers", if not in a job that requires as much post-HS education as mine? 2- How do they understand those "facts" about needing limudei chol to succeed in limudei chodesh. Which of the numerous possible responses I refered to in response to the first snippet in this email they actually believe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 15:12:48 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 18:12:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:30 PM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: >: One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is >: not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with >: what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find >: that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... > >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 15:31:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 18:31:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409223134.GD12000@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:48PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's : >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. : : Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" : is learning? I hope not. I am implying that it is valid for the chassidim whose school you are critiquing to believe so. And yes, they probably believe that the Gra's hisnagdus was an error caused by his exposure to the wrong set of ideas. They *certainly* believe that of RYBS. (Or at least did in his lifetime. I see an "acharei mos - qedushim" effect currently going on with RYBS's memory.) As I wrote, I am defending the position in an eilu va'eilu sense. It is not a position to which I personally subscribe, nor could subscribe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com Mon Apr 9 23:17:53 2018 From: rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com (Rabbi Meir Rabi) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:17:53 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Gebrochts - MInhag but absolutely no foundation in Halacha Message-ID: My Gebrochts postings have been to clarify one point - it is wrong to claim that Gebrochts is Halachically mandated or justified and points to anything other than a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition. and I do thank RIB for his query to which the answer is a firm NO - my observation - [if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach] - is in no manner a violation of, "one should not be MAZNIACH [ridicule] those who have this Chumra" IF they do not eat Gebrochts FOR THE RIGHT REASON i.e. a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition BTW - I do not see this in the ChCHayim, pity RIB did not provide sourcing But it is in the ShTeshuvah [460:2] - Nevertheless those who wish to sanctify themselves by refraining from that which is permitted - soaked and cooked Matza, even that which has been [baked hard] and ground [again referring to the corrected practice of making Matza meal from thinner hard baked Matza and NOT from thicker soft Matza which was grated on a Rib Ayzen, and at greater risk of being underbaked and Chametz] - should not be ridiculed. RIB has not suggested any argument to associate not eating garlic during Pesach with Gebrochts, and I have no idea what makes one Chumra IN LINE with other Chumras. Neither do I understand the significance to our discussion/disagreement. We both urge those who do not wish to eat Gebrochts/Garlic etc because their parents etc did not - to keep their tradition. However, the natural corollary is - that IF you DO NOT have such a custom - then eat them and enjoy Pesach because there is no legitimate Halachic imperative. Also, the reference to Keneidelach being an important contribution to Oneg Yom Tov is not of my making - it comes from great and highly respected Poskim. It is also not correct to characterise this Minhag as being concerned with the infinitesimal - because that is the Halacha - a speck of flour can become Chametz and ruin your entire Pesach. Indeed this was the very point I am making - there is no substance in Halacha to support this concern - if there was it would be Halacha. And finally - If anything, the urging that we not be Mazniach, demonstrates that Halacha has no concerns about this issue. We ought to however, nevertheless, not ridicule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 01:37:42 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:37:42 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: " Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge." You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a question of cost/benefit for the masses. Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is greater then benefit. The people you listed were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 02:23:50 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:23:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: At 04:37 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will >affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a >question of cost/benefit for the masses. > >Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be >harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is >greater then benefit. The people you listed > >were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 03:05:03 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:05:03 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular > studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am > paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular > subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not > study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" > > I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from > observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of > Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. > > YL > > And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: "All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are largely Orthoprax." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 02:16:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:16:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: Will those who are against the teaching of secular subjects simply ignore what R. Yhonason Eybeschutz wrote in Yaaros Devash 2:7 (as translated by L. Levi in Torah and Science, pages 24-25)? For all the sciences are ?condiments? and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impureand how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:32:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:32:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:31:27AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: :> Is that a common interperation of minhag hamaqom -- that there be :> a common practice in all things? I understood minhag hamaqom to :> be designated practive by practice. : Otherwise the concept of Minhag Ha Makom is meaningless.... Again, why? It is meaningful to say, "here, the minhag hamaqom is to say "umoried hageshem", not "gashem", without making reference to anything else the qeillah might do. Why do we need a context of a qehillah that has many such rules rather than a few? And how many? : Many people wear tefillin on chol hamoed in Eretz : Yisroel, including some gedolim. However, some do : it betzinoh so it is not so well known. You misspelled, "a tiny percentage". : One such godol is the Erlauer Rebbe. You can go : in his beis medrash and see him with tefillin. He : keeps the minhogim of his zeide, the Chasam : Sofer, to wear tefillin on chol hamoed and daven nusach Ashkenaz. One may argue that the Erlau community has their own minhag, and their beis medrash it's own minhag hamaqom. But that raises questions of how one defines "maqom" that I don't know how to answer. .... : Bekitzur, Al titosh toras imecho, keep on : following your minhog and Al yisbayeish., as the : Rama says in beginning of Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim. Minhag avos is inferior to minhag hamaqom. In fact, we have had a hard time finding its basis. The best I can come up with is that minhag avos means that in the absence of a minhag hamaqom in your current location, you should follow the minhag hamaqom of your prior location even if that means the location of your avos. :> For other things? Give it time. How long did it take Jews from Provence, :> Italy and elsewhere to congeal into a single minhag Ashkenaz? : On the contrary, I doubt that the Chassidim will : ever eat Gebrokts on Pesach, the Sephardim will : stop eating kitnyos, and the non-Chassidic world : will stop eating Gebrokts on Pesach. And yet nowadays Sepharadim make an Ashkenazi qutzo shel yud, to be yotzei lekhos hadei'os. Yekkes and Litvaks eat glatt out of necessity (go find reliable non-glatt), but how many would eat that piece of non-glatt if they found a reliable hekhsher for it? Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. The choilam is far broader in the US than its ancestry; and in other communities, tav-lessness caught on. How many non-Morrocans in Israel celebrate Mimouna nowadays? It seems from the media, this minhag is spreading. (I think it would be a beautiful thing for "misht-night" communities to adopt. After a week of not being guests, make a point of sharing food and showing it had nothing to do with a lack of friendship.) I see lines coalescing. These things take centuries, and accelerate as people who remember pre-migration life pass away. We just begun. I think it is less that a Minhag America can't emerge than the mashiach won't give it the time necesssary to emerge. And Minhag EY may go back to being by sheivet and nachalah, but in any case its evolution will be radically changed by the rapid influx of the rest of Kelal Yisrael. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:03:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:03:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:37:30PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as : a trivia question for now). There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one were considered propitious for a large crop. (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:12:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:12:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101226.GC31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 07:50:13AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat before Biur : Chametz? What makes this mitzva different from so many other mitzvos, where : we cannot eat until doing rhe required act? When the issur de'oraisa begins is a machloqes tannaim (RH 28a-b): Rabbi Yehudah holds starting from chatzos, R Meir - from sheqi'ah. (Does the issur start from when the non-qorban could be shechted, or when it could be eaten?) The Rambam in Chameitz uMatzah 1:8 pasqens chatzos, as do we when we make the zeman 1 hour before chatzos (rather than 1 hour before sheqi'ah). MiDerabbanan, it's pushed earlier, and that's the safety margin. But I don't think that's enough to make it a morning mitzvah that it must be done first thing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:19:33 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:19:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 02:15:47PM +1000, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: : Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they : essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and : pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are : quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a : "hot dog roll". It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. Like not declaring quinoa to be qitniyos. And unlike declating peanuts to be. (Which some of Eastern Europe did, and as RMF attests, some didn't.) For that matter, is there anyone whose ancestors had the minhag of qitniyos but didn't include corn when it was brought over from the New World? Since minhag is by definition informal and mimetic, what happens to catch on or not doesn't trouble me. Boils down to a qasheh oif a masseh. (You can't ask a "question on a story"; how it happened is how it happened, unreasonalbe or not.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From isaac at balb.in Tue Apr 10 03:24:59 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:24:59 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> On Apr 10, 2018 at 8:19 pm, wrote: > It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, > even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. > There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels > would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of another term. From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 02:59:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:59:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] PESACH -- AFTER 400 YEARS GD'S IN A HURRY TO REDEEM US? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410095948.GA31049@aishdas.org> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:28:48PM +1100, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: : We begin the Seder with Matza being a reminder of our suffering -- but we : conclude it with a new perspective -- Matza reminds us of how quickly Gd : took us out of Egypt. Actually, that's the end of Maggid, not the end of the seder. Later than that in the seder, Hillel reminds us of a third aspect of matzah -- al matzos umorerim yokhluhu. Not that of slavery, nor of leaving, but of the midnight in between, and every Pesach thereafter. There is a fourth aspect: Lechom oni -- she'onim alav devarim harbei. Rashi takes this idea so seriously that he holds you're not yotzei the mitzvah with matzah eaten before Maggid. Matzah that didn't have the haggadah is not lechem oni. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:51:53 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:51:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> References: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> Message-ID: <20180410105153.GB23901@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:24:59PM +1000, Isaac Balbin wrote: : It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the : Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of : another term. The only thing we know for sure is that it included some subset of grain-like foods and of legumes. Any reason as to why is a post-facto theory. Multiple exist. In principle, pasqaning one such shitah is right, and therefore the rabbanim who made a din must have intended to include the new case is possible. But not compelled. We often leave a gezeira off where it originally ended because it's not for us to ban more things than Chazal did. All the more so in a case like qitniyos, when it's not a rabbinic issur but a minhag. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 05:14:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 08:14:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10.4C.08474.AFAACCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:05 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies >curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not >higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance >is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study >http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p >which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: >"All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, >when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are >largely Orthoprax." I am not claiming that the study of secular subjects is any sort of guarantee that one will remain religious. The reasons for someone to give up observance or to water down their observance are complex. However, for many reasons it is important to have a basic secular education. One of them is to open up some opportunities to earn a living. And let me be clear, I am not talking about a "Harvard" secular education. But I see no reason why someone born in the US should not be able to speak, read and write English. I have an Op Ed piece that will appear in this week's Jewish Press on the topic of secular subjects in chassidic yeshivas. In part it reads Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. Parents do not have a blanket right to determine the education of their children. Would you say that a parent has a right to send his child to a school that preaches Antisemitism and prejudice? Also, based on my experience as an educator for over 50 years, I have to say that parents do not always know what is best for their children educationally. Choosing to enroll one's sons in a school that does not give a basic secular education is a very poor choice. Also, having a school that does not give a basic secular education is against the law as is clear from my recent Jewish Press article. Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma let alone a Regents diploma? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Tue Apr 10 04:29:37 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:29:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: It's not only the lack of secular education (that R' Yitschok Levine refers to) or knowledge to interact with the secular world (that R. Hirsch z"l is reported to have referred to) that is the problem; it's the abysmal standard of the education they do receive, the overall intellectual integrity, and their attitude to anything scientific. Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. As far as i recall, the Munkatche Rebbe [frequently?] visited the Natural History Museum when he could. There is such a terrific gap in some of our children's education that it's hard to believe it's not going to be detrimental in some way to their development. [I know I'm spouting to the 'converted', but thanks for the opportunity to at least voice my concerns somewhere.] Dovid Rubin From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 06:07:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:07:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. I will just deal with one of the things you raised. If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against the crowd, this practice would end. YL The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of Volumes I-IV. The German custom to bring a young boy to the synagogue with a wirnpel (wrapping for t he Torah scroll) has no connection whatsoever to the practice of the chalaka (the Arabic term for Upsherin) observed by Sepharadirn and later ad opted by many Chasidirn. Th e custom of holding a special celebration marking the boy's first haircut developed among these groups. The celebration takes place at a specific age, usually three. Th e festivity is customarily held near the gravesite of a tzadik or in a synagogue. T his custom was unknown in ancient Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities. The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are found in accounts written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim. Some three centuries later, we find the first indications that the custom had made its way into Chasidic circles. The most important source concerning the chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. The details of this story are somewhat vague, and it is unclear whether the Ari-zal made a chalaka for his son, or whether the account refers to his disciple, Rabbi Yonatan Sagish. There is also some question as to whether the Ari-zal participated in Lag Ba 'omer events in Meron after his kabalistic insights because the custom to conduct a chalaka on Lag Ba 'omer runs in opposition to the Ari-zal' s final ruling that forbade hair cutting during the orner period. Furthermore, the custom of the chalaka has given rise to some questions as to the propriety of hair cutting at a gravesite or synagogue, which might constitute an infringement upon the sanctity of the site. Some have also questioned the permissibility of haircutting on Lag Ba omer, during bein ha-rnetzarirn (the three weeks before Tisha B' A v) or during Chol Ha 'rno 'ed. Yet another concern was the immodest behavior that occasionally accompanied this event. :Most Sephardic and Chasidic rabbis applauded, or at least defended the practices observed in their circles, though there were those who forbade The custom in this manner. Rabbi Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik of Brisk (1889-1960) disapproved of bringing children to rabbis on their third birthday for the chalaka, claiming that this practice "has no reason or basis." He noted that there are sources indicating that one should introduce the child to matters of Torah at the age of three, but none that involve haircutting. Rabbi Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky [the "Steipler Ga'on," (1899-1985)] also opposed this practice, and would send away parents who brought their children to him for the chalaka haircut. The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. Some, however, dismissed this argument, claiming that to the contrary, the chalaka perhaps began as an ancient Jewish practice which was later adopted by the gentiles. There are some older customs, originating in the times of Chazal and the Ge'onim, such as fasting on Erev Rosh Hashana and the ceremony of Kapaprot on Erev Yom Kippur which were opposed by some rabbis since they feared that their origins could be found in pagan rites. In any event, although some communities accepted this custom, Ashkenazi communities \yere never aware of such a practice. They did not receive this tradition from their forebears, and they found no mention of it in the writings of the Rishonim. The ancient tradition among Ashkenazi communities was to cut a boy's hair at a very young age. In fact, during the times of Chazal, parents would cut an infant's hair not long after birth, and they even permitted cutting a baby's overgrown hair on Chol Ha 'mo' ed. In the times of the Rishonim, too, boys' hair in Ashkenaz was cut already within the first several months after birth. The phenomenon of children with overgrown hair simply did not exist in Germany, and a boy with overgrown hair would have been mistaken for a girl. The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no special affair was held to celebrate the event. .. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:21:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:21:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 09:07:38AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for : >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. : : I will just deal with one of the things you raised. I only raised one thing. You are discussing an example, and not the point. : If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go : against the crowd, this practice would end. Which has nothing to do with the general principle of whether the resettlement of Jewry post-war should or shouldn't evolve into new minhagei hamaqom, nor the topic I raised -- the claim they actually are. Nor the reason why I raised the topic: the idea that minhag avos is only a stop-gap, a way to manage when in a maqom that has no minhag. Nor the reason for my post: Your claim that minhag hamaqom only has meaning if the maqom has loits of minhagim. That it can't be applied one-off to whatever practice is under discussion. And if you are correct, what's the threshold of minhagim that unify a community sufficiently to qualify. Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line accordingly. : The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: : Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of : Volumes I-IV. WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. : The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are : found in accounts : written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... It has to be earlier. Originally, chalaqah was held at the qever of Shemuel haNav on the 43rd of the omer, his yahrzeit. See teshuvos haRadvaz 2:608. (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get associated with a haircut at age 3. The move to Meron and Lag baOmer happened when the Ottomans restricted access to the qever in the 1500s. But that has little to do with upsherin in general, eg on a birthday.) The Radvaz, R' David b Shelomo ibn Zimra, was among the gerushei Sefarad, who ended up in Tzefas in 1513 and eventually end up in Egypt where he was RY (he taught the Shitah Mequbetzes, R' Betzalel Ashkenazi) and ABD. So, upsherin was already a practice old enough to get recorded as minhag by someone who lived through the transition from rishonim to achronim. : The most important source concerning the : chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. What makes this "post important source" if the practice predated the Ari by generations? Raising questions about a tradition that the Ari practiced it is a distraction if he isn't the basis of the minhag. AND, the problems with the story isaren't around upsherin, but around making a celebration the night of Lag baOmer, again nothing to do with making one on the child's 3rd birthday. (Unless it too is in the wrong part of the omer or during the 3 weeks. Issues we already navigate for bar mitzvah parties that aren't on Shabbos.) .... : The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice : stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka : transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's : hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in : ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation : of pagan ritual... All I know is that people invoke a similar Hindu practice. And while Hindus may wait to age 3 before making a celebratory first haircut, waiting until 5 or 7 are more common, and not making any ceremony at all is most common. (Although a girls' only haircut being at 11 months is most common.) Observant Sikh men never get a haircut. In Mongolia, between 2-5, girls get their first haricut when they are 3 or 5, boys when they are 2 or 4. No match. China - 1 month. (They wait until after the bulk of infant mortality; lehavdil but yet similar to our considering a child who dies in their first month a neifel.) Poles: a pre-Xian tradition that survived into the 1700s was 7-10. Ukraininans, 1st birthday. Polenesians, teens. Yazidi, originally 40 days, now, 7-11 mo. Interestingly, Moslem boys get their first haircut at 1 week old -- in other words, on the 8th day. In short -- no culture that wikipedia or google found for me has a special haircut for 3 yr old boys ceremony. And yet, I turned up much else. We've seen similar attacks on shlissel challah ('tis the week for that perrennial) based on a difficult to assert connection to key-with-cross breads in Xian communities that were nowhere near the areas where shlissel challah originated -- in either time or space. And yet, the same people continue dressing up their children in Purim costumes, despite the similarity to Carnivale -- and both being local to Italy in origin. Or milchigs on Shevu'os starting in the same region that already had Wittesmontag on the Monday before the Xian Pentacost. For that matter, both of those customs are first originated LATER than chalakah! ... : The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or : other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic : communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern : Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. : Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no : special affair was held to celebrate the event. Is using the haricut to tell the boy "You're not a baby now, time to start chinukh in earnest with alef-beis" really so terrible? Nothing will make that point as deeply as weeks of build up, followed by changing the look in the mirror. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From sholom at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:09:18 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:09:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> References: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <22b69f274e57a0d24c6dcbc45c456a93@aishdas.org> > : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? > : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as > : a trivia question for now). > > There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one > were considered propitious for a large crop. > > (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) REMT wrote me off line and noted: "I don't know its source, but I first heard it when I was a young child." He also answered my trivial question, writing: "In a leap year, the parsha read eight times will always be Acharei Mos. I know of no one commenting on its significance." It just occurs to me that the main event in parshas Acharei Mos occurred on the same day as the events in parshas Shemini. Kol tuv! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 09:30:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:30:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 11:21 AM 4/10/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line >accordingly. > >: The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: >: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of >: Volumes I-IV. > >WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. It was not RSRH who wrote this, but Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger who has spent much time investigating minhagim. >: The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are >: found in accounts >: written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... > >It has to be earlier. Again you are questioning Rabbi Hamburger. I suggest you contact him about this and the rest of your post. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:31:21 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:31:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 09:07, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >> Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >> children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. > > I will just deal with one of the things you raised. > > If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against > the crowd,? this practice would end. YL That is simply not true. The Baal Shem Tov and his talmidim practised it, and that is more than enough for most people. That not everyone did it is irrelevant; very few practices had unanimous support. The BeShT was far greater than the sources you cite, and many more people follow him today than follow those people, so they would have no reason to change. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:35:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:35:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, > and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get > associated with a haircut at age 3. Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From seinfeld at jsli.org Tue Apr 10 10:08:53 2018 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:08:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Playing devil?s advocate here. For the record, I have college and graduate degrees, my children all read and write well etc. However, in response to Prof. Levine. If the cost of that exposure to American secular culture (language, history, values, etc.) is that a certain percentage of children may be enticed by it and go OTD - more than would have otherwise - then, yes, it makes sense. That?s an unacceptable cost. I?m not saying that that is a real cost, but that is the perception. If you want to change the practice, you have to change that perception (which may have some truth to it, I don?t know). >Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America >cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade >science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he >has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the >history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what >happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the >mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic >knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the >digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of >HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has >no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. > From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 10:29:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180410172934.GA1877@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:35:39AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : >(This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, : >and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get : >associated with a haircut at age 3. : Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. As per the same discussion in previous years.... That's what the rishonim run with -- see Rashi and Radaq on the pasuq. Although Rashi says 22 mo in our girsa, I think the other girsa of 24 mo is more likely, because... As the Radaq points out, this fits halakhah, that the time a woman is mish'ubedes to nurse is 24 months. But while elegent, it is not mukhrach that Chanah kept to the minimum. (Thinking out loud: The exchange in 1:22-23 fits better if it was about Chanah not attending an aliyah laregel that was after Shem'el was 2. After all, why would Elqanah have pushed her to bring ShMemu'el to the mishkan before it was safe?) More to the point (and back to repeating myself), there is a machloqes in the medrash whether Shemu'el lived 52 or 53 years. And since that's 50 years after he was weaned and brought to the Mishkan, it implies a machloqes about when he moved into the Mishkan. The minhag was apparently based on the position that he was niftar at 52, and thus moved into the Mishkan at 3. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:06:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:06:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? Message-ID: One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has no inherent "Jewish" quality.) However, there are opinions that say that the Jews spoke Egyptian while in Egypt. I have posted some selections from the Sefer Lashon HaKodesh, History, Holiness, & Hebrew by Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/jews_egypt_hebrew.pdf While it is true that according to one Medrash the Jews did speak Hebrew while in Egypt, there is another Medrash that contradicts this. >From the above reference: GOD SPEAKS TO THE JEWS IN EGYPTIAN While the above sources point to the notion that the Jews in Egypt did not speak Egyptian, there is another Midrash that implies otherwise. This Midrash likens the Jews in Egypt to a prince who was kidnapped for an extended period of time. Finally, his father the king decided to exact his revenge on the kidnappers and release his son. Upon saving his son, the king conversed with the child in the language spoken to him by the kidnappers. Similarly, explains the Midrash, after God redeemed the Jews from exile in Egypt, He spoke to them in Egyptian.221 The Midrash explains that the Jews had been in Egypt for many years, where they had learned the Egyptian language.222 Therefore, when God wanted to give them the Torah, He began to speak with them in the Egyptian language with which they were already familiar. He began by proclaiming, "I (anochi, ) am Hashem, your God ... !"223 According to this Midrash, the word "anochi" in this context does not denote the Hebrew word for "I"; rather, it refers to the Egyptian224 word anoch (11:ix), which means "love" and "endearment."225 One Midrashic source even explains that the Jews forgot Lashon HaKodesh, which is why God had to speak to them in Egyptian. >From page 99 THEY SPOKE LASHON HAKODESH, BUT TOOK ORDERS IN EGYPTIAN Similarly, we can posit that even when exiled to Egypt, the Jews indeed continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, they were not accustomed to accepting orders in Lashon HaKodesh; their Egyptian taskmasters spoke to them only in Egyptian. Therefore, at Mount Sinai, when God was giving the Jews the Decalogue, He spoke to them in Egyptian, the language in which they were accustomed to "taking orders." THEY MAINTAINED THE ESSENCE OF LASHON HAKODESH, IF NOT THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE Even if we assume that the Jews completely forgot Lashon HaKodesh, we can still reconcile the contradiction based on a previously mentioned concept set forth by Rambam. Rambam, as we already mentioned, writes that Lashon HaKodesh is called so because it lacks the explicitness found in other languages, making it a chaste and holy language. Therefore, one can explain that although the Jews in Egypt spoke the Egyptian language, they did not deviate from the moral standards manifested by Lashon HaKodesh. God had to speak to them in Egyptian since that was the only language with which they were familiar. However, they did not change their manner of speaking; that is, they internalized the refined and moral linguistic style of Lashon HaKodesh, which they maintained even when speaking Egyptian. And from the Chapter Summary After discussing Joseph's personal exile to Egypt, we segued into discussing the Jews' collective exile to Egypt. A well-known Midrash states that the Jews in Egypt did not change their language, meaning that they continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, another Midrash states that God began presenting the Torah to them in Egyptian, because that was the language that they spoke in Egypt. While these two Midrashim seem at odds with each other, we presented several approaches to reconcile them and give a more concrete answer as to whether the Jews in Egypt spoke Lashon HaKodesh or Egyptian: ? Radak explains that there were some Jews who were not enslaved, and they spoke Lashon HaKodesh exclusively. Their not-so-fortunate brethren spoke Lashon HaKodesh between themselves, and Egyptian with their Egyptian overlords. ? Alternatively, it is possible that all the Jews spoke Lashon HaKodesh, yet God presented them the Torah in Egyptian because they were acclimated to accepting orders in that language. ? A third possibility is that since the hallmark of Lashon HaKodesh is its embodiment of holiness and purity, even if the Jews forgot the literal language, they could still be said to speak Lashon HaKodesh- The Holy Language-if their manner of speech remained holy. After the Jews exited Egypt and eventually arrived in the Land of Israel, establishing their own rule, it is clear that Lashon HaKodesh alone served as their spoken language. This arrangement lasted for several centuries until the language began receding under Babylonian influence, toward the end of the First Temple period. Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may not be true. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:22:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:22:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Legendary Chassidic Rebbe Admits: The Noda BiYehudah Was Correct In His Opposition to Lisheim Yichud Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/QEUCPq However, what is less well known, is that the Divrei Chaim, despite being a great Chasidic leader, actually said that the Noda BiYehuda was correct in the matter, and, based on that, his followers do not say lisheim yichud before sefira. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:39:28 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:39:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:06 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews > from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. > Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their > children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far > as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has > no inherent "Jewish" quality.) > > > ... > Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may > not be true. > > YL > > > May not be true is the operative word, there is no disputing that there is an opinion in Chazal that it is true and that the Jews spoke only Hebrew in Egypt. This is the opinion that the Chasidim follow and therefore they are against speaking English. I don't see how you can find fault with them when they are following a valid opinion in Chazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:10:49 2018 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Yehuda Gluck) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 04:10:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Wed Apr 11 02:59:49 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: R? Moshe Yehudah, Thank you for taking notice of my post! ?Only a narrow band of Torah studies are benefited by a narrow band of secular studies? - I agree with you - but only in part. 1. If I may add the word ?directly? to your statement (- ?only a narrow band of Torah studies are *directly* benefited?), as, arguably, the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education [though admittedly, this was not the thrust of my original statement]. 2. Re the case in point, Chullin and biology. Though, in general, the biology syllabus does not necessarily help in learning Chulin, biology could be taught in a manner that would: i.e. a teacher familiar with the various sugyos, could give a thorough grounding in anatomy, etc. This would be better than relying on Temunei Chol [or similar compilations], which (might) stifle critical thinking. Furthermore, an appreciable amount of Torah literature is based upon a medieval understanding of chemistry and anatomy. A fuller understanding of those thinking processes, coupled with a comparative study of [human] biology and the basics of modern chemistry, could conceivably open the door to a much fuller Torah experience. Indeed, a syllabus could conceivably be drawn up that would both benefit the Ben Torah and satisfy the requirements of an Examinatory Board. 3. Re maths; again, you are right, so far as a basic understanding of the sugyos are concerned. But to appreciate maths as a backbone of the world?s structure and thus marvel at the???? ????? , to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory to deeper areas of the Torah [which surely some of them will want to learn], requires a fundamental grounding in the subject. Dovid Rubin Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ________________________________ From: Moshe Yehuda Gluck Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 9:10:49 AM To: 'The Avodah Torah Discussion Group' Cc: 'D Rubin' Subject: RE: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:23:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:23:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Lets take a step back for a second. There has been a machlokes for thousands of years (see the Gemara in Berachos 35) whether the ideal is torah only or for lack of a better phrase torah im derech eretz. There is no disputing that in the last 200 years the overwhelming majority of Gedolim have been in the Torah only camp and in the 20th century the Torah im derech eretz is pretty much RYBS and the followers of R' Hirsch. I can provide an almost endless list of Gedolim who had zero secular education and knew kol hatorah kula while on the other hand the list of Gedolim who had a secular education is much much much smaller. Your position regarding secular studies while certainly a valid one is unquestionably the minority opinion and therefore it is ridiculous for you to simply dismiss the other opinion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 03:23:23 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 10:23:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <79615f4629784da49fb5941943399ebd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. ----------------------------- Bingo-and probably true on a micro level but not, I fear, on a macro level. I used to tell my boys that 80% (not based on a study but the handy 80/20) rule)of what they learned would not be used later, the problem is you don't know which 20% will be. Look here for the background of the inventor of the m-16 and you'll see what he brought together https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Stoner Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 04:40:52 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 07:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote, and I quote his closing last paragraph in full: > Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them > to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend > a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma > let alone a Regents diploma? The first and second sentences don't have any logical connection that I can see. There are plenty of boys who attended a Hassidic yeshiva, who now earn enough to support a family. Diplomas are not guarantees, and I'm don't know how much they help. They certainly don't help as much as drive and persistence and elbow grease. My boss, for example, asks me for help occasionally with English spelling and grammar, but that doesn't seem to have hampered his ability to own his business at half my age. (His mathematics abilities are a good example. He understands enough of the concepts that he can figure out anything on his calculator without my help. But he avoids doing even simple arithmetic in his head. And because he refuses to do the arithmetic in his head, I make more mistakes than he does.) Akiva Miller From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 11 06:22:58 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:22:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <1F.0A.18065.33C0ECA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:10 AM 4/11/2018, Moshe Yehuda Gluck wrote: >I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that >a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. >What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion >sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some >secular knowledge in order to understand them. Please read RSRH's essay The Relevance of Secular Studies to Jewish Education (Collected Writings VII) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 06:50:01 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:50:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption Message-ID: Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:20:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:20:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org> I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:45:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:45:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:50:01PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may : be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? All I have is the reverse. R' Gedalia Felder (Yesodei Yeshurun 2 pp 188-191) holds that an adopted child can be called up "ben Micha Shemuel", but that this shouldn't be done when the adopting father or the son is a kohein. In order to avoid confusion about the child's kehunah. (Or that of a future descendent, when people vaguely remember his name years later). I assume leviim too, but that's not in my notes. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 12:08:20 2018 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:08:20 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> References: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Tangentially, there is a convention to write the name of a chalal in official documents as Ploni ben Ploni Vehu Kohein, to signify the difference in status between father and son. I'm not sure that this would be recommended (or desirable) in the case of an adopted child. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 11 23:46:36 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 01:46:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: I suspect that some will feel that my position on the issue "secular" studies comes from the left of center. First off, we need to delineate what we mean by "secular" studies. This word as we use it today is far different from the science the GRA or the many achronim, rishonim and of course Chazal learned in the sense of math, astronomy and biology. Today that word would also include many areas such as social studies, psychology, philosophy, evolutionary biology, cosmology, comparative religion, black studies, sexual awareness, cultural studies etc, etc, that could lead a young untrained mind into problematic areas that could raise many question they are not prepared to deal with. The scientific study required by the various sugios in shas and halacha really require a minimal study of some elementary math such as some trig and geometry, some values such as that of Pi, square root of 2 etc and Pythagoras theorem, astronomy (mainly lunar orbit, seasonal and diurnal calculation), anatomy and some other limited areas of biology plus a handful of other concepts. By this logic much of what we call science today would be excluded from being necessary for learning Torah. Mi'sevoras libi, I would say that the study of much of what we think of in modern parlance of the many new fields of mathematics and the physical sciences such as the many branches of modern physics both classical and relativistic and quantum mechanics, the many branches of chemistry, biology and medicine and of course modern astronomy including much more than just solar system dynamics (mainly lunar & seasonal) and positions of a handful of stars are mandated for a very simple reason -- an understanding (the deeper the better) in these fields makes one truly understand that the world is so highly complex and functions so beautifully that this it can not be a random happening and that there must be a borei olam. A havana into the very ultra small as we find through quantum mechanics and particle physics, or into the wonders of the atom and chemistry and how things combine, or into the wonders of dynamics, optics, elec & magnetism, or the modern fields of solar and stellar astronomy and spectrographic analysis and through the beauty and understanding exposed through the many modern branches of modern math including advanced algebraic theory, statistical analysis, advanced calculus and vector and tensor analysis and the many other fields to numerous to mention here that are so useful throughout all of modern science.. These literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam. The understanding of biology from its lowest levels of its physics and chemistry to the molecular with the tremendous complexities at its molecular and cellular levels and onto its study at the organic and systemic levels, through developmental biology of the miraculous changes from conception through the fetus to birth, infancy and childhood to the adult and ultimately death. Many of these may not help much with the simple peshat of any particular sugio in shas, but they surely create emuna and tremendous yiras haromeimus. No one who has even the smallest inkling of any of this knowledge could believe that existence as we now can begin to perceive it is a bunch of random events. Just the mind boggling complexity of the functioning of a single cell is awe inspiring. With so many thousands of things happening in each cell with perfect timing, with everything just in the right place at the right time in each of the billions of cells in our bodies. Worst of all, leaving a young mind unexposed to many of these areas and without proper training in them leaves him vulnerable to the many questions he will eventually encounter as he goes through modern life. He will not be prepared to deal with evolution, cosmology, philpsophy etc that he will surely encounter no matter how well shielded he may be. In addition to the above, in our modern society some of the above may be needed merely to functional and earn a living in todays highly technical society and he will be severely limited in the types of parnasa available to him. I am sure that many will differ substantially from my position above. Please excuse my rambling and repetition at times and run on sentences in the above. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 12 10:20:51 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 17:20:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not utter the phrase with the congregation? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Apr 12 12:42:50 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:42:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "There is no way that a "Rabbinical committee (namely the Rabbanim/Poskim/Rebbeim of the respective chassidishe Yeshivos whom Simcha Felder is representing) decided that systematic secular education is forbidden by Orthodox Jewish law. The reason is that the Torah requires one to study secular subjects. I have posted part of an article by Dr. Yehudah Levi from his book Torah Study. " Of course there is. Dr. Yehuda Levi is coming from a Torah Im Derech Eretz point of view however, Chasidim and most Charedim have a different viewpoint, namely Torah only. You seem to be a classic case of someone living in an echo chamber. The only opinion/derech that you recognize as legitimate is Torah Im Derech Eretz. As I stated many times, Torah Im Derech Eretz is a small minority, the overwhelming majority of gedolim rejected it. So much so that Gedolim like R' Baruch Ber could not believe that R' Hirsch thought that it was lechatchila. R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch wrote a teshuva (end of Bircas Shmuel Kiddushin) where he explicitly forbid a secular curriculum: ?What emerges is (a) that according to the Torah the obligation of Banim Ubeni Banim means you must make your children into Geonei and Chachmei Torah ? and not merely to prepare them for life as a Jew. But rather, you must teach them and get them to learn the entire Torah, and if chas v?sholom you do not, you violate the entire Mitzvah of learning Torah as per Banim Ubnei Banim. ... (c) To learn secular studies on a regular basis is prohibited as per the Rama 246:4 ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 12 12:34:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:34:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu In-Reply-To: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180412193406.GA7972@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:20:51PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to : bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "barchu : hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in : order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait : and not utter the phrase with the congregation? See the Agur, Hil' Berakhos 98, which can be found at . The Maharam miRothenburg held the sha"tz needn't say it at all. R' Yehudah al-Barceloni says he should say. The Agur adds: and we are noheig to say it. The next source, the Avudraham (or to be accurate: Abu-Dirham), says that the sha"tz says it to be among the community of mevorkhim. He cites the Y-mi (Berakhos 7:3). And he adds that R' Yehudah b"r Barzili Barceloni (I assume the same source as the Seifer haAgur) writes in the name of R' Saadia that even though the sha"tz said "haMvorakh", and therefore didn't remove himself from the klal, he needs to return himself to the klal "legamrei" and day "Barukh H' Hamvorkh". Like in bentching, where the leader says "nevareikh" and yet repeats the responses of the rest of the zimun. No answer there. However, note that the assumption is that Borkhu doesn't need the sha"tz or the oleh to repeat it. The sha"tz needs to repeat it for his own sake, so as not to exclude himself from the kelal of mevorkhim. (Except according to the MmR, who doesn't believe the sha"tz has such a need.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 12th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Gevurah: What aspect of judgment Fax: (270) 514-1507 forces the "judge" into submission? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 01:31:53 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:31:53 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am surprised that you even bothered to quote him." And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his teshuva. There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 02:10:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 05:10:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: >"In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz >wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am >surprised that you even bothered to quote him." > >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with >his teshuva. If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in EY are pursuing higher secular education. >There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' >Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and >Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through >this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not >with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to >learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a >book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the >Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of >issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even >happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas >and poskim. Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat and Yom Tov (holy days) - and furthermore, it is better to occupy oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). >And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but >Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after >them." as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as >the Mishna Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of >people are capable of studying Torah all day. Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? The following is taken from Rav Schwab on Chumash, Parshas Acharei Mos. "At all times the Torah's unchanging teachings must be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, attitudes, relationships to man and beast, and positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and evaluation of the Torah. "What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the 'ways of the Earth.' The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world that surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities that confront him. "What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more crucial it is that this wisdom be conveyed to the Jewish contemporary world. It must be transmitted in a language that our generation understands and that will attract the searching youth, the ignorant, the estranged and the potential ba 1al teshuvah to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah leader must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. "There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose life task is to enlighten and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those 'messengers of G-d' the highest respect and a loyal following. These are the kohanim and levi'im of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. "Yet education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore it becomes mandatory for the present day 'Tribe of Levi' to initiate and encourage an educational system that can serve the other "eleven tribes who comprise the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meets its challenges, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head-on the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. "The Divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Sun Apr 15 05:53:59 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:53:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Micha Berger) In-Reply-To: References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com>, <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org>, Message-ID: This reply was sent earlier to R' Michah and is still valid: I agree. With respect, I did allude to ?learning skills and a mode of thinking? in both of my previous posts: ?the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education?, ? to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory?, and my reference to ?the [lack of] overall intellectual integrity?. Related to this: Is it incorrect to posit that a lot of ma?amorei Chazal was formulated in accordance to their understanding and cultural absorption of sciences of their day? Can we not further Torah with our understanding of modern science, both peripheral and integral ? even though clearly lacking their sya?ato dishmayo and Ru?ach HaKodesh? Is that not the derech taught both by the Ba?al Shem and his disciples, and the GRA and his school [to use the chochmoh of the world..]? Another q: Do we view Torah SheBa?al Peh on a par with Torah SheBiKsav, in the sense that it must be learnt ?as is?, without consideration of the worldview that shaped those comments? [I rather think we can see two views in the Rishoinim.] Dovid Rubin ________________________________ From: Micha Berger Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 5:20:06 PM To: Moshe Yehuda Gluck via Avodah Cc: Moshe Yehuda Gluck; 'D Rubin' Subject: Re: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:39:19 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:39:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:45:43 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:45:43 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 3:01 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a > regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance > secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > > > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > > The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he > already knew shas and poskim.? > > > Can you verify this assertion? > Not really but given that the Gra was a super genius and the stories that abound about how much he knew as a child it is certainly plausible to believe so. The fact is that no one really knows how old the Gra was when he learned these things so your assertion that he learned mathematics as a youth is unprovable as well. > > > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > > Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in > 1518? > > > Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there > would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. > > > And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple according to the Rama, the study of Torah is what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get us into the world to come and the study of secular studies will not. That fact remains the same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 03:39:38 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:39:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >> And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his >> teshuva. > If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who > attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend > the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in > Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today > offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. Touro College was established against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim see http://haemtza.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/yosefs-folly.html for example for details. > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in > EY are pursuing higher secular education. Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a pig with a streimel (see http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html ). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: " *Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the other nations, she didn't want to burn them, rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need any outside wisdom and therefore she was priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the world with his wisdom which was solely torah based. * *We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt."* >> There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch >> Ber. The Rama writes: >> "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >> and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will >> acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other >> wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all >> other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called >> by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the >> Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he >> knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >> regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance >> secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles > Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also > learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He > taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning > of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is > permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this > excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible > and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh > De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his > decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy > only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat > and Yom Tov (holy days) -- and furthermore, it is better to occupy > oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). Not sure what you point is here, the Rama is quoted exactly as I wrote, you cal leanr secular studies only now and then and only after you know shas and poskim. > And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but > Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them." > as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as the Mishna > Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of people are > capable of studying Torah all day. > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in 1518? From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 05:01:14 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:01:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:39 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. >R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a >pig with a streimel (see? >http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html >). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak >Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: > >" Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn >them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the >other nations, she didn't want to burn them, >rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need >any outside wisdom and therefore she was >priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the >world with his wisdom which was solely torah based.? > >We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish >home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish >wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt." Too bad this statement does not differentiate between un-Jewish and non-Jewish. as RSRH did. I agree that we do not want un-Jewish influences in the Orthodox world. However, there is no problem with non-Jewish influences. I wonder if they are against the use of, for example, modern medicine or electricity or running water, and countless other things that are "non-Jewish wisdom and come into Chareidi homes. >>There is no question that the simple reading of >>the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: >> >>"But it is not for a person to learn anything >>but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >>decisors that come after them and through this >>they will acquire this world and the world to >>come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >>In any case, it is permitted to learn through >>happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >>isn't a book of heresy.? This is what called >>by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person >>should not take a trip in the Pardes until he >>has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] >>and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> >>The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >>cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >>only that, but he writes that even happenstance >>secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > >Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > >The Gra was sui generis, when he studied >mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim.? Can you verify this assertion? >>And how many people are capable of capable of >>learning "anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >>and the halachic decisors that come after >>them."? ? as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah >>in Koheles as well as the Mishna Brurah make it >>clear that only a very small percentage of >>people are capable of studying Torah all day. > >Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > >Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah >less in 2018 then it was in 1518? Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 09:44:37 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:44:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:45 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not >for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna >and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come >after them and through this they will acquire >this world and the world to come. But not with >learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple >according to the Rama, the study of Torah is >what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get >us into the world to come and the study of >secular studies will not. That fact remains the >same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person >should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. The facts do not remain the same in 2018 as in 1518. The day school movement in the US as well as all of the Orthodox schools throughout the world where secular studies are routinely taught from kindergarten on show that things have changed. Please spend the time to read "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 ? 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 The Jewish Press, July 6, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916)" "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1786-1879)" "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1654 ? 1785) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 08:07:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:07:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi >world agrees with his teshuva. > >There is no question that the simple reading of >the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything >but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >decisors that come after them and through this >they will acquire this world and the world to >come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >In any case, it is permitted to learn through >happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by >the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should >not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and >he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >only that, but he writes that even happenstance >secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. I must admit that I do not understand your assertion against secular studies in conjunction with Torah studies even for boys at a young age.. The day school movement in the US was founded on the principle of a dual curriculum. The model was RJJ. Today in the US the vast majority of yeshivas follow this model save for some of the Chassidic yeshivas. Gedolim like Rav Yitzchok Hutner (Chaim Berlin), (Mr.) Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz (Torah Vodaath), Rav Avraham Kalmanovitz and Rav Shmuel Birenbaum (Mir), Rav Dr. Yosef Breuer and Rav Shimon Schwab (Yeshiva RSRH) , to name just a few, headed yeshivas in which boys were taught Torah and secular studies in elementary and high school grades. I am sure they were well aware of what the RAMA wrote and paskened that it did not apply today. Even in Europe in the 19th century there were some places where secular and Torah studies were taught along side each other. The Kelm Talmud Torah was one. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelm_Talmud_Torah "In addition to Jewish subjects, students studied general subjects such as geography, mathematics, and Russian language and literature for three hours a day. The Kelm Talmud Torah was the first traditional yeshiva in the Russian empire to give such a focus to general studies. " There was the L?mel-School in Jerusalem where both Torah and secular subjects were taught. So I really do not understand why you focus on the RAMA when it is clear that yeshiva education in many places, since the 19th century and throughout the 20th century involved a combination of Torah and secular studies. What are you arguing about? YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 11:16:15 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:16:15 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> On 4/15/2018 11:10 AM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, > in EY are pursuing higher secular education. I just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different story entirely). From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 10:14:25 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:14:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916) ... There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in have secular studies: 1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would have had no students 2. The law mandated secular studies Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a bdieved. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:22:23 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:22:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:14 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in >have secular studies: >1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send >their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would >have had no students >2. The law mandated secular studies When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young people. >Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but >as a bdieved. Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! YL From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:29:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:29:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <4C.65.18065.A7C83DA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:16 PM 4/15/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I Just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went >through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these >colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or >should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different >story entirely). And many of those who attend these institutions find their secular knowledge woefully inadequate and probably wish they had a stronger secular education when they were younger. Look at the first part of the video at https://goo.gl/WKrKyT and see what he says about his own yeshiva education. At about 2 minutes in he says he discovered that he didn't know anything when it came to being prepared to work. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 15 05:48:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:48:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria Message-ID: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> The leprosy mentioned here was special kind of leprosy which only the Jewish people suffered from only in Israel. It never occurred outside of Israel, even in a Jewish home. The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical but rather a spiritual disease. The Rabbis comment: b?sorah tovah hee l?Yisroel ? "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and mortar to act as if it were alive. It would be most unusual for a house to become sick just like a human being. Such an illness borders on the miraculous. Why does the Torah say that a house may be afflicted with leprosy? It means that a Jewish home is different from other homes; it has life and spirit attached to it. When the people who live in these homes are sinful, the very bricks of the home reflect that sinfulness. The Rabbis tell us that leprosy is a sign of evil and sin; therefore, it is natural that house would manifest leprosy as a sign of its inhabitants evil. Now we can understand why the rabbis say it is good news when a house is stricken with leprosy. If one can notice the disease before it spreads, he has a chance to cure it. When the disease goes unnoticed, the real trouble ensues. Since in today?s world we don?t have the warning of leprosy attached to our houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. The Bible will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible Dwight L Moody -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 11:02:08 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:02:08 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sunday, April 15, 2018, Prof. Levine wrote: > When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 > there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young > people. > Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a > bdieved. > Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 15 12:45:46 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 19:45:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. _______________________________________________ Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 13:08:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 16:08:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <13.9E.29097.691B3DA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:02 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >This is not something to be happy about. This is >more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu >torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very >difficult decision to violate the Halacha in >order to save the next generation. This was not >uncommon in America of that time. Young >Israel???s sponsored mixed dances for the same >reasons. However, now that the Torah community >is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. ? On the contrary, this is something that is appropriate for our time and the future. Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? See my article "Frum or Ehrliche?" The Jewish Press, October 20, 2006, page 1. This article is also available at "Frum or Ehrlich". Letters to Editor Also see "The Obligation to Support a Family" The Jewish Press, February 18, 2015, front page. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 15:35:12 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 18:35:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the > community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the > congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l?olam vaed" > and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included > with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not > utter the phrase with the congregation? Incidentally, the same situation and question applies by the Borchu prior to Birchos Krias Shema, as per S"A 57:1. I can't bring any source, but in my mind, the simple answer is that if the oleh would say it together with the congragation, he might not be heard. The delay is to insure that no one mistakenly thinks that the oleh is excluding himself. I was going to ask a related question about Kaddish that has bothered me for some time. Namely: When the Kaddish-sayer says "Yhei Shmei Raba" himself, why does Mishne Brurah 56:2 tell him to say it *quietly*? But I am *not* going to ask that question, because RJR's post has forced me to compare these tefilos carefully, and I have found a difference that might help to answer his question. RJR was very correct when he used the word "command" to describe what the oleh is saying. The word "Borchu" is indeed the tzivui/imperative form of the verb. But no comparable command exists in Kaddish. Yes, the Kaddish-leader does command them "v'imru", but he even specifies what it is that he wants them to say. Namely, a simple "amen". And so they do. May I suggest that the "Yhei Shmei Raba" is an impromptu addition, that the tzibur adds of their own accord, NOT commanded to do so by the Kaddish-leader. Thus, there is no fear of causing any illusions that he is somehow excluding himself. Indeed, he himself added to the praise by saying "Yisborach v'yishtabach", which (one might say) is simply an expanded version of "Yhei Shmei Raba". So I guess the real question on MB 56:2 is not why the leader says Yhei quietly instead of loudly, but perhaps we could ask whether the leader really needs to say Yhei at all. Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 20:59:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:59:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <54519ad6-5f2a-1c69-4e5f-2d8f0fa2f2a5@zahav.net.il> 1) Is the community as strong as it was back when Torah was transmitted orally? 2) Who is the rabbi who is going to overturn decisions made by the Ta'naim (as opposed to overturning decisions made by school administrators in the 50s)? On 4/15/2018 9:45 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es > laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. > KT From hankman at bell.net Sun Apr 15 18:13:32 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:13:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> R? Marty Bluke wrote: ?R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah.? My response to R? Marty makes a number of assumptions that may not be universally accepted but that I firmly believe. The times are different, the level of knowledge is different both in the physical sciences and in Torah hakedosha. Dare I say that these as a function of time seem to be moving on trajectories that are unfortunately inverse to each other ? particularly in the latter time frame that we live in ? most intensely over the last 10 to 12 decades but can already be clearly seen over the last 4 centuries. With each dor we can see an ongoing diminution in the level of our Torah havanah while a commensurate level of greater scientific understanding has come about (with perhaps the exception of a very few yechidei de?ah such as the Gra and a few others who may have achieved levels more common in much earlier times before them). While Chazal tell us ?haphoch v?haphoch d?kol bah? and that certainly for those who are capable of a great level of Torah understanding such as those of Chazal who were doresh all the essin or all the taggin in the Torah probably could have been able to find quantum mechanics or tensor analysis or molecular biology in the Torah if they so chose. Certainly if the scientists of our day were able to discover these facts, Chazal certainly were able to as well. But I would point out that there is no maimre in Chazal that relates to having discovered any of this knowledge through their pilpul and passing this on to us. Perhaps they did not feel it important enough to report. But this level of understanding in Torah in our times is sadly not available in our times. Given the level of limud for the average person (unlike for some of the gedolim of our times) in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics. The average person (maybe I am just giving away my matsav) will not find much yira or emuna from learning that which is typical of our yeshivos (say a sugia in shas say ?succa govoah m?esrim ama or a sugia on movuy or on tumas negaim ? of hilchos melicha or muktsa in shulchan aruch etc). For the average person these are not awe inspiring subjects and unfortunately only a true godol or great talmid chochom could extract yira and emunah from these cut and dry subjects. Such inspiration for the average yid are fewer and much further in between from most of his limud of Torah. This as a result of our sad diminution in our Torah learning ability. Today, given our greater abilities in understanding the Borei?s briah it is much easier for us to find yira and emuna from our hisbonenus in them. So ?of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none? is Torah, but a very solid adjunct in our times for a vehicle to further inspire yira and emunah would very effectively be math and scientific knowledge. Part of the mitsva of emuna, is not simply belief, but to go out and prove to your satisfaction (to be doresh v?choker) the truth of the Borei and his achdus and that he is the Borei olam and revealed Himself to us at matan Torah and so on. To the extent that science facilitates this search it is a MITSVA and not just mere secular studies at the cost of Torah studies. Clearly the experience our ancestors experienced at yetsias Mitzrayim, al hayam (ma sheroaso shifcha al hayam etc) and revelation on sinai etc was more than enough to inspire tremendous yira, awe and emunah without the need for any help from science (which was not great in their period in any case) and on through the period of the nevi?im and the batei mikadash and later Chazal inspiration was possible through there havana of Torah alone. But I do not see that to be the case in our generation and times. ?So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah?? Because in our day it may be another additional (I hesitate to say ?more? effective way b?avonoseinu harabim for most people) very effective way for most average people.? So today, for the yechidei olom the tried and true method of attaining great yira and emunah through limud Torah may be the best way to go as we have witnessed these great traits in our great gedolim, but that recipe may not work so well in our times for everybody else without additional help. I am also not comfortable with the notion that there are certain areas of knowledge that are off limits to even our gedolim. I feel quite confident to assert that in our time, non of even our gedolim come to discover the great advances in science through there limud hatorah. If they know these subjects it came from sources outside of their linudei kodesh. But Chazal was not constrained in their knowledge. They were required to know shivim loshonos, they studied kishuv and astrolgy and the chukos hagoyim and certainly the science of their day (sometimes even quoting chachmei ha?umos and cf the Rambam quoting Aristo often etc [I also imagine the Rambam learned his medicine in the conventional way mostly including sources outside of Torah]). I feel sad for many talmidei chachamim in our day who lack the background in (sometimes in even minimal) math and science to grasp that they are saying a peshat in a sugia that could not be, and to seek out another peshat therein or to at least realize there is a problem they need to deal with to get a proper havana. Also the chiyuv to teach a son an umnus, obviously means, other than the chiyuv to teach one?s son Torah. We do not assume that his limud haTorah will suffice to teach him an umnus as well. The conventional ?secular? methods of teaching an umnus are to be followed. If you want your son to be a carpenter, send him to carpentry school ? do not expect him to come from yeshiva a talmid chochom AND a carpenter just from his limud haTorah. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 16:30:43 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:30:43 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: Is it not likely that the prohibition is against non-Torah learning which serves no purpose other than engaging in those studies for their own interest and excitement? There is no prohibition against learning any skills for earning a livelihood. Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and research. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 18:06:13 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:06:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. It seems to me that there is indeed one very obvious exception, namely, the chometz which the Rav has not yet sold to the non-Jew. (I suppose that one could avoid this situation by delaying the bittul until the very end of the fifth hour, but the danger of missing that deadline scares me.) I have not seen any sifrei halacha, nor any pamphlets or bulletins or websites, that mention this point. Perhaps everyone just presumes that people have this exception in mind when they say the bittul? Here's a better way to phrase my question: Would a mental reservation be valid in this case? Perhaps halacha ignores the mental reservation, and only cares about the actual words of the bittul - which explicitly refers to ALL the chometz. If halacha does allow this exception - and people do have this exception in mind either explicitly or implicitly - then there is no problem. But I would like to hear that this is confirmed by the poskim. Some might say, "What's the problem? There is chometz in his house, but he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" No, I can see two very serious problems. But before I go further, I must reiterate that these problems would only arise in the case where one does his Bitul Chometz BEFORE the Rav transfers ownership to the non-Jew. (If the ownership transfer occurs first, then at the time of the Bitul, there is no problem, because the only chometz still in his possession is really and truly nothing more than the chometz that he is unaware of.) 1) If there is still chometz in his home, and he is expecting for it to be sold to a non-Jew several minutes or hours later, but the words of the bittul - "All the chometz in my possession, whether I know about it or not" - are to be taken a face value, doesn't this case aspersion on the sincerity/validity of the bittul? 2) Perhaps even worse: After Pesach, when it is time to re-acquire the chometz, he can no longer rely on "he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" Rather, a determination must be made. If he got rid of it via mechira (despite happening after the bittul), then the chometz may be eaten. But if, in the final analysis, he got rid of it via bitul, then it is assur b'hanaah (Mechaber 448:5, MB 448:25). So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? Akiva Miller From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Apr 16 06:35:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 23:35:36 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: I enjoy reading smatterings from the philosophical musings of the great scientists. But I suspect, that is the very reason they are banned. It is because they are NOT boring. And I suspect that unless it may assist me in my Parnassah even reading about new tech developments etc, is likely to be prohibited, not as a corrosive Hashkafa but simply as a time waster. But as the saying goes, Nobody's Perfect [which is sometimes followed by - I am a Nobody] Furthermore, the loud protests that I can already hear, are voiced by those who live in this world which is influenced by non-Torah energies. If we experience boredom when learning Torah - then is it not true that we are still far from the truth of Torah? Reb Avigdor M said - ever noticed how people yawn during Bentching? And would then wryly observe, They were not yawning a minute earlier during the ice cream. I have a friend, a Sefaradi Satmar Chossid, V Frum V Ehrlich, who asked R A Miller if he should learn ShaAr HaBechicnah in the ChHalevovos, R A asked him if he reads the newspapers, to which he replied, No - to which Reb Avigdor responded You need to learn it anyway because the streets are infiltrated with the HashpaAh of the newspapers. I apologise if I seemed to be dismissive of the scientists and their philosophical musings - and the truths that they may discuss Sure, I agree, truth is truth no matter the source. I was merely reflecting upon the reason for the ban on Alternative Wisdoms A] they are unnecessary - they are not required for Parnassah B] they waste time from Torah C] they may well harbour and cultivate life-concepts that are alien and contrary to Torah, amongst the granules of truth Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 06:51:02 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:51:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: <20EAE8A6498E468ABF14517EBCFFBC8A@hankPC> R' Meir G. Rabi wrote: > Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to > various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. > Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote > extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and > research. Do not ignore the truth of the message because you (and we all) do not like the like the lifestyle of the messenger. Pythagoras' theorem is a central truth to much of mathematics and science, and the truth of Einstein's science has withstood the test of time and been subject to much experimental verification. So what exactly is your point -- ignore the truth because you do not like its source? Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Apr 16 11:33:13 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:33:13 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <100f9bef-3e84-6df0-e91d-87b4c01ee3c7@zahav.net.il> Last year I read the document that one signs with the Rabbinate about the mechira. It was quite clear - you sell everything.? Everything includes things that you may have forgotten about? and even things that you have no idea if you own, like stocks in some company that deals in chameitz (even if your ownership is via your pension fund). Everything? means everything. I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". On 4/16/2018 3:06 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the > chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. > > > > So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? > > Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 16 11:07:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:07:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria In-Reply-To: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> References: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180416180705.GG23200@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:48:58AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical : but rather a spiritual disease. I like calling it spirito-somatic, coining a term to parallel "psychosomatic". Just as it stress can turn the presence of Helicobacter pulori in the stomach into having an ulcer. : The Rabbis comment: b'sorah tovah hee l'Yisroel -- : "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." : Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and : mortar to act as if it were alive... But they also say it's purely theoretical (Sanhedrin 71a). Although that's tied to R' Elazar b"R Shimon's side of a machloqes in the mishnah (Nega'im 12:3). R' Yishmael and R' Aqiva (the other two opinions in the mishnah) would apparently disagree. In any case, as with the rest of the cases in the gemara of laws that exist only for learning (ben soreir umoreh and ir hanidachas) it continues with tannaim saying they saw something local tradition said was evidence of one. Nowadays, house mold is known to be all too common. The actual physical side of tzara'as habayis needn't be miraculous. However, unlike tzara'as of the body, one can't invoke a soul - mind - brain causality. It would be pretty direct evidence of Divine Providence if tzra'as of the sort that would cause tum'ah struck only appropriate homes. Which is how I saw the quote. It requires people living on a level where blatant hashgachah peratis is approrpriate. As opposed to an era where even tzara'as of the body requires far more spirituality than people achieve. : Since in today's world we don't have the warning of leprosy attached to our : houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be : able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. There is a discussion of the role of learning Torah, and whether studying Torah that is non-applicabile is of value. Because of ideas like this one, it is hard to believe there can be Torah that is non-applicable. Even if the case isn't, "derosh vekabel sekhar" could refer to taking home lessons for the general principle. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 16th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Tifferes: What type of discipline Fax: (270) 514-1507 does harmony promote? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Apr 16 06:55:47 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:55:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzorah Message-ID: <672ECAA3-45E8-4B5C-A040-0A47C6B91FE2@cox.net> The second verse of this portion (14:2) states: "This shall be the law of the metzora on the day of his purification..." Since the Torah mentions that his purification takes place during the day, the Sages expound that the Kohen's declaration, which alone permits the metzora to begin his purification ritual, may be made only during the day (Rashi; Sifra). The observance of Taharat Hamishpacha has been a central feature of Jewish life for millennia. One finds Mikvehs in medieval Spain, in ancient Italy and in the famed desert outpost of Masada. This is consonant with Halacha which mandates that even before the town synagogue is built, a Mikveh must first be established. The source of the laws of Mikveh and family purity is found in this week's Torah portion. The Torah commands that when a woman has a menstrual flow, she and her husband must stay apart from one another. During this period she is "tameh," a Hebrew term that has been incorrectly translated as "unclean." In point of fact, the word tameh has nothing to do with uncleanness. When one is tameh it means that a person has had some contact with death. In the instance of a menstruating woman, it is the death of the ovum. Similarly, when a man has had physical relations (which inevitably involve the death of millions of sperm), he too is tameh. Implicit in this Biblical tradition is a great sensitivity and awareness of the natural life cycle. After a week has passed since the cessation of the woman's menstrual flow, the woman goes to the Mikveh where she undergoes a "spiritual rebirth." Various aspects of the Mikveh experience reinforce this notion of rebirth. The Mikveh itself must have 40 seah of water, the number 40 alluding to the 40th day after conception when the soul of a child enters the embryo. The woman must have no ornaments or barriers between herself and the water, for her emerging from the Mikveh is like that of the newborn leaving the waters of the womb with no ornaments or barriers. A child is the mirror of the family, he reflects the moral purity of his parents. Anonymous From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 16 08:34:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:34:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Kriyas HaTorah, Aseres Ha'dibros Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Rambam (Teshuvos HaRambam 60) writes that one who is seated should not stand up for the reading of the Aseres Ha'dibros (Ten Commandments). However, the general custom today is that the entire congregation does stand during this reading. Why is it that this ruling of the Rambam is not followed? A. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt"l pointed out that there are two versions of cantillation for the Aseres Ha'dibros. The first is called ta'am ha'tachton (lower cantillation) which punctuates the Aseres Ha'dibros into sentences in the same manner as the rest of the Torah. The second is called ta'am ha'elyon (higher cantillation), which punctuates following the order of the commandments, reconstructing the manner in which the Ten Commandments were received during matan Torah. There are two reasons why someone would wish to stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros. If one's intent is to show extra honor to this portion of the Torah, this is inappropriate. The entire Torah was given to Moshe on Har Sinai, and therefore all of Torah is equally precious. Standing for the Aseres Ha'dibros might lead some to the erroneous conclusion that only the Ten Commandments were received directly from Hashem. However, there is a second reason why one would stand during the Aseres Ha'dibros and that is to recreate the assembly at Har Sinai. We stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros in the same fashion that all of Israel stood during the original acceptance of the Torah. Today, the general custom is to always read the portion of the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'elyon. This indicates that this is not merely a reading of the Torah, but a recreation of matan Torah. Therefore, it is appropriate to stand. Rav Soloveitchik posits that the Rambam read the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'tachton, equating it to every other Torah reading, in which case, it would indeed be inappropriate to stand. The custom of Rav Chaim Soloveitchik, zt"l was to read the Aseres Ha'dibros both on Shavuos and during the weekly portion with ta'am ha'tachton, following the practice of the Rambam. Some, however, have the custom to read the Aseres Ha'dibros on Shavuos with ta'am ha'elyon, since this reading is a recreation of Sinai, but when parshas Yisro and parshas Va'eschanan are read on a regular Shabbos, the Aseres Ha'dibros are read with ta'am ha'tachton. In such a shul it would be best to stand from the beginning of the aliyah so as not to show more honor to one part of the Torah than another. From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 17:58:57 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 19:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: In my previous post responding R? Marty Bluke I wrote: ?in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics.? Upon reflection I wish to add to my previous thought about ?the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly? can lead to great awe and yiras harommeimus and emuna. I have no doubt that the pasuk jn Iyov (19:26) ?umibesori echezeh eloka? is a direct expression in Nach of this idea that my very tissues (biological systems) are great evidence and testimony to the the existence of the Borei Olam and His careful and intricate design and continuing hashgacha of the very smallest and finest, myriad intricate details of every living thing. It basically is the old argument that the existence of a complex system such as a clock implies that there must be a clock maker ? but ever so much in spades. Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 17 10:59:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:59:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> Message-ID: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a : bdieved. Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. The wave of rabbis coming in when the big drive for day school education started were predominantly a particular kind of Litvak. Look who the big voices were in the Agudas haRabbanim of the first half of the 20th century. RARakeffetR makes a strong case that one of the differences between RSRH and RYBS was just how lekhat-chilah secular studies are. RSRH held that our insulation from general culture and general knowledge was a tragic consequence of ghettoization. And that we never chose that life, it was forced upon us. The Emancipation was seen as a boon, allow the full expression of Judaism again. RYBS, in RARR's opionion (and of course, others vehemently disagree) only saw secular studies as the ideal way to live in a suboptimal situation. Secular knowledge in-and-of-itself as well as its ability to help one live in dignity is lekhat-chilah only within this bedi'eved world. But had we all been able to move back to Brisk, it would be all the better. Which gets us to the eis la'asos discussion. Shas too is lekhat-chilah and a great thing. What is bedi'eved is the reality that forced Rebbe, Rav Ashi, Ravinah to canonize official texts and (according to Tosafos) the geonim to write it down. But since we are still in that reality, we still publish TSBP -- lekhat-chilah. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? : Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, : "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of secular studies. Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. I would stick to discussing financial crimes: Yafeh Talmud Torah im Derekh Eretz sheyegi'as sheneihem mishkachas avon. VeKhol Torah she'ein imahh melakhah, sofahh beteilah vegoreres avon. - R' Gamliel beno shel R' Yehudah haNasi (Avos 2:2) But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the am hanivchar means. I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does not produce people less prone to these things. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 17th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Tifferes: What is the ultimate Fax: (270) 514-1507 state of harmony? From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 17 17:25:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 20:25:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz Message-ID: . I had asked: > On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat > before Biur Chametz? I thank those who responded. I still haven't found any poskim who deal with this exact question, but the Magen Avraham does mention something very close: "All melachos are assur once the time for burning has come, until he burns the chometz, just like above in Siman 431." - Magen Avraham 445:2, at the very end Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Apr 17 22:27:14 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 07:27:14 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Omer and Koolulam Message-ID: A Post by Rabbi Alex Israel. In this essay (originally posted on Facebook for public consumption), Rav Israel talks about his feelings about participating in a Koolulam sing along. If you don't know, Koolulam is an organization which gets hundreds, even thousands of people together to teach to sing one song in unison. They took this idea from the US with the twist of having regular folks and not just stars singing. For an example of what Koolulam does, here is their Yom Atzmaut video (described by many as a tefilla b'tzibbur): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxzR9Z-kG6Q (Al Kol Aleh by Naomi Shemer). Rav Israel's post is an excellent example about how people are dealing with inner conflicts of the Omer (and Three Weeks) mourning period and living in modern Israel. Note: There are rabbanim who wouldn't have allowed participation, during the Omer time or any other time. You can read the comments and discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/alexisrael1/posts/10157199448378942 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ If you have been following me on FB, you will know my obsession with Koolulam, especially their ??70th Yom Haatzmaut event. Prior to the event I was asked by 7 or 8 people, friends or talmidot/im, ?whether they could attend during the Omer. (If you watched the video, about half the participants ?were religious-looking.) ? I am generally halakhically conservative (small "c"!) and I try to keep halakha even if it disrupts my lifestyle. I ?am committed to halakhic practice and I don't knowingly contravene the law. So was it forbidden?? On the one hand this was a live event. So is it a problem? The Shulchan Arukh restricts weddings ?and haircuts as modes of marking the death of Rabbi Akiva?s 24,000 talmidim. Magen Avraham ?adds dancing and revelry to the list and I grew up not even going to movies in the Omer. Koolulam ?isn?t a wedding and did not include dancing, but was very much a public celebratory event. Could I ?go and allow others to go? I went to consult. One authoritative Posek said to me "It's not really assur (not dancing); it's not really muttar (public mass event). Go if it is ?important to you." ... But is that satisfactory?? The fundamental issue is deeper than the technical definition of ?music?, dancing? etc. In truth, ?I was going as part of my Yom Haatzmaut experience, as a celebration of life in Israel, of a people ?revived. This was not simple entertainment. Having participated in Koolulam, it was incredibly ?uplifting. My wife has described the evening as ?tefilla betzibur,? as the song?s words are essentially ?a prayer! - Just watch the "kavanna" in the video of the event! This was not merely a fun night out, although it was great fun. It was for us a Zionist ?expression, it touched a far deeper chord; it reflected faith, national unity, pride, hope, and so much ?more.? On the one hand, I see Halakha as embodying values which we aspire to imbibe. As such, I fully identify with the mourning of the ?Omer. It recalls Rabbi Akiva?s students who did not regard or interact with one another respectfully. In Israel ?today, we desperately need to be reminded annually about the need for a sensitive and respectful ?social environment and public discourse. The Omer contains a critical message. We wouldn't want to be without it. The mourning of the Omer, especially for Askenazi kehillot, also marks ?massacres and Crusades throughout the ages; another important feature, (although they may have tragically been eclipsed by the Shoah.?) But here is the problem. These practices totally fail to absorb the huge historic shift that is Medinat ?Yisrael. There is a gaping dissonance between the traditional Omer rhythm and our Israel lives. The ?traditional Omer rubric doesn't match the modern days of commemoration. For example, one ?does not recite Tachanun on Yom Hashoah because it falls in Nissan. If there is one day to say ?Tachanun, it is Yom Hashoah (I wrote about my struggle with this here ?http://thinkingtorah.blogspot.co.il/?/davening-on-yom-hasho?). And is Yom ?Haatzmaut merely a hiatus in a wider period of mourning? Moreover, in general, on a daily basis, ?as I read the Siddur, I wonder how we can ignore the huge chessed of HKBH in our generation of ?Jewish independence and the restoration of land and nationhood. How can my Siddur be the same ??(excluding the prayer for the State) as my great-grandfather? ? In this period of the year, we should be thanking God, celebrating our good fortune, revelling in ?the gifts that we feel as we move from Yom Haatzmaut to Yom Yerushalayim. Fundamentally, the ?Omer is a happy time; Ramban perceives it as a ?chol hamoed? of sorts between Pesach and ?Shavuot where we mark ?the love of our youth, our marriage with God, how we followed God ?through the wilderness? (Jeremiah 2) as we followed God from Egypt to Matan Torah at Mount ?Sinai. Where is the joy? ? So, I felt that this was a sort of Yom Haatzmaut event which yes, contravened the traditional Omer, ?but in some way lived up to our new reality. I keep the Omer - not shaving; watching how I speak ?to others and how I interact in a positive and respectful way - but we are not in the terrible era of ?Bar Kochba when the Romans massacred Rabbi Akiva's talmidim, and we are not in the period of ?the Crusades. We are in Medinat Yisrael, our thriving sovereign State, and I want to praise Hashem and celebrate my people for ?the ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ????, ?? ???????? ????? ?????? ??????? - and so I went to Kululam. ? I don't know how to square the two systems.? Later I saw a post by an amazing Rav, Rabbi David Menachem, whose post reflected similar sentiments, going even further than my thoughts. See his post here: ?https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=963243270498844&id=276752372481274 ?(h/t Yael Unterman) I?m sharing these thoughts without the ability to articulate a solution. Maybe time will change ?things. Maybe we need to push these questions to halakhic authorities and thinkers greater than ?myself.? From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 17 12:56:42 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 19:56:42 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> There have been many many posting recently about the desirability of secular education, but no one has, so far, mentioned an exceedingly important point. Bammaqom sh'eyn anashim hishtaddel lihyoth ish, so I have to step in and point it out. We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have. `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater". This is preposterous; someone who knows xokhma yvanith knows that "epi" means "above" and "tropos" means to move, or to act. An epitropos is someone who acts above someone else, i.e., a guardian, who acts above, and on behalf of, his ward. `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Posqim, especially, need to have a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages. Any poseq who is not willing to be `oqer a din in the Shulxan `Arukh is no poseq (you may attribute this quote to me). But ordinary Jews also need to know this. It is always dangerous to believe things that are untrue. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 17 15:00:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 18:00:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >: Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a >: bdieved. > >Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up by Shearith Israel in the 18th century taught secular as well as Torah subjects. The day school set up by Rabbi Avraham Rice did the same. While it is true that the level of Torah subjects taught was low, still there were secular subjects almost from the beginning. Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects and so did RJJ that was founded around1902. The high school that Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started in the second decade of the 20th century taught secular subjects as well as Torah subjects. The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. Please see my articles "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 "Bringing Torah Education to Baltimore" The Jewish Press, October 3, 2008, pages 57 & 75. >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? >: Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, >: "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." > >So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of >secular studies. The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. >Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of >secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. He knew in detail how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, he did value mathematics. Once he moved to NY he enrolled his children in yeshivas that gave its students a secular education. He received special permission not to send his eldest son to public school in Chelsea, MA, since there was no other alternative at the time. (His eldest daughter did attend public school in Chelsea, MA.) Lazar Miller, his eldest son, told me when he was sitting shiva for his mother that his mother used to help him with his math. However, she used Hebrew terminology for fraction, numerator, and denominator, since she had studied at two Yavneh schools in Lithuania where everything was learned in Ivrit. >: How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? > >Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat >haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. > >I would stick to discussing financial crimes: ... >But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding >of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the >am hanivchar means. What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal. I will take Erlichkeit with aberrance to mitzva practice over Frumkeit any time. >I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, >have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does >not produce people less prone to these things. I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to those who possess it. Originally, higher education in America was tied to religious education, and there was an attempt to instill morality in the students. Today, there is no such attempt. Indeed, if anything, higher education is in many cases anti-morality from a Torah standpoint. Parents contemplating sending their children to a secular collage should keep this in mind. YL From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 18 13:05:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:05:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:00:38PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: :> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a :> : bdieved. :> Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. : This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up : by Shearith Israel in the 18th century ... : Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects ... : The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. None of which led to the dayschool movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? .... :> So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of :> secular studies. : The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member : behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. But you haven't shown a connection between the lack of limudei chol and the extent by which people are not living according to some derekh's understanding of "true Torah values". :> Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of :> secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how : science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. ... And yet would have felt a student who studied science as a full time endevor to be a cause fo a cheshbon hanefesh. And consequently, due to his own lack of formal study, much of the science he uses in his examples is just plain wrong. (And similarly, someone who knew the then-latest theories of cosmogony, geology and evolution would not have found is arguments for Creationism very convincing. If you don't know what the other side of the debate believes, you end up knocking down strawmen.) : how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is : true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, : he did value mathematics. Leshitakha-- Why aren't you asking how R' Miller could ignore RSRH's paean to Schiller? :> But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding :> of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the :> am hanivchar means. : What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on : externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal... Frumkeit is about ritual and a drive to satisfy one's need to be holy. Ehlichkeit is about wanting to do G-d's Will. A frum "baal chessed" wants his gemach to be the biggest in town. An ehrlicher one is happy those in his town in need have so many sources of help. See Alei Shur vol II pp 152-155 A translation of an excetp by R' Ezra Goldschmiedt My blog post on the topic . And if that's not your definition, it's the one I intended when I said that the main cause of the chilulei hasheim you raised (and the mindset that least to them which is in-and-of-itself un-Jewish) is frumeit. :> I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, :> have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does :> not produce people less prone to these things. : I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to : those who possess it... So then why bring up immoral behavior as proof that there are problems with a lack of secular education? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 18th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 balance? From driceman at optimum.net Wed Apr 18 13:30:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:30:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > RAM: >> On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat >> before Biur Chametz? > Burning hametz is a b?dieved. In an ideal world we would eat all of our hametz before zman issuro. So Hazal gave us time to eat hametz in the morning, and instituted biur hametz soon enough before noon that we wouldn?t violate any issurim, but not much before that. Otherwise why not do the biur right after bedika? David Riceman From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 18 16:25:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:25:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95.6C.08474.004D7DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: None of which led to the day school movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Etz Cahim had secular studies in the late 1880s. see below. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started a high school with secular studies around 1915. . R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? This is not true. > From my article "The Founding of Yeshiva Etz Chaim" The Jewish Press, May 2, 2008, pages 48 - 49. From the amount of time allocated to secular subjects, it is clear that the directors of the yeshiva considered these far less important than the students? limudei kodesh studies. Abraham Cahan, who would eventually become the editor of the Jewish Daily Forward and a prominent figure in the Socialist movement in America, became one of the first teachers in the English department in 1887. Cahan records that the curriculum was loosely drawn to provide for the study of grammar, arithmetic, reading, and spelling ? all within the ?English Department.? But because the directors of the school had no clear idea of what should be taught, the English Department functioned haphazardly, more out of a perfunctory acknowledgement for these subjects than a sincere desire to ?provide the children with a modern education.? The English Department was divided into two classes. The first was taught by a boy about fourteen, who had just graduated from public school and the second was taught by Cahan, who was a little less than twenty-eight years old. The students ranged from the ages of nine or ten to fifteen and many were exposed to the formal study of secular subjects for the first time. One of the native students received his first lessons in the English language when he entered the Yeshiva after passing his thirteenth birthday. The young immigrants presented an immense challenge to their devoted teachers. The students drank up the instruction with a thirst centuries old. Cahan frequently remained long after the prescribed teaching hours to tutor his pupils, who were uniformly poor in reading and mathematics and who regarded grammar as an exquisite form of torture. On these occasions, the directors would ask Cahan why he ?worked so hard,? saying that the students ?already knew enough English.? And from my article "The Founding of the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School" The Jewish Press, September 5, 2008, pages 26 & 66. Setting The Pattern For Future Yeshivas The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was unique in that it was the first elementary parochial school that taught basic Jewish studies as well as Talmud. Yeshiva Etz Chaim, founded in 1886, was an intermediate school that enrolled boys at least nine years old who already were somewhat proficient in Chumash and Rashi. Yeshiva Etz Chaim?s goal was to give its students a thorough grounding in Gemara and Shulchan Aruch. In addition, it provided some limited secular studies in the late afternoon. The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was different in that in addition to providing a first rate religious education, it sought to provide its students with an excellent secular education at least equivalent to that offered by the public schools of the time. Nonetheless, limudei chol (secular or ?English? studies) was considered much less important than limudei kodesh (religious studies), and this attitude was clearly displayed in the constitution of the school. It required that there be two principals, one for each department. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 18 17:35:48 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:35:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> R? Jay F, Shachter wrote: ?We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have.? To this I respond: First, I certainly would not wish to set myself up as one who is capable ?to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us,? despite having some modern math and scientific knowledge. I think such a broad statement goes much too far. Not having any significant knowledge of Greek, I will refrain from commenting on your second example. However the first example you cite regarding Pi and the Rambam is one that I am willing to challenge. You are of course correct about the dating of the formal proof[s] (there are more than one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_%CF%80_is_irrational), date to modern, post Rambam times. However, it is very possible and probably likely that the Rambam intuited this on his own, even if without the benefit of a formal proof, that Pi had to be or was most likely to be irrational. I know I did so and probably most reasonably good students of math do so as well, long before they are aware of any formal proof for that fact. One reason for this is the well known method to approximate the value of Pi to any precision desired (even if very slow to converge) that requires little more than the knowledge of how to analyze a triangle. Simply inscribe a polygon of N equal isosceles triangles in a circle and calculate its perimeter and then divide by twice the length of the long side (= diameter of the circle). then do the same for N+1, and N+2 etc. a process in theory you could do infinitely many times for greater precision. So to intuit irrationality is very plausible even if not proven in our modern sense. Practically, note, that no matter how far you carry this exercise you will not get a repeating decimal that is the mark of the rational number. So I think you are far from ?judging the credibility? of the Rambam based on this example you cited. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 18 15:33:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:33:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . R' Ben Waxman wrote: > I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth > of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real > need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know > about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." > > The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika > anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant was that once you sell your chameitz there is no *d'Oraisa* need to do a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, and that's why we say the bracha. This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the only reason. Mishneh Brurah 431:2 writes: "Also: Because people are used to chometz all year long, if there is still some in his house and his possession, they made a gezera because he might forget and eat it." Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of the chometz that we found. But this is an error, in my opinion, because the concern raised by the MB was that one might happen to come across some chometz, and thoughtlessly eat it. Mechira will NOT prevent this. Mechira will ONLY remove the chometz from one's ownership, but it will not help against forgetfullness. I would like to close by showing that Bedikah and Mechira BOTH have strengths that the other lacks, and that is why people should do both: Mechira removes all chometz from ownership, regardless of where it might be, and (I think) regardless of my sincerity, but if I didn't clean the house well enough I may have left some around. Bedika removes (or greatly reduces) the chance that I might come across some chometz accidentally, but the chometz that I didn't find is still in my ownership. A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had intended to type!) Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 00:09:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 03:09:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> Message-ID: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day. In his day it was considered acceptable to say "Look, pi is obviously an irrational number", and nobody would lift an eyebrow, because it *is* obvious. Only later did mathematicians start to say, well, yes, it is obvious, but let's see if we can actually prove it. And eventually they did so, and guess what, they confirmed what everyone including the Rambam already knew. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 18 23:13:45 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 08:13:45 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Ben On 4/19/2018 12:33 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant > was that once you sell your chameitz there is no*d'Oraisa* need to do > a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, > and that's why we say the bracha. > > This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do > Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 03:27:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:27:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam and Pi In-Reply-To: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180419102714.GA11722@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:09:29AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a : rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state : it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day... I fully agree. But there is an irony here. When it comes to theolgy, the Rambam holds the chiyuv is to know, ie to believe because they had proof -- not tradition, not pur faith, etc... I think the Rambam believed he had a proof that pi was irrational. However, he had a differnt definition of the word proof. Continuing on this tangent... I think the definition of "proof" and therefore of "Rationalism" changed so much since the Rambam's day, the Rambam really wouldn't qualify as a "Rationalist" in our sense of the word. For example, science wasn't invented yet. The things the Rambam believed about Natural Philosophy were not backed by anything comparable to the rigor of scientific process. (Which itself is only rigorous at narrowing down the search space. Actual theories are constructed inductively, patterns found from a number of examples, and only have Bayesian levels of certainty. There can always be a black swan out there that, once found, requires replacing the theory with a new one. But *disproving* theories? That black swan does with certainty. Jumping back to before this parenthetic digression...) Similarly in math. The Rambam didn't have a modern mathemetician's definition of proof in mind. Even though he knew Euclid. But he did and always expected knowledge to be backed by some kind of proof. Archimedes spent a lot of time trying to "square the circle", i.e. come up with a geometric way of constructing a square with the same area as a circle. Numerous people tried since. This is the same thing as failing to find the rational number that is pi. Say the square they were looking for had sides of length s. So, the are of the square would be s^2. To "square the circle" would mean to find a square whose sides, s, are such that the ratio between s^2 and r^2 is pi, so that the areas s^2 (the square) and pi * r^2 (the circle) are equal. Repeatedly failing to find s by geometric construction eventually led people to conclude it was a fool's errand. By the Rambam's day, it was taken as a given that geometric construction could not find an s, and therefore that the ratio between them, pi, was irrational. (Weirdly, there still could have been a "black swan", the geometric construction that hadn't yet been found. The level of confidence the Rambam had would parellel that of a scientist believing the results of repeated experiment, but not that of a modern methematician.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Apr 19 08:04:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:04:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day >schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a >post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied >began, but initially, it didn't have to. I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was never separate from the study of Torah. He emphasized the importance of unifying Judaism and secular studies. Often speaking of the, "harmonious union of culture and spirituality," he believed that knowledge of the liberal arts would broaden one's understanding of Torah. However, Revel's dedication to Orthodox Jewry was undisputed. For instance, he forbade the use of a female vocalist in the 1926 Music Festival, as a female singer is a violation of Orthodox Jewish law. He did not allow Reform Jews to serve on Yeshiva College's national board of directors. He was also staunchly opposed to mixed seating in synagogues. "He wrote: 'Yeshiva aims at unity, at the creation of a synthesis between the Jewish conception of life, our spiritual and moral teaching and ideals, and the present-day humanities, the scientific conscience and spirit to help develop the complete harmonious Jewish personality, once again to enrich and bless our lives, to revitalize the true spirit and genius of historic Judaism.'" From https://goo.gl/hbRw8S "Rabbi Revel's first step as the new head of RIETS was the creation of an affi liated high school. The high school, Talmudical Academy, had its fi rst entering class in September 1916." Regarding Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin please see "Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin, Torah Education Pioneer in America" The Jewish Press, April 4, 2008, pages 42 & 91. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 03:19:45 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:19:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> References: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <81715a05-f9f9-f57e-95b1-03dc5240cb96@sero.name> On 19/04/18 02:13, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there > is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Nor is there an issur in having hefker chametz sitting in your property, but you have to search for it and put it away or get rid of it, for fear that if you come across it during Pesach you may absentmindedly eat it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Apr 19 07:45:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:45:48 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . I just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this permission? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:33:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:33:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180419153325.GA3724@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:04:09AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. : : From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b : : "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was ... Before the wave in question, but not the cause of the day school explosion. I do not know why this is so hard of a point to get across. Being around first but not starting a trend does not make something the source of the eventual trend. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is flawed reasoning. In fact, he didn't run a day school. And for that matter TA wasn't fully seperate from REITS. It wasn't a HS model that caught on anywhere. The model of day school and HS that actually catches on across American O through the middle of the 20th cent was the product of compromises between R ("Mr") SF Mendolovitch and his parent body. When TA evolved into MTA and BTA, it was because other schools have already created different expectations of what a HS was. Being in the same track as the eventual college degree, so that going from TA to any other college but YC was more like a transfer, was not sellable. (Although it did make AP courses moot; just take a college course in your 3rd year, if you were ready to.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Apr 19 04:25:17 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:25:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach Message-ID: The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately precedes the Amidah. I gave the following response: Soncino gives a very poignant explantion. ?O Lord, open Thou my lips; and my mouth shall declare Thy praise.? David?s lips had been sealed by wrongdoing, because praise of God would then have been blasphemy. If, then, God opened his lips and he was again enabled to offer Him praise, it was a sign that he had been granted pardon. What a profound thought before one of the most prominent and central prayers of our entire liturgy. We are all sinners and hope for the same pardon that King David was granted. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:59:45 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:59:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180419155945.GA30717@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:25:17AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately : precedes the Amidah. Technically, it is part of the Amidah. That's why we say it between ge'ulah and tefillah in Shacharis and Maariv. Unlike "Ki sheim H' eqra", which is only said before the Amidah of Minchah and Mussaf, because there is no Birkhas Ge'ulah, and therefore no problem of interruption. This is particularly relevant to a Chazan, as Chazaras haShatz should begin with "H' Sefasai Tiftach", not Birkhas Avos. Tangent, since we're looking at what the pasuq is about. Safah is at the edge. The word is not only used for a lip, but also for the seashore (sefas hayam). The peh is what stands behind the sefasayim. So, when I say this pasuq, and when I have the time and yishuv hadaas to think about what I am saying, my thoughts are about Hashem removing the externalities that block me from expressing my real inner self. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 09:23:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20180419162328.GB30717@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:56:42PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: : We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct : judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. : ... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. : He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although : he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater"... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge to that we know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon am? Mind you, I believe in the value of secular knowledge in-and-of-itself. Not just what you need to increase the likelihood of paying the bills. But I just don't see this particular argument. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 09:25:22 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> On 19/04/18 10:45, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I? just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, > then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no > longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). > > But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I > MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is > no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not > destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this > permission? It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 11:55:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahMusings] The Best Charity Message-ID: <20180419185537.GA11736@aishdas.org> People who both know my own proclivities and read this to the end will understand why I just HAD to share this post by RGS. >From https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/04/the-best-charity/ Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings The Best Charity Apr 19, 18 by R. Gil Student My friend, Rav Shlomo Einhorn, is once again attempting a superhuman feat of Torah teaching. A little over two years ago, he taught Torah for 18 live-streamed hours to raise money for the yeshiva he heads. This year, on Lag Ba-Omer, he will be attempting to break that record by teaching for 19 straight hours. This is a cause worth supporting -- or is it? I. Which Charity? Many people in the Jewish community have achieved varieties of financial success, allowing them the privilege of supporting many charities. This raises questions of communal and philanthropic priorities. Others have limited charity funds but still want to allocate them effectively. The issue is a blessing but also a complex problem, with multiple angles. Rav Hershel Schachter discussed this with me a few years ago in [48]Jewish Action. I would like to explore a specific subject that I have seen discussed in the responsa literature -- what is the best charity if you have to choose only one? In mid-sixteenth century Turkey, a wealthy man passed away without leaving instructions for the disposal of his charity funds. The local rabbis decided that some of that charity money should be given to the deceased's poor brother but the sons of the deceased objected that they should inherit the money and decide what to do with it. The question was brought to the Maharshdam, Rav Shmuel Di Medina of Salonica (Responsa Maharshdam, Yoreh De'ah 158). Maharshdam says that we have to try to determine the deceased's desires for the charity fund. Since in this case we do not know his intentions, we should give the money to the highest level of charity. The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 259) quotes his father, the Rosh, as saying that a town may reallocate to a study hall money that was donated to a synagogue or cemetery. Maharshdam argues that if in a case in which we know with certainty that the donor intended for the money to go to a synagogue we can use it for a study hall, then certainly when we do not know the donor's intention we can use the money to support Torah study. If we give the money to a lesser charity, we risk misusing the donation. II. Higher Torah The question then becomes which Torah study organization receives higher priority. Maharshdam quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 119b) that the world survives because of the Torah study of children, who due to their age are free of responsibility from sin. Additionally, more people doing a mitzvah together has greater merit than fewer people. Therefore, concludes Maharshdam, the money should be given to ththe highest charity -- a large elementary school. Similarly, Rav Ephraim Navon in early eighteenth century Turkey addresses a related question (Machaneh Ephraim (Hilkhos Tzedakah 11). A man donated money to establish in a small town a part-time kollel of ten men studying Torah. However, the town could not find ten men willing to enroll. The donor wished to change the endowment from a kollel to a full-time elementary school teacher. Rav Navon permitted this reallocation for technical reasons but adds that this new purpose is higher than the original because the Torah study of children sustains the world. III. God's Place However, Rav Yosef Eliyahu Chazzan challenges this argument (Ma'arkhei Lev vol. 1 no. 25). He quotes the Gemara (Berakhos 8a) which states that nowadays God only has the four cubits of halakhah. Therefore, He loves the distinguished gates of halakhah more than all the synagogues and other study halls. According to this passage, high-level Torah study merits higher priority than any other study. This seems to contradict the earlier passage, which gives priority to children's Torah study. This question gains greater strength when we note that the priority of high-level Torah has practical implications. Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Tefillah 8:3) rules, based on the above Gemara, that it is better to pray in a study hall than a synagogue. Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 90:18) rules likewise. Since the two passages seem to contradict and the latter is quoted authoritatively, it would seem that an elementary school should not be given priority over adult Torah study. Rav Chaim Palaggi (Chaim Be-Yad nos. 64-65) favors the interpretation of Rav Chazzan. However, he struggles with the many authorities who side with the Maharshdam. Rather than taking a minority view against the majority, in an impressive act of intellectual humility Rav Palaggi adopts a middle position that gives due weight to the majority with which he disagrees. IV. Jewish Behavior Perhaps a reconciliation of the two passages lies in the Rambam's interpretation. Rav Chazzan and Rav Palaggi follow Maharsha's interpretation that the Gemara is praising high-level study of halakhah. In the introduction to his commentary to the Mishnah (ed. Kafach, vol. 1, p. 21), Rambam sees the passage about the four cubits of halakhah as a general declaration about the uniqueness of true loyalty to the letter and spirit of halakhah. Synagogues and study halls may be full of people studying Torah but not enough of those students apply these teachings properly to develop a faithful Torah personality. Only someone who internalizes the messages of halakhah can reach out fully to God. If so, the distinguished gates of halakhah may overlap with elementary schools. Schools that teach proper character traits seem to qualify as remaining within the four cubits of halakhah, whether for adults or children. An elementary school that trains its students to follow the law, to embrace and internalize the messages of Judaism regarding behavior and thought, serves in the same capacity as a high-level kollel. Both types of institutions are distinguished gates of halakhah. Elementary schools have the additional benefit of purity, discussed above. If this is correct, the highest charity would be an elementary school that emphasizes proper behavior and attitudes, a mussar-focused cheder that directs pure children on the proper path. About Gil Student Rabbi Gil Student is the founder, publisher and editor-in-chief of Torah Musings. From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Thu Apr 19 18:08:35 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 01:08:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> ?When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah?? One thing I learned in my years as an attorney is that a rhetorical question is not an argument. I, of course, do not know what Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue to be observant in a work environment. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Fri Apr 20 11:40:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:40:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> References: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20180420184026.GA7707@aishdas.org> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 01:08:35AM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : I, of course, do not know what : Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very : proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates : and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue : to be observant in a work environment. Historical (and hagiographical) accounts portray the request for secular education that would make college and professions possible options came from the target audience, a majority of the parents of Brooklyn, not R "Mr." Mendlowitz. His launching of the HS was by convincing 8th grade parents to keep their sons in TvD "just one more year", as the parents wanted their boys to go to Public HS. That was the importance of getting a real American education had to his customer base. Then, it was another "just one more year" into 10th grade, until he had his first graduating class. There wasn't an issue for him of getting secular education into TvD, it was an issue of getting parents to agree to commit time to limudei qodesh! So of course TvD made a big deal about the quality of their secular studies. The whole point their marketing had to make was that the son can learn Torah without parents feeling afraid their boys would be held back. Getting back to the main conversation: What R-"Mr"-SFM thought is more of a historical issue. My point was that the push for limudei chol in day schools at the time the movement (not the first day school!) was getting started came from the parents, not the idealogues. There is no indication the decision was lechat-khilah, as this wasn't a lechat-khilah situation. Limudei qodesh without a guarantee of pre-college quality education wasn't a vaiable option in most communities, not a choice on the table. Meanwhile, the big voice in American O Rabbinate of the time was the East European Rabbi, and not an ideological immigrant who had a pull to America, but someone who came fleeing either progroms or Nazism. We know the majority of them considered limudei chol an assimilationist force. Or is that too under question? (I used the name "R 'Mr.' SF Mendlowitz" [or misspelled as per the usual pronounciation "-olovitch"] because he asked people to call him "Mr." and therefore I thought it respectful to acknowledge it. Even though here, "R" is the default title for men. Then I was afraid people who didn't know the history would think insult was intended, so I am adding this parenthetic explanation.) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 20th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Tifferes: What role does harmony Fax: (270) 514-1507 play in maintaining relationships? From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:54:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:54:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Some thoughts on the passing of a teacher and friend Message-ID: <5f552137ab7f4015af43f057f925c5ae@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> With the greatest trepidation I will share a few thoughts. I knew (to the extent one can know someone) R'Ozer Yeshaya Glickman Hacohain Z"L for 40 years. In the early years we learned together. He certainly was far more able than I but we did discuss many tum issues over the years. I don't think he would be happy being held up as a unicorn even though his blending of both worlds was the reason he felt he was asked by the Yeshiva to be "on the road" so much. I believe he felt that anyone could do what he did at their own level. When the hurley burleys done the question the yeshiva needs to ask itself imho is have they encouraged (or perhaps should they-my uninformed sense is that RIETS looks at the separate mountain approach as a vision -a la r'ybs) broad lives( a la r'hutner) in any of their best and brightest? do they seek out role models of that nature or only exceptional examples in specific accomplishments (e.g big TC or big $ but not a balancer)? Balancing priorities is a big challenge in life, if one wants to honor R'OYG Z"L imho one might start with some cheshbon hanefesh looking at his balance and its message for us (no two of us will likely reach the same conclusions but that's what is to be expected-it's the process not the results) yhi zichro baruch KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:53:20 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:53:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?R=92YBS-Feminist/Talit_Story?= Message-ID: <9fc9dd88e16649d48fc183b298bbfe74@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I believe this version of the story told by R? S Mandel in Jewish Action-not the ?gotcha? version I?ve heard. When a group of feminists visited him and demanded that he permit them to wear tallitot, he listened to them, showed he understood their reasoning, and proposed that there first be a trial period during which they would wear colored cloaks as tallitot, but without tzitzit and without reciting a berachah. He asked them to note how they feel wearing them and to come back after two weeks and confer with them again. After two weeks, they reconvened, and when the Rav asked these women how they felt, they told him how inspired they felt when wearing the cloaks. The Rav replied that that was excellent, that they should definitely continue wearing the cloaks and praying with kavannah, and that there was no need to wear the tallitot with tzitzit that men wore. Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 22 11:27:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:27:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah is Not Religion Message-ID: We are counting towards Shevuous which commemorates the giving of the Torah. The question is "What is Torah?' The following is from RSRH's essay Sivan I that I have posted at Sivan I (Collected Writings I) The Torah, however, did not spring from the breast of mortal man; it is the message of the God of Heaven and Earth to Man; and it was from the very beginning so high above the cultural level of the people to which it was given, that during the three thousand years of its existence there was never a time yet during which Israel was quite abreast of the Torah, when the Torah could be said to have been completely translated into practice. The Torah is rather the highest aim, the ultimate goal towards which the Jewish nation was to be guided through all its fated wanderings among the nations of the world. This imperfection of the Jewish people and its need of education is presupposed and clearly expressed in the Torah from the very beginning. There is, therefore, no stronger evidence for the Divine origin and uniqueness of the Torah than the continuous backsliding, the continuous rebellion against it on the part of the Jewish people, whose first generation perished because of this very rebellion. But the Torah has outlived all the generations of Israel and is still awaiting that coming age which "at the end of days" will be fully ripe for it. Thus, the Torah manifests from the very beginning its superhuman origin. It has no development and no history; it is rather the people of the Torah which has a history. And this history is nothing else but its continuous training and striving to rise to the unchangeable, eternal height on which the Torah is set, this Torah that has nothing in common with what is commonly called "religion." How hopelessly false is it, therefore, to call this Torah "religion," and thus drag it by this name into the circle of other phenomena in the history of human civilization, to which it does not belong. This is a fundamentally wrong starting point, and it is small wonder that it gives rise to questions such as the following, which have no meaning so far as the Torah is concerned: "You want Judaism to remain the same for ever?" "All religions rejuvenate themselves and advance with the progress of the nations, and only the Jewish 'Religion' wants to remain rigid, always the same, and refuses to yield to the views of an enlightened age?" See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 22 04:12:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 07:12:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav Message-ID: . Tumas meis and sheretz, for example, are supernatural phenomena. If someone has been in contact with tumah, and is infected with that tumah, there is no physical evidence of this infection. We are aware of the tumah if and only if we know about the events that took place, and the status of the things in those events. Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses. But they are spiritual illnesses, not medical ones. And in fact, Torah Sheb'al Peh is chock full of spiritual reasons why a person would become a metzora - Lashon Hara being the most famous of these, miserliness and others being mentioned less frequently. My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve myself in general." (Please note: This post is NOT an attempt to categorize all the many kinds of tumah. The first two paragraphs are designed only to show a similarity between tzaraas and zav, and then to highlight a difference.) Akiva Miller From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:02:03 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:02:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Re: R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 RYL quoted R? Yonasan Eybeshutz: --quote-- For all the sciences are condiments and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impure and how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. ?end quote-- >>>>> ? Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual, or even for every member of the Sanhedrin, to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry.? It is not necessary for all these subjects to be part of the standard yeshiva high school curriculum.? It is only necessary that there be in the world mathematicians, zoologists, chemists, doctors, astronomers and so on.? It is not even necessary that they be Jewish.? It is only necessary that their expertise be accessible when needed.? It is not uncommon that poskim confer with physicians, for example, when they need certain medical information in order to posken shailos in specific situations.? The poskim don?t first have to go to medical school.? ? Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. ?It is necessary that they exist in the world. ?It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies. ? If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:55:19 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:55:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> ? In a message dated 4/9/2018 RYL wrote: ? >> ?There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf --quote-- R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. Hayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, ?through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash?. By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy?. R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): ?. It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. ?.He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. ?. ? --end quote-- To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw from this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL ? >>>>? ? ? To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn: ? [1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ? [2] If you can master the ?seven branches of secular wisdom? before your bar mitzvah, that?s fabulous!? Because after your bar mitzvah you have to be mindful of ?vehagisa bo yomam velayla.???But before your bar mitzvah, you can play ball, roller-skate, and memorize the encyclopedia to your heart?s content. ? [3] Funny you should quote R? Chaim of Volozhin.? The famous Yeshiva of Volozhin did not include any of these seven branches of wisdom in its curriculum.? Anyone happen to remember why and when the Yeshiva of Volozhin closed its doors? ? Let me add a passage written by Rabbi Dr. David Berger (who, BTW, was my Jewish history professor for four wonderful semesters in Brooklyn College): ? --quote? ? Although various Geonim were favorably inclined toward the study of philosophy, it is clear that the curriculum of the advanced yeshivot was devoted to the study of Torah alone?.The private nature of philosophical instruction in the society at large [early medieval intellectual Islamic society] made it perfectly natural for Jews to follow the same course; more important, the curriculum of these venerable institutions [the yeshivot] went back to pre-Islamic days, and any effort to introduce? a curricular revolution into their hallowed halls would surely have elicited vigorous opposition.? ? --end quote? ? [Above is from R? Berger?s essay ?Judaism and General Culture in Medieval Times,? in the book *Judaism?s Encounter with Other Cultures* edited by Jacob J. Schachter.] ? Please note these words:? ?the private nature of philosophical instruction.?? The Vilna Gaon studied secular subjects on his own, as many yeshiva students have done over the years. ? Elsewhere RYL has indicated his desire that the NY govt require chassidishe schools to provide a good secular education to their students. ? You don?t have to impose your preferences on others, or get the government involved to force changes in school curricula. ? I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 01:06:16 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:06:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <6b2084c852a745458c68c6f7836e4477@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn:[1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ================================== IIUC, the Gaon?s theory of limud torah was that there was no such thing as spare time (any time one does not have to be doing something else must be spent learning) Thus assumedly he felt time spent on secular studies was required. Unless one posits that he had a need for ?recreation? which was study of secular studies or that he really only studied them when Torah learning of any sort was forbidden. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 23 05:39:50 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:39:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halacha Yomis - Hafrashas Challah, At Large Factories Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. How does the OU separate Challah at Jewish owned factories that manufacture bread and related items that require Challah separation? Is there a mashgiach separating a piece of dough from every batch? Isn?t that impractical? A. For OU-certified restaurants and caterers, the mashgiach separates Challah from every batch of dough. However, in factories it is not practical to have a mashgiach present each time a batch of dough is made. Instead the OU uses what we call the ?Tevel Matzah system.? Open boxes of matzah that did not have Challah separated from them (i.e. tevel) are placed in these factories next to the mixers. The mashgiach declares that each time a batch of dough is made, a designated piece of the matzah should become Challah and exempt that batch of dough. Even though the matzos have already been baked and the mixer contains unbaked dough, we have already seen that one can separate from baked matzah on raw dough when both are obligated in Challah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Mon Apr 23 06:34:22 2018 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 13:34:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. On Sunday, April 22, 2018, 11:29:56 PM CDT, Toby Katz wrote: > Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. It is necessary that they > exist in the world. It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student > take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. > I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female > physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. How > fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn > Torah day and night that men have! ... > If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") > are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and > potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. Not that this is optimal, Those that have the ability, and desire should spend as much time as they want/need to achieve the Torah knowledge we all rely on to live our lives. We all need Gedolim that these kinds of people become to naser the difficult Shaylos that constantly arise as we progress through time. For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah. This that misdirect those strengths - being urged to use their strengths to learn Torah are in my view shortchanging them. They are discouraging Jews from serving God and his people in the best way they can. Where their strengths where they really lie. More to say - no time. HM Want Emes and Emunah in your life? Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/ From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Mon Apr 23 01:26:05 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:26:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 From: Micha Berger > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us > they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon > am? What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, and what they are teaching us, whilst simultaneously utilising our understanding of the era's terms and sciences to better probe the intentions of the original statements. Dovid Rubin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 08:15:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 11:15:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423151544.GD1065@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 08:26:05AM +0000, D Rubin wrote: : > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, ... : > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon : > am? : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) ... Just to clear up the word, I meant non-posqim. I needed something that meant someone who wasn't "from LOR on up", and therefore shouldn't be pasqening for themselves. : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper : understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, : and what they are teaching us... Yes, as I said, I too believe in a role for limudei chol beyond the utilitarian study of things that will eventually help you pay the bills. I was addressing what I thought was a flaw in a particular argument. There is enough Torah to keep one busy for a lifetime without topics that require a formal secular education. The question is what to do when "Mah shelibo chafeitz" is something like hil' qidush hachodesh. Which brings me to a totally new aspect of this discussion: formal vs informal education. Secular study in one's spare time was the norm in places like Volozhin and Slabodka. (Although Slabodka students were more likely to be reading Freud...) To the extent that RSRH thought Volozhin were "fellow travelers on the path of Torah im Derekh Eretz" and described them as such to his followers when fundraisers for the yeshiva approched Frankfurt aM. And yet the same Litvisher rabbanim and RY would campaign against university and formal education. Perhaps their primary concern was leaving the bubble prematurely leading to assimilation, rather than expecting their talmidim to define away the concept of "free time" or afraid of which ideas their students might be exposed to. Although the Alter of Slabodka would make a case-by-case diagnosis and give each student different guidelines, at least we could say there were stduents for whom he thought secular study on one's own was appropriate. And apparently the norm. Remember, these are the same bachurim for whom the leading pass-time when not learnig was chess. Yeshiva wasn't for everyone; the guys who went were a bunch of intellecturals. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From t613k at aol.com Mon Apr 23 09:33:07 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:33:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <162f35a0504-c8b-11ca6@webjas-vab001.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Mon Apr 23 12:43:36 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:43:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: << I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies.>> And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of science the women should pasken the question -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:00:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:00:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423210037.GA8959@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:43:36PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of : science the women should pasken the question Except that it's arguable that pro forma women can't pasqen. It means a poseiq needs to know enough to ask intelligent questions of the expert. Even if the experts would end up being women, BTs who studied the subject before accepting ol mitzvos, unobservant Jews or non-Jews. Which is a good deal of knowledge, but doesn't require years of formal education. When I brought this thread over from Areivim to Avodah, my intent was not to have a bunch of pro-secular education posts. Rather, my focus was on the eilu va'eilu of saying that even though I believe in the value of secular education, I cannot say it's the One True Derekh. For example, the gemara only says that many tried to follow Rashbi's Torah-only derekh and failed. Not that R Yishmael was right. But that pragmatically, one worked for the masses and the didn't. And if the context changes, so that the welfare state makes it possible for more to succeed toing things Rashbi's way? The gemara says nothing against it. Assuming they don't bankrupt the state that way or other Modern Israeli political, governmental and economic issues, but again, that's the balebatishe problem of the system failing. Even if it were chilul hasheim issues (just to pre-empt that line of reasoning), that's not about eschewing secular studies. I would say the gemara leaves both options open. And for today... For every kid who leaves chareidi life going OTD because they feel hobbled by the lack of secular education, or the lack of worldliness in general, or just plain constricted by the paucity of their choices of how to live as adults there is a Mod-O kid who leaves because of too much opennees, a lack of structure, an attraction to the other lifestyles they're exposed to, a feeling that their parents are fooling themselves with compromise... To survive, we need all our options. That said, I find it interesting that none of the arguments in favor of limudei chol actually involved what I consider their real value: There is too much we can't learn from Torah. Not that it's not there, just that we don't know how to extract it. Like when RALichtenstein saw the Chevra Qadisha try to rush the aveilim at one levayah through so that they could begin another, he commented that had they read Hamlet they never could have acted that way. Not that such middos aren't in Torah sources, but they're more accessible sometimes in literature. And for all the awe one may get from the Wisdom of the Author when learning Torah, it hits harder when you see Chokhmas haBorei in the physical world, outside the context of "religious studies". Also, by studying other topics one learns other modes of thought, and becomes more able to think in other ways, reach other conclusions. Mathemeticians, programmers and lawyers all learn a precision of thought and attention to detail that helps in real-life problem solving as well as learning. Vekhulu for other displines. In short... The value I find in limudei chol only starts with knowing more and having more data to put into the Torah and the parnasah mills. They change how one thinks in ways that improve both Torah and life skills. Simply by having more tools in the toolbox. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 11:08:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. When I was a kid, it was a big deal that we couldn't buy chameitz from Walbaum's, including the supermarket whose parking lot was directly across the street. It means that for a couple of months, I couldn't be sent to the store on Fri for many of those last-minute purchases. I presume (given who my parents would have asked in that era) that was R' Fabian Schoenfeld's pesaq. But as the broohaha over beer this year indicates, there is a machloqes. We could view the sale as valid, and the Jew wrongfully selling merchandise that belongs to someone else. Theft, rather than chameitz she'avar alav es haPesach. Which would imply that in our case, where bi'ur chameitz is done later than the rav's mechirah, we would view it as wrongfully destroying someone else's chameitz. Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? I would think the latter. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 14:07:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:07:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> On 23/04/18 14:08, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. > > With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim > who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) > that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to > treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But here your actions show that you were completely serious about the mechira, but you didn't intend this to be included in it. The shtar you signed doesn't specifically say this *is* included. Its description of what's included very much depends on your intentions as revealed by your actions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend to include ANY item? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 23 14:51:13 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:51:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <07.CD.29097.DC55EDA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:31 AM 4/23/2018, RN Toby Katz wrote: >I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a >reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I >never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would >never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the >option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? >? >? >? >--Toby Katz I find your terminology "normal Orthodox schools" somewhat surprising in the context of Chassidic yeshivas. What exactly do you mean by this terminology when contrasted with Chassidic schools? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 21:57:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:57:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/04/18 17:49, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be > : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from > : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a > : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. > > But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when > the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions > showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or > burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend > to include ANY item? Again, you are conflating two questions, one of which depends on your intentions and one which does not: 1) Is the mechira valid? Yes, regardless of your intentions. 2) What is included in the mechira. Certainly anything explicitly included in the shtar. But the shtar's language is vague; does it apply to *this* piece of bread? Only if you meant it to. That which you've set aside for breakfast is clearly not included, even if the mechira happened early in the morning. Ditto for that which you set aside to burn. Did it include an item on your store shelves, which you ended up selling just 20 minutes later? We can approach this two ways: a) It did, because you intended it to. Your intention was that your inventory should not become treif; this is inventory, you don't want it to be treif, therefore it's included. b) I bo'is eima, fine, let it be as you say, and the act of selling an item -- whether 20 minutes after the zman or 20 minutes before the end of Achron Shel Pesach -- shows that it was not included. Even if we were to accept this proposition (which I do not), whatever remains on the shelves that you did *not* sell remains included. Not only did you do nothing to indicate an intention to exclude it, you clearly did intend to include it, since your whole purpose was that it should not become treif. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 22:18:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:18:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name>, <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore > guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is > still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between > chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or > moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? > > I would think the latter. > ?????- Iiuc they sold the whole business, not just the stock Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 24 04:53:01 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 07:53:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira. There have been conjectures that the person's actions might reveal his intentions, or maybe not. But it seems to me that the starting point should be that which has been mentioned in writing. And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser degree of detail. In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this thread. But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other details. It seems to me that the "stam daas" of this person would be that he is selling only what is on the list, and the bittul is on everything else. Akiva Miller From hankman at bell.net Tue Apr 24 06:15:47 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:15:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: <0401042908D24434A2102FDD03A26A7A@hankPC> R?n T. Katz wrote: In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz I would go well beyond that and possibly suggest that when done ?the right way? that certain limudei chol? (read math and natural sciences) could be a better and more efficient way of attaining emunah including drosh vachakor and yiras harommeimus and the goal of understanding ?beHai? boro osom, or the gevuros of masseh bereishis, the intricacies of the olam koton and the actual vast olom not to mention the numerous sugios in shas and halacha that require knowledge of the real world and it science (its understanding). I propose a thought for consideration, that while for some yechidim their level of Torah learning is sufficiently high that Torah is the best and most efficient path to attain these goals. Unfortunately for many (most) of us, our level of Torah havanah is not even close to that level and as a practical fact a more direct path to getting a start on these Torah goals is through studying the briah and its science put there by G-d in the maseh beraishis. Someone like the GRA whose level of Torah study most of us can not even begin to imagine would relegate his study of science to only when it was not in opposition to his limud of Torah (such as the B?HK etc) as the best manner (for him) of achieving this goal was through his limud of Torah. But for most of us to take this as also applying to our situation is wishful thinking. As many times as I learn parshs Bereishis, my havana of ?beHai? boro osom has not really grown very much nor my level derosh vachakor. For us it may be a lekatchila outside the B?HK to set times for scientific study if done with the appropriate approach in support of our Torah understanding and growth in yira and emunah even when not just for parnasa. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 24 08:12:26 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:12:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Some_FAQs_about_the_OU=92s_=93Tevel_Mat?= =?windows-1252?q?zah_system=94?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Here are some FAQs about the OU?s ?Tevel Matzah system? that were described in yesterday?s Halacha Yomis. Q1. What would happen if the box of tevel matzos that was left in the factory was accidentally discarded? A1. If the matzo is discarded, the Tevel Matzah system becomes in-operative. Because of the concern that the tevel matzos might be lost, the OU also arranges a backup Hafrashas Challah each day in the OU offices to cover any factory that did not have a proper Hafrashas Challah done on premises. Q2. Is there any special reason that the OU chooses to use matzos for their tevel system? Couldn?t plain dough or bread be used instead for this purpose? A2. The main advantage of using matzos for Hafrashas Challah is that they have a very long shelf-life. A matzah can easily last from one year to the next and still be edible. Another obvious advantage of using matzah is that it can remain in the factories on Pesach. Q3. From how many batches of dough can one separate Challah using one box of tevel matzos? A3. When the mashgiach places the box of matzos in the factory, he declares that 1/5 of a gram of matzah should become Challah for each subsequent batter that will be produced. Considering that a box of matzos contains approximately one pound of matzos (454 grams), this means that a box of matzos will cover the Challah for more than 2,200 batches of dough. Even if a factory makes ten batches a day, a single box of matzos will last for over 6 months! Q4. Given that a box of matzah can be used to separate Challah for over 2,000 batches of dough, if a factory only makes one or two batches of dough a day, could a single box of matzos be used for several years? A4. No. One cannot take Challah from dough made from wheat that grew in one year on a batch of dough made from wheat that grew in a different year. The cutoff for determining which year the wheat grew is Rosh Hashanah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 24 08:24:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:33pm EDT, R Akiva Miller wrote: : This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do : Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer : to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the : only reason. I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? The MB's other reason (gezeira) and discussion thereof, elided. : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of : the chometz that we found... "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? ... : A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my : chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already : removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for : me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had : intended to type!) Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? A shade over 6 days later, on Tue, Apr 24 at 7:53am EDT, RAM wrote: : I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone : referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira... : And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two : major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person : who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller : must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser : degree of detail. I thought there are so many versions, referencing "the text" or even "a text" is meaningless. I therefore viewed the issue when you raised it last week (?) morein terms of: Does your LOR address this issue, and if so, how? : In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, : I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must : take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual : intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this : thread. Bitul and "all my chameitz" are mutually exclusive sets. It it's hefqeir, it's not mine. (BTW, in Israeli Aramaic the word was "hevqer", which I kept on reading as though it was "the cattle.") Espectially is we allow later actions as evidence of what was intent at the time of the sale. : But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that : he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", : and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other : details... Without "and any other chameitz which may be"? That version would solve all your problems, but affords less protection against issur. Since all the mechirah is belt-n-suspenders with bitul anyway, no big deal. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony? From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 24 09:03:23 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:03:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> References: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1df6ecc6-8417-7966-0620-412e6633fa66@sero.name> On 24/04/18 11:24, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of > hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? Yes, I think it is. Hefker, especially when the item is still in your property, depends on your willing renunciation. If you still regard it as yours then it's not hefker, regardless of your declaration. Either because the insincere declaration is defective, or because the moment you think of it as yours you regain it through kinyan chatzer. > : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point > : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) > : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of > : the chometz that we found... > > "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? Bedika != Bittul. By definition Bedika cannot get rid of what is not found. > Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? I don't see why not. If you inherited an unspecified estate you can surely sell it as a lot, sight unseen, and leave it to the buyer to discover what exactly is included in it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Tue Apr 24 23:26:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 06:26:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hand washing Message-ID: The gemara (Shabbat 62b) states that being derogatory (mzalzel) concerning ntilat yadaim(hand washing) causes poverty. Rava then clarifies that this is only talking about the case where one doesn't wash at all. The gemara then rejects Rava's interpretation based on R' Chisda saying that he had washed his hands with a lot of water and got a lot of good (in return?). As part of a broader shiur, I was wondering : 1. Is it possible that water was not as readily available then and so this focus on the amount of water might not be applicable today? 2. Why would the gemara accept a rejection of Rava without a more specific refutation source? 3. How is R' Chisda's statement a source of rejection? (Rava could well agree that using more than the minimum is praiseworthy but still hold poverty only comes for those who don't wash at all) That's enough to start :) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Tue Apr 24 10:57:13 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:57:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed during the Rav?s lifetime. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 24 05:30:39 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Apr 22, 2018 09:28:10 pm Message-ID: <15245910390.9bBE36.37982@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge [s]o that we > know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto > explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we > question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with > emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? > > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the > metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) > that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such > things. But the hamon am? > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- correction. At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that requires supernatural explanation. Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass them. There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 06:05:39 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:05:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <23688d43-325f-1109-9d85-fcb94a75b7e7@aishdas.org> On 4/24/2018 1:57 PM, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit > and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav's talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav's lifetime. The one that Rabbi Mayer Twersky quotes is in the name of an impeccable source, Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, who was personally involved. KT, YGB From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 07:25:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:25:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425142550.GB15047@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:57:13PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit : and others tell a different version. He believes one... Actually, you can go see RSM's version for yourself. No need to mix RJR into this. From the current Jewish Action: https://jewishaction.com/the-rav/observing-the-rav > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav?s lifetime. Actually, the "a woman" version was. I remember the discussion in shul, because I thought that the story as told belittled the woman too much. (Unlike RSM's impression, "Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances.") Tamar Ross (2004) records R' Meiselman and the Frimer Brothers telling the story https://books.google.com/books?id=vkvNNioH--4C&lpg=PA91&pg=PA91#v=onepage I found R' Meiselman (published Fall 1998) here (near the bottom of pg 9 [5th page of the PDF]): http://bit.ly/2HQBwHm And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 They say they were told the story by Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, former rabbi of the YI of Brokline, and that it happened in the mid-70s. Remember (unlike RSM) your "several of the Rav's talmidim knew the NY RY, not the Rabbi of Boston. There is really enough detail in R' Meiselman and R's Frimer version to rule out the story being legend. I would attribute RSM's version to memory drift; it has been some 40 years since the events, after all. 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? From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Apr 25 07:37:22 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:37:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Translation of Makkos / Binfol oyivcha al tismach In-Reply-To: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> References: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> Message-ID: Revisiting an issue that comes up repeatedly--do classical sources support the approach that we should feel sorrow for / not rejoice over, the suffering of our persecuting enemies. Yeshayahu (15:5) declares, ?My heart cries out? over the destruction of Israel?s wicked enemy, Moab. TargumYonason (and Radak and Metsudos) take this as the prophet quoting the enemy. But Rashi takes it as the prophet expressing his own heart?s thoughts, and he writes, ?The prophets of Israel are unlike the prophets of the umos ha-olom. Bilaam sought to uproot Israel for no reason. But the prophets of Israel [who had good cause to wish for their persecutors? destruction, nevertheless] mourn over the punishments coming upon the nations (miss-o-ninnim al pur-annos ha-ba-ah al ha-umos).?? (Artscroll cites both explanations, but adds a commentary by ''Sod Yesharim (I could not find it on HebrewBooks.org) who, like Rashi, takes the prophet to be referring to his own grief, but contra Rashi declares, ''The prophet had no cause to grieve over the downfall of the wicked nation of Moab, or of other unworthy nations. However, every nation had its own type of impurity that tempted the righteous and was a challenge that they had to overcome. When they did so successfully, they grew in stature. Now, with the demise of Moab, that particular challenge disappeared, and with it the potential for growth.) Also, I did have occasion to directly ask Rav Dovid Feinstein what he meant in the Kol Dodi Hagadah by ''shofchim l'eebud ha-makos and we don't drink them.'' Did he mean we pour out the wine out of sympathy for the Egyptians' suffering the makkos (as I had translated it), or did he mean that after taking the drops of wine out of the cups, we throw them (the drops of wine representing the makkos) out as waste, rather than drinking them (as R. Zev Sero insisted). And how that relates to the issue of ''al tismach.'' Sorry, but he did not commit to either way, comfortable with both approaches towards rejoicing over the downfall of Israel's enemies. Nevertheless, by my request, the next printing of the Kol Dodi Haggadah should have the translation changed to R. Zev's. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 08:32:13 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:32:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". Does _anybody_ here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? Perhaps a bar mitzvah boy the first time his tefillin "counts", or, perhaps the first time one dons a tallis at shul after marriage, or the first time one does birchas hachama? (As a baal teshuva, I have had a plethora of opportunities to do a mitzvah for the first time, and sometimes I get a spiritual high. And it's quite possible that I didn't do all of them correctly the first time, and that sometimes I wasn't even yotzie b'deived. No, I don't check my tzitzis every time I put on my tallis). Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce inappropriate? The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an inappropriate thought? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 25 13:03:11 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 16:03:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages Message-ID: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:26 AM 4/25/2018, Jay F. Shachter wrote: Let me begin with Daas Torah. Some years ago Rav Zelig Epstein, ZT"L was describing how the Mir Yeshiva left Vilna and got to Japan. He pointed out that almost all of the yeshivas were at this time located in Vilna and that almost all of the hanhalla of the yeshivas were opposed to leaving Vilna, because they feared that the Russians would arrest the yeshiva boys for trying to leave the "Communist paradise." However, several yeshivas boys were strongly in favor of leaving. The following is from my article Rabbi Aryeh Leib Malin And The Mir Yeshiva Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 154 The Jewish Press, February 2, 2018. "Rabbi Malin [a top Mir student] felt it was a matter of life and death that the Mir Yeshiva students leave Vilna. He is reported to have said, "I will get a gun and shoot anybody who tries to stop us from leaving!" (This was verified for me by Reb Zalman Alpert, who served as a librarian at Yeshiva University for many years and told me he heard it from two former Mir Yeshiva students.) " When one of the boys heard that the yeshiva students went against what the hanhalla said, he asked, "But what about Daas Torah?" Reb Zelig replied (and I do not know if he was serious or kidding), "This was before Daas Torah was invented." I was told that Reb Chaim Shmuelevitz, who was against the yeshiva leaving, later apologized to Reb Leib with tears in his eyes. The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. Regarding asking and following what a rov tells you, I am convinced that when they ask in the World to Come "Why did you do this or that?" and someone replies, "I asked a Rov and he told me to do this." the response will be, "You were given free will and expected to exercise it." Certainly one needs to ask a rov difficult halachic questions, but need one ask about most things in daily life? A friend of mine who is a therapist told me that some of his patients are afraid to do almost anything on their own. How sad. Even the Avos were not perfect and RSRH points this out. See his essay Lessons From Jacob and Esau (Collected Writings VII) where he points out that Yitzchok and Rivka made errors in educating Eisav. See also his commentary on what Avraham did when he said that Sarah was his sister. He follows the RAMBAN who says Avraham made a "big" mistake when he did this. Sadly there are some who do believe that whatever scientific assertions Chazal made must be valid. Rabbi Moshe Meiselman is one such person. His book Torah, Chazal and Science takes this position. It is hard for me to understand how a nephew of RYBS can hold this view. Regarding believing things that are not true, see my article "My Mind Is Made Up. Do Not Confuse Me With The Facts!" The Jewish Press, August 25, 2004 pages 7 & 77. YL >It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > >Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what >you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when >you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages >have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same >moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- >correction. > >At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the >moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the >dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on >yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, >the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and >advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly >caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). > >Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this >mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still >we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on >our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in >matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, >even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in >Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit >when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must >rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. >If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will >increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where >the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same >reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. > >That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know >already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, >and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, >and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take >literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and >you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that >requires supernatural explanation. > >Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, >and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes >you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like >them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a >Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your >abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is >a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some >of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. > >You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different >species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that >every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid >Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all >scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a >vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us >closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different >species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you >will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are >different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do >is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass >them. > >There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original >topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than >bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, >that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education >inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for >all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and >progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some >people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the >Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded >innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There >is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he >is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will >never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that >he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. > > > Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter > 6424 N Whipple St > Chicago IL 60645-4111 > (1-773)7613784 landline > (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice > jay at m5.chicago.il.us -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 14:03:32 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish Message-ID: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> >From The Jewish Press , by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev [literally, "the fish of the sword"] is kasher. Why is it widely considered to be not kosher, then? Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different consistency - or something like that - from those of other fish. So he decided it was a treife fish. But that's absolutely not correct. The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag hacherev is kasher. Professor [Shlomo] Sternberg, a big genius in learning and math, published an essay maybe 20 years ago in which he writes that Rabbi Soloveitchik asked him to conduct research on the status of swordfish. He did. He showed Rabbi Soloveitchik the scales of a swordfish and Rav Soloveitchik said, "It's a kashere fish!" Professsor Sternberg writes that he still has the envelope with the scales he showed Rav Soloveitchik in his Gemara Chullin. If the commentaries on the Shuchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev is kosher, how can Rabbi Tendler claim it isn't? Rabbi Tendler claims "dag hacherev" is a different fish. It's not true. But Rabbi Tendler did a service to the Orthodox Jewish community because at the time there were Conservative rabbis who were giving hashgachas, so he laughed them out of existence and said they don't know what they're talking because [they were giving swordfish a hechsher when] swordfish is really treif. So the Orthodox realized you can't rely on the Conservatives. L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue, but Rabbi Tendler accomplished his goal. Well, that's a lot of egg (roe?) on my face after what I said repeatedly in the 1990s in soc.culture.jewish[.moderated] O/C/R Wars... But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. "L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! There is a tie in here to what R JFSchachter posted here yesterday (? no time zone) at 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) under the subject line "Judging The Credibility Of The Sages": > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what > you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when > you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages > have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same > moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- > correction. I was okay attributing ignorance to Chazal, but not violating epstemic virtue like "making up an answer". I would think that by the end of the period, subconsious biases wouldn't have made it into the final result. > At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the > moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the > dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah... Except that daas Torah only requires belief that one is obligated to listen to halachic leadership on social and personal issues where the unknowns are not halachic (or even aggadic). Not that they are necessarily right, nor even that they are more likely to be right. (Infallibility was never Agudah doctrine; but you do find it among the population.) And I am not sure that when it comes to halakhah Chazal *can* be wrong. It's like saying that the house john built is inconsistent with the house John built. Pesaq is constitutive, not truth finding; expecially when you are the nation's authoritative halachic source (eg the Sanhedrin or shas as keSanhedrin, depending on when you think the Sanhedrin actually closed its doors). A pesaq made by CHazal based on incorrect science may still be correct halakhah because they define correctness. We would need to revisit our recurring tereifos discussion. But in any case: 1- I refuse to believe Chazal "made up answers" of had other epistemic moral failings (as a group, including peer review, what made it into shas, etc...) And I wonder how emunas chakhamim would work without that kind of assertion. 2- And yet, that may have happened here, among our contemporary posqim. No one is interested in fixing the science error (among those who believe it is in error) because C loses this way. 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? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 12:49:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 15:49:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425194944.GC6722@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:32:13AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 : > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 : : Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav : concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of : 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" : and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". ... : The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is : *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is : doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an : inappropriate thought? I think it's more that the high isn't from the halachic aspect of what they're doing. Rather than it having to be halkhah qua halakhah. I am not sure that "one is doing ratzon H'" is different than "being mequyam a mitzvah" anyway. As for "getting closer to H'", Litvaks would talk more about sheleimus than deveiqus. IMHO this is part of RYBS being, fundamentally, a Brisker. Here's a quote I feel is on a similar theme, from "The Rav: The World of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik", starting on pg 54: Judaism must be explained and expounded on a proper level. I have read many pamphlets that have been published in the United States with the purpose of bringing people closer to Judaism. There is much foolishness and narrishkeit in some of these publications. For instance, a recent booklet on the Sabbath stressed the importance of a white tablecloth. A woman recently told me that the Sabbath is wonderful, and that it enhances her spiritual joy when she places a snow-white tablecloth on her table. Such pamphlets also speak about a sparkling candelabra. Is this true Judaism? You cannot imbue real and basic Judaism by utilizing cheap sentimentalism and stressing empty ceremonies. Whoever attempts such an approach underestimates the intelligence of the American Jew. If you reduce Judaism to religious sentiments and ceremonies, then there is no role for rabbis to discharge. Religious sentiments and ceremonies are not solely posessed by Orthodox Jewry. All the branches of Judaism have ceremonies and rituals. This is not the only reason why we must negate such a superficial approach. Today in the United States, American Jewish laymen are achieving intellectual and metaphysical maturity. They wish to discover their roots in depth. We will soon reach a point in time where the majority of our congregants will have academic degrees. Through the mediums of white tablecloths and polished candelabras, you will not bring these people back to Judaism. It is forbidden to publish pamphlets of this nature, which emphasize the emotional and ceremonial approaches. There is another reason why ceremony will not influence the American Jew. In the Unitesd States today, the greatest master of ceremony is Hollywood. If a Jew wants ceremony, all he has to do is turn on the television set. If our approach stresses the ceremonial side of Judaism rather than its moral, ethical, and religious teachings, then our viewpoint will soon become bankrupt. The only proper course is that of Ezekiel's program for the priests: "And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and the common, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean" [Ezekiel 44:23] The rabbi must teach his congregants. He must deepen their appreciation of Judaism and not water it down. If we neutralize and compromise our teachings, then we are no different than the other branches of Judaism. By RYBS's standards, being moved by music at a kumzitz is "ceremony". Meanwhile, Chassidus, Mussar, RSRH, Qabbalah-influenced Sepharadim (following the Chida and Ben Ish Hai) and numerous other derakhim have no problem with ceremony. For that matter, before it became minhag, specifying specific patterns of hand washing (RLRLRL or RRLL) was also ritual once. And many of those Academics that RYBS foresaw want their Nesivos Shalom, Tish, kumzitz.... Neochassidus is a big thing in YU. This idea that ceremonies that aren't defined by halakhah are inherently empty and its sentimentalism is cheap rather than reinforcing the cognitive and halachic, is, as I said, only something a Brisker would write. Even within Brisk... RYBS went further in this direction than did the Brisker Rav (R Velvel, his uncle). The BR holds that one makes berakhos on minhagim that have a cheftzah shel mitzvah (eg lighting a Chanukah menorah in shul), and that the Rambam and Rabbeinu Tam don't argue about that. What they do argue about is whether Chatzi Hallel is close enough to Hallel to qualify for a berakhah. This is a non-started for RYBS, who requires minhagim have a cheftzah shel mitzvah or else they're ceremoial. RYBS even fit the minhagim of the 3 Weeks and 9 Days to fit this shitah by insisting they must follow what was already established aveilus and sheloshim, respectively. Oops. I just notied I'm repeating something I worte a decade ago. See . At least the berkhah-in-minhag part was posted in 2011, so that this post had the value of combining the two earlier ones. Beqitzur, I don't know of two many people (aside from our mutual rebbe-chaver) who would agree with RYBS on this one. 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? From zev at sero.name Wed Apr 25 14:37:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:37:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish In-Reply-To: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 25/04/18 17:03, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish > because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with > scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is > young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are > elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) > So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question > seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify > as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. There can be no question that a fish does *not* have to keep its scales to remain kosher. The posuk says fish only have to have their scales in the water, not when they leave the water. A fish that sheds its scales when caught is kosher, and no rabbi has the right to say otherwise. And I don't see a difference between shedding when caught and shedding on reaching adulthood. As I understand R Tendler's claim, it was that swordfish never have true scales, that even the ones they have as juveniles are not kaskasim. And this seems not to be true. BTW R Ari G and R Ari Z dispute the claim that adults swordfish (or landed swordfish) lose all their scales. They claim that this is the result of not examining adult landed fish closely enough, and that if one does one finds kosher scales still attached to the skin. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Apr 25 16:33:33 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 23:33:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: <06705270-E689-4937-BAAF-0C7AE035E469@tenzerlunin.com> I simply note that (a) all the stories were published after the Rav died and (b) all appear to be least first degree if not more hearsay. (It?s unclear how R. Mandel knows the story. His article doesn?t say if he saw it, heard it from the Rav, or heard it from someone else.) But the difference between the two ways the story is told is striking and, I believe, calls it into question. But I guess we?ll never know. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 26 05:25:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:25:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sifrei torah Message-ID: <6fef9ae673744a11a2ede85a210fb782@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Can anyone point me to information concerning the history of the difference between the physical element of Ashkenazi (atzei chaim) and Eidot Hamizrach (containers) Sifrei Torah? The differences in the timing and physics of hagba and glila ? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Apr 26 10:06:01 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 17:06:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Unknown Days of the Jewish Calender Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NZ9BN1 This coming week, an unsuspecting person wishing to catch a minyan, who walks into a random shul in many places around the world, might be in for a surprise. After the Shemoneh Esrei prayer on Sunday there will be no Tachanun. On Monday there will be Selichos; and on Thursday there again won?t be Tachanun! Why would this be? No Tachanun generally signifies that it is a festive day[1]; yet, no other observances are readily noticeable. As for the reciting of Selichos on Monday, they are usually reserved for a fast day; yet no one seems to be fasting! What is going on? See the above URL for more about this. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 19:43:43 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 22:43:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> On 4/25/2018 11:32 AM, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: >> And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at >> (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav > concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense > of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something > else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". > Does anybody here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? ... > Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah > was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce > inappropriate? > The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he > is thinking that he is being mekayum a mitzvah?... For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a problem. KT, YGB From meirabi at gmail.com Thu Apr 26 15:58:32 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 08:58:32 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach Message-ID: Yeshayahu (15:5) My heart cries out over the destruction of Israels wicked enemy, Moab. Rashi understands, the prophet is expressing his own agony - The prophets of Israel, unlike the prophets of the world, like Bilaam, seek to destroy us without provocation. Our prophets however, mourn for our persecutors when they suffer Divine punishments. As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness, that is certainly more of an intense and personal loss than the millions of Egyptians who perished - but we mourn them all from the perspective of lost potential, lost opportunity to be loyal to HKBH, and HKBH's failure to successfully persuade them to open their eyes and do what is right. That is why we spill wine from the cup we use for Hallel - HKBH's praise is incomplete, He was not fully successful - the gift He gave humanity, free choice, can, and was, used against Him. Obviously the cup should not be topped up. Each plague was a lesson and a plea from HKBH to all who witnessed these astonishing events - do the right thing, reconise that I am the King of all kings, The Master of the universe. Every Yid deserves 600,000 to attend his funeral. The Gemara explains - As it was given So it is taken away. Every Y, even the most Poshut or unlearned, is a potential recipient of the entire Torah and we must visualise their departure as the loss of that tremendous potential. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 26 18:35:26 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:35:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2499630f-df1d-04ef-9897-ef18103da093@sero.name> On 26/04/18 18:58, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of > descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness Where is this written? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri Apr 27 01:04:10 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 10:04:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> References: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> Message-ID: When I was in yeshiva, one of my rabbanim told us that we should dance when we "get" a Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Ben On 4/26/2018 4:43 AM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: > For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a > problem. > > KT, > YGB From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 29 07:49:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 17:49:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: A while ago we had a discussion about farfetched ukimtas. In yesterday's daf (Zevachim 15) the Gemara made a very startling statement about farfetched ukimtas. The Gemara has a question about whether Holachah without walking is Pasul or not. The Gemara brought a proof from a braisa If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher (even though when it spills, some if it spreads out towards the Mizbeach, i.e. Holachah without walking). The Gemara answered that none of the blood spread towards the Mizbeach.The Gemara then asked, surely, it spreads in all directions! The Gemara gave 3 answers 1: It fell on an incline. 2: It fell in a crevice. 3: The blood was very thick, and almost congealed. It did not spread at all. Then the Gemara made the following startling statement to reject these answers: It is UNREASONABLE to say that the Tana taught about such unusual cases The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? I brought an example from Bava Basra 19-20 which had at least as farfetched ukimtas and yet the Gemara didn't think they were unreasonable. Here is the example that I quoted from Bava Basra A Baraisa states that the following block Tumah, grass that was detached and placed in a window, or grew there by itself; rags smaller than three fingers by three fingers; a dangling limb or flesh of an animal; a bird that rested there; a Nochri who sat there, a (i.e. stillborn) baby born in the eighth month; salt; earthenware Kelim; and a Sefer Torah. The Gemara then proceeds to ask questions on each one that it is only there temporarily and the Gemara gives ukimtas, qualifications, for each thing to explain why it is not there temporarily. 1. Grass The grass is poisonous. The wall is ruined (so the grass will not destory it) The grass is 3 tefachim from the wall and does not harm the wall but bends into the window 2. Rags The material is too thick to be used for a patch It's sackcloth which is rough and would scratch the skin. It's not sackcloth, it's just rough like sacklocth 3. Dangling limb of an animal The animal is tied up and can't move. It's a non-kosher animal. It's a weak animal. 3. Bird The bird is tied down. It's a non-kosher bird. It's a Kalanisa (a very lean bird). It's not really a kalanisa, it's just lean like a kalanisa. 4. A non-Jew He is tied up. He is a ?????. He is a prisoner of the king 5. Salt The salt is bitter. There are thorns in it. It's resting on earthernware so it does not harm the wall. 5. Sefer Torah It's worn out. It's burial will be in the window. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 29 22:24:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 05:24:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? -/////---- One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the already known outcome. Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon Apr 30 01:22:56 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:22:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched >> ukimtas? ...` > One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition > as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the > already known outcome. It doesn't sound that way from the Gemara, The Gemara goes as follows: 1. Ula makes a statement that Holachah without walking is Pasul. 2. The Gemara brings a proof against him from a Mishna (where the blood spills, etc.) 3. The Gemara answers for Ula with an ukimta for the Mishna which doesn't contradict his din 4. The gemara says the ukimta is unreasonable Nowehere does it sound like we are reconciling sources with a known outcome. It sounds like a typical give and take found all over shas where ukimtas are simply accepted. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 29 18:59:29 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 21:59:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Question from the Book of Yechezqeil Message-ID: In Yechezqeil, 44:31, he writes that a Kohen shall not eat nevayla (or T?refah). Nobody can eat it so why is there a prohibition for just the Kohen? I?m aware of what Kimchi and Rashi say, but it seems to be a weak explanation. To say the Kohen needed a special warning is stretching it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:55:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:55:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:24:19AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition : as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with : the already known outcome. I don't know if that works here. I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and there are no counterveiling issues involved. Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish case. Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the floor of the azarah and not spread. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:51:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:51:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215105.GB12997@aishdas.org> My first thought was somewhat off topic but feel like it should be related... R' Yirmiyah's banishment from Bavel was over his habit of checking shiurim by posing implausible edge cases. He ends up in EY, and succeeds in the Y-mi. The final question (BB 23b) before his expulsion was whether we assume owned a bird that had one leg within 50 amos of the dovecote (ie within the shiur for the chazaqah for assuming that's its origin) and one leg outside? But there is also when he questions tevu'ah growing at least 1/3 before RH if harvested on Sukkos. Veqim lehu lerabbanan? How can you measure such a thing? (RH 13a) And his question on hashavas aveidah of 1/2 qav in 2 amos, or 2 qav in 8 amos? We assume yi'ush if we find less than 1 qas scattered across 3 amos. Is that a ratio? (BM 2a) How can you say that a revi'is is the amount of mayim chayim that the blood of a metzorah's birds would be niqar within? Wouldn't it depend on the size of the bird? (Sotah 16b) What if a kohein becomes a baal mum while the dam is in the air between his hazayah and it landing on the mizveiach? (Zevachim 15a) According to R' Meir, a miscarriage that was developed enough to have the shape of a beheimah causes tum'as leidah. (As opposed to saying it must be human shaped.) So, R Yirmiyah asked R Zeira, according to R Meir, what if a woman gives birth to such a baby, a girl and the father was meqadeish her to a man? R' Zeira points out that the child wouldn't live 3 years anyway, so bi'ah isn't an issue. R Meir asks: but what about marrying her sister? This one may or may not count, as R' Acha bar Yaaqov says that R Yirmiyah's point was to get R Zeira to laugh. (Niddar 23a) But it does reflect what kind of thing would come to his mind. (Tangent: There are a number of stories that indicate R Zeira needed chearing up. Like the golam Rava sent him. RMMS tied this to "Rav shachat lei leR Zeira".) But when he gets to EY, the Y-mi accepts his question. (Not that the Y-mi ever answers questions that involve guessing what the tanna / amora would have said...) A picker can eat a snack (quantity discussed) before tu"m was taken from the crop. As long as he is holing them. R Yirmiyah asked whether a picker can eat an olive he was juggling -- and thus didn't put down but also isn't just picked. (Maaseros 3:4, vilna daf 17b) Maybe the issue in the OP is about this time rejecting an absurd -- R Yirmiyahu-like -- oqimta is just the difference in styles in different batei medrash? Too haskala-ish to be satisfying? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Mon Apr 30 20:47:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:47:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tuesday, May 1, 2018, Micha Berger wrote: > > > I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is > the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and > there are no counterveiling issues involved. > > Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish > cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish > case. > > Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's > that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the > floor of the azarah and not spread. And it?s easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn?t seem more unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 06:47:36AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is :> the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and :> there are no counterveiling issues involved. :> Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish :> cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish :> case. : And it's easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a : prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn't seem more : unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. I suggest exploring if the distinction is between a din that could only apply in the farfetched case and dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from the distcussion. This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See . (He offered to send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. In a different post, I suggested another line to explore, if you prefer it. Diffierent batei medrash had different tolerances for R Yirmiyahu's questions, and those too also used farfetched cases. And if so, maybe there was one beis medrash during the course of the ccenturies of amoraim that simply had no patience for odd oqimtos; even though they were atypical that way. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 31st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Hod: What level of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 results in harmony and balance? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 1 03:34:33 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 13:34:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > > But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. > > I suggest exploring if the distinction is between > a din that could only apply in the farfetched case > and > dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated > in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from > the distcussion. > > This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought > in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See > . (He offered to > send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta > serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in > this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. > The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without walking from the equation. It would seem to be a perfect example to apply R' Michel Avraham's thesis and yet the Gemara rejects the ukimta as being unreasonable -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue May 1 04:40:42 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 11:40:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: Please see https://goo.gl/ESJERH for two links to a talk given by Rabbi Dr. Shnyer Leiman titled The Strange History of Lag B'Omer. Please see https://goo.gl/s2KHAVfor [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] The Spreading Fires Of Lag Baomer: Tempting Quick & Easy ?Spirituality? vs. Enduring Ruchnius goo.gl In the past we have discussed at length (5771, 5772, 5773A, 5773B, and 5773C) how Lag Baomer is marked in minhag Ashkenaz, and contrasted it with other, more recent customs, that have become popula? See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) No less an authority than Chasam Sofer was strongly opposed to Lag B'Omer celebrations. He argued that one should not make a new Yom Tov that is not based on a miraculous event, that has no basis in Shas and Poskim, and that is based on the death of someone. (See here for links.) See https://goo.gl/Zma8pS [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] No ? No ? No ? No ? No ? Minhag Ashkenaz & Recent Lag Ba?omer Innovations ? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ?????, ??? ?????, ??????, ?????, ??? ???? goo.gl Yes, it is that time of the year again. Lag ba?omer is almost here. And with it, all the hype and solicitations for trips to Meron, Chai Rotel Mashkeh donations, upsherin, bonfires, and the l? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:54:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:54:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:34:33PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter : (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that : blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The : ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without : walking from the equation... I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Tue May 1 04:25:47 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 14:25:47 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the > stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. > And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's > not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. The Gemara starts with Ula stating a din that holacha without walikng is pasul. The Gemara then brings down the following statment from a Mishna If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher. The Gemara then asks on Ula from this Mishna, namely that the blood must have moved towards the Mizbeach, e.g. holacha without walking and it is kosher. The Gemara then answers with the implausible ukimtos to explain the Mishna. In other words, it seems that the ukimtos are there to explain the Mishna namely that the Mishna provides a principle that blood that falls on the floor is kosher and the ukimtas are there to remove any extraneous factors such as holacha without walking. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 1 15:57:50 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 18:57:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ahava Eternal Message-ID: <2060439B-6A01-4D14-AC06-6D6675AC6381@cox.net> I heard a beautiful d?rash by Rabbi Yosef Shusterman (Chabad of Beverly Hills). He said the following: If you ask 20 people the definition of ?LOVE,? you will get 20 different responses. However, the best definition of love is the Jewish definition. He uses gematria. The gematria of Ahava is 13 and the gematria of Echod is 13. ?Love" is when you are at ?one? with whomever or whatever. Theologically, the love of God is when you are at one with God. Sometimes it takes an entire lifetime to reach that madreiga. I am in you and you in me, mutual in divine love. William Blake (18th c. poet, painter and printmaker) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 2 01:33:44 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 08:33:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of?= =?windows-1252?q?_Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/W49XHX Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. See the above URL for more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 07:10:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 10:10:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <64a22eb4-af1e-fab5-373f-889b1083cd08@sero.name> On 02/05/18 04:33, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From https://goo.gl/W49XHX > > > Toras Aba ?just put up an interesting post > discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to > similarity with ancient practice of idolators. > > See the above URL for more. And yet your precious Minhag Ashkenaz was to (have a nochri) make a bonfire and dance before it (or around it) on Simchas Torah. R Wosner was asked about doing so in camp, stam on a Wednesday, not on Lag Bo'omer when it is, at least in Meron, Chevron, and a few other places in Eretz Yisroel, a long-established minhog practiced by tzadikim and chachomim who were much greater than R Wosner or anyone else you can cite. I don't believe it occurred to him that someone might apply this teshuvah to those fires, and it's dishonest to do so. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 09:04:58 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:04:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:33:44AM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : From https://goo.gl/W49XHX : Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. Most of us have little problem with Israel's Moment of Silence on Yom haZikaron and Yom haSho'ah, at least not Derekh Emori problems. And we wear ties. There are limits to invoking Derekh Emori. To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last days too. And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah kekhol hayom". At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled later than the norm, this evening.) I don't know the origin. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 09:45:50 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:45:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> On 02/05/18 12:04, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag > baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) > and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas > simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo > velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than > waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the > Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last > days too. > > And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo > you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I > have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah > kekhol hayom". > > At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I > know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled > later than the norm, this evening.) > > I don't know the origin. The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. A cessation of mourning, such as the last day of shiva, obviously begins in the morning. Nor is it an occasion for joy; when one gets up from shiva one doesn't go dancing and singing. Thus the restrictions are lifted only after daybreak, and tachanun is said at mincha on the previous day, just as it is on the other three days whose observance begins in the morning, viz Pesach Sheni, Erev Rosh Hashana, and Erev Yom Kippur. But the celebration of Rashbi is a positively happy occasion, so it starts immediately at nightfall, and no tachanun is said at the previous mincha. The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and relies heavily on the Magen Avraham. (He later expressed regret over his over-reliance on the MA, which is one reason why he wrote a second edition, only a few chapters of which are extant.) So it's not surprising that this is the psak found there, however it is not the psak that was followed in Chabad, which means in practice he paskened differently. (Sometimes it means he changed his mind, but sometimes he never paskened in practice as he wrote in the SA, for the reasons I mentioned above.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 10:53:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 13:53:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : >I don't know the origin. : : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain how or when the older minhag was changed. And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. ... : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 11:25:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 14:25:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> On 02/05/18 13:53, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : >I don't know the origin. > : > : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the > : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of > : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the > : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. > > That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain > how or when the older minhag was changed. It follows that the minhag changed when the significance of the day changed. In other words, the minhogim of the day when R Akiva's talmidim stopped dying did not change, but on top of them came a whole new layer of minhogim for the new holiday that occupies the same day on the calendar. For a similar example, the significance of 3 Tammuz in Lubavitch changed dramatically in 5754. The earlier significance of that day and whatever practices it had did not go away, e.g. those who did not say tachanun on 3 Tammuz before 5754 still don't say it, while those who did still do, but the new significance, and the host of practices that came with it, overwhelmed the earlier significance and observance. > And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" > is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. Doesn't the Idra Zuta say that Rashbi asked for his hilula to be celebrated rather than mourned? > You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, > after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, > in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) > that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, > Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. Whether it's the correct explanation of the Pri Etz Chaim or not, it is the one held by the people actually doing the celebrating, and thus fully explains their practices. > ... > : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which > : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and > : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... > > I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to suppose they didn't exist in his day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 15:57:53 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 18:57:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> Message-ID: <4b464085-efab-7164-2d33-7726eba6a069@sero.name> On 02/05/18 14:25, Zev Sero wrote: >> >> : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which >> : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and >> : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... >> I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. > They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to > suppose they didn't exist in his day. PS: Indirect evidence that in the AR's day the night of Lag Baomer was already considered part of the simcha is that in his siddur (as opposed to his SA) he wrote that tachanun is not said at mincha of erev Lag Baomer. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 3 07:01:56 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 03 May 2018 10:01:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?iso-8859-1?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= References: Message-ID: At 12:04 PM 5/2/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag >baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) >and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas >simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo >velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than >waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the >Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last >days too. > >And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo >you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I >have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah >kekhol hayom". > >At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of Aveilus on the 34th day? If so, how can Sefardim go to Meron on the night of the 33rd? I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at Tzeis and who started it. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 3 06:04:34 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:04:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tzedaka priorities Message-ID: The S"A in O"C 152:1 codifies a prohibition against tearing down a synagogue before building a new one (one must build the new one first). The M"B (4) gives the reason for this prohibition as a concern that if one had not built the new one first, a case of pidyon shvuyim(captive's redemption) might arise requiring funds to be diverted from the new construction. 1. Why couldn't the chachamim make a takana in that case? 2. Why would the chachamim work around required priorities? 3. Doesn't 152:6 says you would sell a synagogue anyway in a case of pidyon shvuyim? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 09:03:10 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 12:03:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on the > night of the 33rd? The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve either of those things. (There is no issur on music during sefirah; that seems to be a modern invention, presumably because in modern times we've become lenient on the prohibition against music at any time, so we need to impose a restriction during sefirah, whereas earlier generations who were strict with the general prohibition didn't feel a need to strengthen it now.) > I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at > Tzeis and who started it. As I wrote earlier, it seems associated with the adoption of the Rashbi's celebration on top of the earlier marking of the end of the plague among R Akiva's students. Thus it would probably have started in Tzfas in the late 16th century and spread into Europe in the 18th century together with the AriZal's kabbalah. (Note that according to the AriZal, not cutting hair is not connected to avelus, and applies on Lag Ba`omer as well, except for upsherenishen. But not having weddings is because of avelus, so if we're celebrating Yom Simchas Rashbi they should be permitted.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 10:13:07 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:13:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on : >the night of the 33rd? : : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve : either of those things... An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 10:17:41 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:17:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> On 03/05/18 13:13, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on > : >the night of the 33rd? > : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are > : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve > : either of those things... > An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. For children, who are not obligated in aveilus anyway. But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and the answer is the same way they go by day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 11:56:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 14:56:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and : the answer is the same way they go by day. The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both Ashk and Seph? Yes, if the party happened to be during the day, I would have the same question WRT Sepharadim (only). So how does pointing out that fact help me any in answering it? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 33rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total Fax: (270) 514-1507 submission to truth, and what results? From simon.montagu at gmail.com Thu May 3 16:36:11 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 02:36:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 > > > Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is > > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did that before the 16th century. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 12:08:37 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 15:08:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> On 03/05/18 14:56, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and > : the answer is the same way they go by day. > > The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > Ashk and Seph? And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do so from nightfall. (b) The Meron celebrations, which the question was about, don't violate the sefira observances anyway. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 05:04:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 08:04:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer Message-ID: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:24 AM 5/4/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > > > >I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings >Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did >that before the 16th century. In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to show that it was not really part of the davening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 05:14:32 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:14:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Bow_and_Arrow_on_Lag_B=92Omer?= Message-ID: >From http://www.collive.com/show_news.rtx?id=50532 A 4-year-old son of a Shliach in Florida was hit in his eye by an arrow on Lag BaOmer. Please pray for Baruch Shmuel ben Chana. I do hope he has a refuah shleima. This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. >From https://goo.gl/kumYeX One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn?t even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a break from their Torah studies. It is also surprising that they should pass the time with such a martial activity, seemingly out of character with the day devoted to the man of peace. Rav Menachem Mendel of Rimanov, one of the early Hasidic Rebbes, explained that the custom is based on the Midrash which states that all the days of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, the rainbow didn?t appear in the sky. (Ketubot 77b the same is said there of Rebbe Yehoshua ben Levi.) Rashi explains that the rainbow is the sign of the covenant that the world will not be destroyed, and if there is a perfect tzaddik in the world there is no need of such a sign. (Cited by B?nei Yissachar on Lag BaOmer.) See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 07:58:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:58:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both :> Ashk and Seph? : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do : so from nightfall... You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something aggadic. But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from what I was raised to believe on that. I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and rishonim couldn't have known about? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 07:05:58 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:05:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Mysterious Origin of Lag Ba-Omer Message-ID: Please see http://www.hakirah.org/Vol20First.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 4 09:57:47 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 18:57:47 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Bottom line: They do it or they don't? Ben On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time,? and I > was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to > show that it was not really part of the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:41:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:41:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Let me begin with Daas Torah. ... : The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a : result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this : was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. So what are those formulations? Here are 3 I know of: 1- Given how the gadol's mind is shapeds by his learning, he is a useful resource for advice. He could be wrong, but aren't your odds better by asking? 2- Asking a gadol will get you the answer Hashem wants you to act on, whether it is the truth or not. E.g. the error of advising agaisnt fleeing the Nazis was because that was what Hashem wanted of us. But it was still pragmatically in error. I also see hints of this model in RALichtenstein's "Im Ein Daas, Manhigut Minayin?" but with the added caveat that RAL didn't expect to find daas Torah in practice. (Not since RSZA.) Again, just implications; I could be reading too much into the essay. 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, they are supposed to lead. RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like the same model. Notice that all advocate listening to gedolim even on non-halachic matters, but not because of any guarantees about accuracy. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:52:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:52:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180504165212.GC13247@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 07:12:36AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They : have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye : (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so : much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses.... The relationship to a kohein is trickier than that, as their is no tum'ah until after the declaration. He is more parallel to an eid qiyum than an eid birur. For example, Vayiqra 14:36 tells a person to remove all the items from his home before the kohein comes to inspect a potential nega in it. Even even if the kohein sees the same unchanged splotch and declares it a nega, those itsems are not tamei. It wasn't a nega until the declaration. ... : My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would : become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate : some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just : another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve : myself in general." Tum'as leidah isn't because something is spiritually awry with the mother. So I am not sure we have to assume that zivah is like tzara'as. Lefi RSRH, tum'ah comes from things that could make us overly identify with our bodies -- death, birth, the kinds of sheratzim that share our homes (in EY), niddah... Zivah and leidah would fit that pattern. So would tzara'as, because it too feels like the body is rebelling against the will. The difference is that chazal is saying the body really is rebelling (or made to show rebellion) against a tainted will. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From zev at sero.name Fri May 4 11:15:17 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:15:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 04/05/18 10:58, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > :> Ashk and Seph? > > : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in > : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus > : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't > : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do > : so from nightfall... > > You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, > nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new > information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. Nothing is being uprooted. Something new has come. Just as when a local "Purim" or lehavdil a fast is declared. > If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a > comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something > aggadic. > > But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind > the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous > revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from > what I was raised to believe on that. > > I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence > of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation > anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take > over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in > this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and > rishonim couldn't have known about? They didn't know about the Zohar, let alone the Idra Zuta and R Shimon's request that people rejoice at his "hilula". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 11:51:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 14:51:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:57 PM 5/4/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >Bottom line: They do it or they don't? > >Ben >On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >>Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and >>I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it >>to show that it was not really part of the davening. > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the beginning are said responsively. The Shatz stands at the table where leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 12:06:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 15:06:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <7E.8C.04381.0DFACEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:41 PM 5/4/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Let me begin with Daas Torah. >... >: The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a >: result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this >: was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. > >It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the >popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues >speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are >infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. Please see the article To Flee Or To Stay? at http://www.hakirah.org/vol%209%20bobker.pdf At the end of the article it says, "This article is excerpted from Joe Bobker's "The Rabbis and the Holocaust," to be published by Geffen Books in the summer of 2010." However, to the best of my knowledge this book was never published, and I have always wondered why. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 5 11:45:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 05 May 2018 20:45:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1ed3f3d3-7cb6-927c-da0f-e22d19aa3a4e@zahav.net.il> Bseder. We are all agreed that even Frankfurt changed their seider Tefilla sometime in the last few hundred years. Many shuls have someone, even a child, say (sing) the tehillim from the bimah. Ben On 5/4/2018 8:51 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the > beginning are said responsively.? The Shatz stands at the table where > leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over > he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun May 6 01:53:37 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 11:53:37 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: Yesterday's daf (Zevachim 22) has another wild ukimta that seems to just be there to answer a question on an amora and not provide a sterile environment to learn out a new principle. Here is the gist of the Gemara: R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina states if the Kiyor does not contain enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim, it is invalid - "v'Rachatzu Mimenu Moshe v'Aharon u'Vanav." The Gemara asks a question from the following Baraisa: One may be Mekadesh from any Keli Shares, whether or not it contains a Revi'is of water (this is much less then the water needed for 4 people) Rav Ada bar Acha answers: The case is, the Keli Shares was carved into the Kiyor (so the water comes from the Kiyor, which contains enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim). I don't see any way that you can say here that the ukimta is to remove extraneous dinim etc. The ukimta here seems to serve one and only one purpose, explain the Barisa that it is not a question on an Amora. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From saul.mashbaum at gmail.com Sun May 6 06:41:09 2018 From: saul.mashbaum at gmail.com (Saul Mashbaum) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 16:41:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: RYL >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. Saul Mashbaum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 05:28:41 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 15:28:41 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire Message-ID: << And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. >> Fore details about the printing error to give rise to the idead that Lag Baomer is Rashbi's yahrzeit see http://seforim.blogspot.co.il/2011/05/ changing subjects one of the weirdest experiences I had was a bunch of black coated Chevra kadisha dancing about a grave in Bet Shemesh at 12 midnight with just a flashlight for light -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 07:21:11 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 17:21:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: <> OTOH there is the gemara that when there was the dispute in Yavneh between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. This story took place many years before talmidim of R. Akiva (who was junior at that time) died. If so Rashbi was a known talmid many years before R. Akiva revived Torah . As an aside other taananim survived the bar kochba wars including talmidim of R, Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at mail.aol.com Sun May 6 11:22:13 2018 From: t613k at mail.aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 14:22:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bow and Arrow on Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16336b09884-c88-1c19@webjas-vaa039.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 5/6/2018 7:51:35 AM EST, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org writes: From: "Professor L. Levine" > This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. > From https://goo.gl/kumYeX >> One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is >> less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows >> and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe >> Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn't >> even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a >> break from their Torah studies..... Torah sages and their students learned Torah secretly in the woods, hiding from the Roman soldiers. They took bows and arrows with them and if they were found in the woods, they would say they were out hunting. That's what I was told when I was a little girl. I don't know if this is associated with R' Akiva and his talmidim, or with R' ShBY. As a child I thought the story was about young children and didn't realize until later that it must have been adult students with bows and arrows in the woods. (Yes I know Jews don't hunt for food or for sport, but maybe the Romans didn't know that. Or the Jews could plausibly say they hunted for hides and fur.) PS All my Areivims and Avodahs lately are deformed by great quantities of question marks. If anyone knows how to stop this from happening, please let me know. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com -- From driceman at optimum.net Sun May 6 17:58:21 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 19:58:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> RMB: > 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus > stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the > Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act > as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make > gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on > personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, > they are supposed to lead. > > RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before > RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who > carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the > names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked > questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like > the same model. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? David Riceman From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sat May 5 12:17:25 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 5 May 2018 22:17:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Sacrificies Message-ID: Question: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat had to bring the animal to as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result in hundreds -- Eli Turkel From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 7 04:19:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 14:19:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices Message-ID: R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he was permanently a Kohen; From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:37:00 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:37:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 06/05/18 10:21, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > This story took place many years before talmidim?of R. Akiva (who was > junior at that time) died. On the contrary, R Akiva was very senior at the time of these disputes. In the mishna in Rosh Hashana he was one of the two who counseled R Yehoshua to obey R Gamliel's order, and in Berachos when R Gamliel was deposed he was one of only three candidates considered to replace him. > If so Rashbi was a known talmid?many years before R. Akiva revived Torah > .?As an aside other taananim?survived the bar kochba?wars including > talmidim?of R, Yishmael What have Bar Kochva or his wars got to do with any of this? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:45:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:45:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> References: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> Message-ID: <44c411ba-2fee-9ae7-82d6-de3850c6417a@sero.name> On 06/05/18 20:58, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus >> stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the >> Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act >> as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make >> gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on >> personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, >> they are supposed to lead. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim who are to guide them. There need to be askanim because the chachamim have no time for klal work; they're busy learning and will neglect it. So those who lack either the head or the bottom for full-time learning can be the administrators, and when they need guidance they will consult the chachamim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Wed Apr 25 14:17:16 2018 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:17:16 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5AEFEEE1.1030601@biu.ac.il> Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: >>From The Jewish Press >, >by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): ... > Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if > he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi > Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called > up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different... ... >"L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! The attached has lots of relevant information. [Attachment stored at -micha] From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 08:00:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 11:00:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 07/05/18 07:19, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen > even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes > in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was > considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen > only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); > others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he > was permanently a Kohen; Thank you. Note the context: Rav stated outright that Moshe was a cohen gadol, and the gemara cites this braisa to show his source, that he was ruling like the Yesh Omrim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 8 12:40:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 15:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 3000 Year Old Mansion Implies a Sizable Malkhus Beis David Message-ID: <20180508194052.GA19392@aishdas.org> >From . What struck me is what appears to be the weakness of the objection -- some of the results are from a poor source, and even though they converge with other results, we'll question the whole thing? Does This 3,000-Year-Old House Confirm King David's Lost Biblical Kingdom? By Owen Jarus, Live Science Contributor | May 3, 2018 02:50pm ET Archaeologists have discovered a sprawling, possibly 3,000-year-old house that suggests a biblical kingdom called the United Monarchy, ruled by King David and later Solomon according to the Hebrew Bible, actually existed. The archaeologists who excavated the house, at a site now called Tel Eton, in Israel, said in an article published online March 13 in the journal Radiocarbon that the date, design and size of the house indicates that a strong organized government existed at Tel Eton around 3,000 years ago. They added that this government may be the United Monarchy. The site is located in the central part of Israel in a region called the Shephalah. ... In their paper, Faust and Sapir argue that evidence supporting the existence of the United Monarchy is often not studied because of a problem they call the "old house effect." The site of Tel Eton, including the massive house, was destroyed by the Assyrians during the eighth century B.C. As such, the house held a vast amount of remains dating to that century, but relatively few remains that date to 3,000 years ago when the house was first built. This "old house effect" is a problem commonly seen in Israel and at archaeological sites in other countries, the archaeologists said. "Buildings and strata can exist for a few centuries, until they are destroyed, but almost all the finds will reflect this latter event," wrote Faust and Sapir, noting that archaeologists need to be careful to dig down and find the oldest remains of the structures they are excavating so they don't miss remains that could provide clues to the United Monarchy. Israel Finkelstein, a professor at Tel Aviv University who has written extensively about the United Monarchy debate, expressed skepticism about the results. Two of the four samples used for radiocarbon dating are olive pits, which pose a problem, he said. "The single olive pits come from fills [material that accumulated on the surface of the floor before the floor broke apart]. They have no importance whatsoever [for] dating the building. At Megiddo, my dig, samples like this, single items/fills, are not being sent to the lab to be dated, because they enter bias into the dating system," Finkelstein said. "There is no connection whatsoever between the finds at Tel Eton and the biblical description of the United Monarchy." Faust told Live Science he expects that some archaeologists would be critical of the use of material found in the remains of the floors for radiocarbon dating. He noted that all the radiocarbon dates, those from the olive pits and from the charcoal, converge around 3,000 years. "The convergence of the dates suggest that we are on safe grounds," Faust said. He also noted that one of the charcoal samples is not from the floor but from the foundation deposit (the chalice), strengthening the conclusion that the house was built around 3,000 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 38th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Yesod: How does reliability Fax: (270) 514-1507 promote harmony in life and relationships? From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue May 8 13:05:25 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 23:05:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer Message-ID: >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag in the places I have seen -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Tue May 8 15:31:28 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 01:31:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 11:05 PM, Eli Turkel via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > >>> > In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some > places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is > leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. > This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. > >>>> > > This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> > > Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. > In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag > in the places I have seen > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Tue May 8 17:28:19 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 20:28:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Me > >> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? RZS: > > Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those > doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim > who are to guide them. Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. David Riceman From eliturkel at gmail.com Wed May 9 00:33:02 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:33:02 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: A while ago there was a debate about gebrochs while some condemned the minhag others defended it. I suggest reading an article by Brown https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 (4th on the list) It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those practices that can be traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a select few don't count. He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of elitism that only gedolim count. OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at most) His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in terms of protecting their communities from modernism. I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. Again see the above article for more details -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Tue May 8 21:46:46 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 14:46:46 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer & Rashbi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2700442c-cb3b-4267-b4bc-7e47e0d3efc8@yypwn-sl-yzhq-hkhn-blbyn> See also From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 02:53:57 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 05:53:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 01:31:28AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but : parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or : by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and : acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only : at Kaddish before Barechu At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night (in the US, mostly Syrian), everyone chants everything together. No shatz, and no one taking the lead even section by section. As per the first clause above. Somoene takes the lead for Bameh Madliqin from their seat. Chazan starts at pre-Qaddish material for Arbit. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:12:47 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:12:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 18:31, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: > > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but > parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together > or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing > up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame > Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu In other words, the same as pesukei dezimra, or the ashre and uva letzion before mincha. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed May 9 10:59:33 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 19:59:33 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> References: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At the Yemenite place I go to Friday night, everyone chants Kabbalat Shabbat together (same tune, every week, for the whole thing). An elderly person will get the kavod of saying the first line of Lecha Dodi out loud, but the rest is sung together. After Lecha Dodi, they say four lines from Shir HaShirim and then one person leads them in a "Bar Yochai" song (this kavod is auctioned off). After that, all together for BeMah Madlilin and Mizmor L'yom Hashabbat. On 5/9/2018 11:53 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night . . . From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:21:40 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:21:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 20:28, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: >> Me >> >>> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? > > RZS: >> >> Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those >> doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim >> who are to guide them. > > Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not the rav who guided him. Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. But at any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to do their job properly they can't be learning all day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:27:09 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 03:33, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 9 12:54:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 19:54:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation Message-ID: Many years ago when my two oldest grandsons were in elementary school in yeshiva, they began to speak in a derogatory manner abut non-Jews. They had heard these things from their fellow students. Their father, my oldest son, and I made it clear to them that this was not the appropriate way to speak about human beings who were created by Ha Shem with a neshama. Fortunately, they listened to us and changed their attitude. No one is saying that one must be "buddy buddy" with gentiles, but they are to be treated with proper respect. I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/letter_11.pdf While I suggest that everyone read the entire letter, below are some excerpts from it. MISHPATIM. All these insights, however, are of value only if you truly live your life according to what you, as man and Yisraelite in God's world, with your God-given powers, have recognized. The first requirement is, therefore, that you practice justice: -Respect every being in your surroundings, as well as everything within yourself, as a creation of your God, -Respect whatever is theirs as given to them by God or as having been acquired according to Divinely sanctioned law. Let them keep, or have, whatever they are entitled by right to call their own; do not be a source of harm to -others! -Respect every human being as your equal. Respect him, his inner self as well as his outer garment-his body-and his life) Respect his property, too, as a legal extension of his body. Respect his claim to property or services that you have to render to him, 1 properly measured or counted, as well as his claim to compensation for harm done to his body or property. -Respect his right to know the truth and his right to freedom, happiness, peace of mind,P honor and a peaceful existence. -Never abuse the frailty of his body, mind or heart/ and never misuse your legal power over him. The Chukkim require of you: -respect for all that exists, as God's property: do not destroy anything! do not misuse it! do not waste! use everything wisely -respect for all the species: their order was established by God-do not intermingle them;u respect for all creatures: they are servants in the household of Creation; v respect for the feelings and instincts of animals;w respect for the human body, even after the soul has departed;x respect for your own body: maintain it, as it is the repository, messenger and instrument of the spirit; -limitation of your own instincts and animal-like actions: subordinate them to God's Law, so that, truly human and sanctified, they can help you attain the holy goal of mankind and will not turn you into a mere animal; -respect for your soul, when you nourish its tool, the body: supply the body only with such nourishment that will enable it to act as a pure and willing messenger of the world to the spirit, and of the spirit to the world, rather than giving it food that will induce sluggishness and sensuality; -concealment and sublimation of the animal in you, rather than according it too much respect and attention: only thus will the conflict within you ultimately be resolved, and the animal in you will also aspire only to the truly human; -lastly, respect for your own person in its purest expression-your power of speech. In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources can express a derogatory view of gentiles. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 19:50:36 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 22:50:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 15:54, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters [...] > [...] > In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources > can express a [contrary view] How about because they are Torah sources, and are therefore not required to agree with your favorite 19th-century writer. On the contrary, you should ask how he could contradict Torah sources. (The answer being that he found some contrary sources which appealed more to him, so he adopted their view; that was his right, but nobody else is required to do the same.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From sholom at aishdas.org Wed May 9 08:15:51 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:15:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 20:09:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 23:09:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180510030910.GB2931@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 11:15:51AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : We know Rashi's famous question and answer: that shmita eitzel har sinai : here is to show us that this, too, and all the details, were also given at : har sinai. See my vertl at . That's the Sifra that Rashi is quoting. : My question, however, is: why davka _this_ mitzvah (shmita/yovel)? Other : mitzvos could have been used to demonstrate the point that Rashi mentions. Rashi mentions that shemittah isn't taught in Devarim. The Malbim explains that this is unexpected, since shemittah didn't apply until entering EY, and such mitzvos tend to be the ones introduced in Devarim. : Thoughts? I ran with it... Suggesting that the whole point is that the reductionist approach doesn't work to understanding Torah. This was brought to light bedavqa with a mitzvah that isn't needed to be known yet for its own sake. But the whole picture was given at Sinai, even shemittah, so that we can understand any of the picture. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 39th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliable person? From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 01:57:15 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:57:15 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? >> My apologies. See https://www.academia.edu/36530833/A_translated_chapter_from_The_Hazon_Ish_Halakhist_Believer_and_Leader_of_the_Haredi_Revolution_The_Gaon_of_Vilna_the_Hatam_Sofer_and_the_Hazon_Ish_-_Minhag_and_the_Crisis_of_Modernity_English_?auto=download&campaign=weekly_digest which has several articles besides the one by Brown, Alternatively, send an email to eliturkel at gmail.com and I can send the article -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 02:43:30 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:43:30 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya 3rd line in the widest lines near the bottom and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about 130-135 CE. Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died about 20 years earlier (see eg wikipedia on Gamliel II) It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 07:51:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 10:51:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Me: >> >> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. RZS: > > Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every > Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not > the rav who guided him. No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. > Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a > yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. Again the Reish Galusa determined public policy, the hachamim determined halacha. > But at > any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the > full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to > do their job properly they can't be learning all day. The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his role? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 10 09:08:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:08:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:51:16AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : The claim that "da'as Torah" is derived from din melech is precisely the : claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise : in other fields... That's NOT the way I understood R' Dovid [haLevi] Cohen at all. We want a melekh, separate from the beis din hagadol. Although one person can be in both roles, like when Chazal refer to "Shelomo uveis dino." However, ba'avoseinu harabbim we lost the melukhah. The obligation of obeying the melekh devolved into obeyind the Sanhedrin. (This would have to have been some time between Gedaliah and Ezra, inclusive.) Obeying the melekh wasn't based on the melekh's comptenecy, but the need for order in running a society. (And, I guess some reason(s) why HQBH advised monarchy in particular as the means of getting that order, except according to some readings of RAYK. But RAYK didn't hold of the shitah we're looking at, so ein kan hamaqom leha'rikh.) Then, we lost the Sanhedrin. Today's rabbanim fill in -- either as their shelichim, or . The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. And just as the melekh might not be the expert across all of society, the Sanhedrin or today's rabbanim might not be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 40th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Yesod: When does Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliability/self-control mean submitting to others? From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 10 06:30:06 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93normal_practice=94?= Message-ID: <4ee8a413f67f49da89acceed596b8f72@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I was bothered by the gemara-Megilla 26a where it says Jerusalem apartment ?owners? took ?gifts? by force as ?rental? from olei regal. The Beit Mordechai (2:16), who lived in the early 20th century, raises the same question and says since the normal practice in Israel was for renters to leave something for the innkeeper in addition to the rental payment, so innkeepers in Jerusalem would take it by force since they could not charge rent. He admits that it?s possible that this would be considered stealing but because of this ?normal practice? of leaving something, it?s almost like they had a legal claim and therefore they felt they could take the items. Interesting that I couldn?t find earlier authorities bothered by this but maybe I missed something. Any thoughts appreciated. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 08:15:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:15:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6f2cda5f-ce57-a7a3-36af-3cc0b767dc9f@sero.name> On 10/05/18 05:43, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh >> between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it wasRashbithat was involved. > > I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, > and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > > > Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya?3rd line in the widest > lines near the bottom > and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Thank you. > Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about > 130-135 CE. Why do you suppose he was killed around that time rather than much later? If he was killed then, then he would have been born around 10-15 CE, have started learning Torah around 15-20 years before the churban, and have come back home with all those talmidim 4-9 years after it. Doesn't it seem more likely that his Torah learning started after the churban, and after Kalba Savua had resettled somewhere and reestablished himself, which would mean his death was also several decades after Bar Kochva? > Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died?about 20 years earlier (see eg > wikipedia?on Gamliel II) > > It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the > story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. Why is this at all difficult to believe? What makes it difficult? > So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of > the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant If you assume both that the students died then and that he himself died then, then when did he have time to teach his five new students? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 10 05:57:21 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 08:57:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim Message-ID: At 10:44 PM 5/9/2018, R Eli Turkel wrote: >I suggest reading an article by Brown >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2Fu%2F0%2F%23search%2Fhillel%2F1633fd7c1ed2a4a7&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce7f2ed89c0b04a153b9008d5b61fe896%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C1%7C636615170523842613&sdata=KHDvBEGhAvUsiq8oxUjnwZDX%2Bt0hzpo7D25XR2o0CPA%3D&reserved=0 > > >It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish > >Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent >past >basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those >practices that can be >traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a >select few don't count. >He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that >the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even >communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of >elitism that only gedolim count. > >OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of >the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In >fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their >unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at >most) > >His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in >terms of protecting their communities from modernism. >I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between >litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. I believe you are referring to an article that recently appeared in Hakirah that is at https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjyg6mKmfvaAhVCuVkKHeutBeYQFggtMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hakirah.org%2FVol24Shandelman.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3XZQch0OGem-hvrLpivEHB (I cannot access the link you give above, because I do not have a google account.) I found this article most disappointing and sent the email below to the Editors of Hakirah Subject: The Gaon of Vilna, the Hatam Sofer, and the Hazon Ish: Minhag and the Crisis of Modernity To the Editor: I must admit that the title of this article truly attracted my attention. However, after reading it I was sorely disappointed. The author writes at the beginning of the article, "We have seen that from the 1930's to the 1950's at least, the position of the Hazon Ish remained consistent and unyielding: A minhag has no normative status of its own, and at best can only be adduced as evidence for an actual halakhic ruling, which in turn derives its authority strictly from corroboration by qualified halakhists." He then goes on to point out that both the GRA and the Hazon Ish did not observe many minhagim that most people do observe. However, he does not give us a list of the minhagim they did not observe nor does he give us a list of the minhagim that they did observe. Surely these should have been included in detail in this article. Later in the article the author writes, "These two Orthodox groups [the Hungarian Orthodox and the latter-day hasidic] turned minhag into an endless opportunity for the creation of new humrot. And this only goes to show that it is not always a broken connection with the 'living tradition' that facilitates the creation of a dynamic of humrot. Again, I think that the article should have included a detailed list of these Chumras. In my opinion, this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much substance. What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about nothing." Dr. Yitzchok Levine -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 10 06:58:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:58:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Wild Wild State of Kashrus Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/2bPRtq It was an innovative way of saving money. The municipality worked it out that they would outsource the financial cost of the Department of Health inspectors. From now on, it would be the restaurants themselves that would hire the health inspectors. The restaurants would pay them, they would take out the FICA taxes, the worker?s comp ?? the restaurant would handle it all. The move ?worked wonders? for the state of health in the restaurants. Eateries that were previously designated with a C minus rating were now rated A plus and health violation write ups were down too. The astute reader will detect an obvious problem here. This is what is called a classic conflict of interest. The upgraded rating and lowered violations are probably due to the unique financial arrangement. When an inspector is paid by the people he supervises there is a risk that his judgment and actions will be unduly influenced. The safety of the restaurant consumers has been placed at risk. Indeed, the general public has also been placed in danger. SAME FOR KASHRUS The same should be true in the field of Kashrus. The mashgiach is there to protect the public from eating non-kosher or questionable items just as the health inspector is there to protect the public from anything that can compromise their health and safety. RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN ZT?L Indeed, last generation?s Gadol haDor, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, in his Igros Moshe (YD Vol. IV #1:8) writes that the Mashgiach should not be paid by the facility receiving the hashgacha, but rather should only be paid by the Vaad HaKashrus itself. Indeed, he should have no direct monetary business dealings with the company. See the above URL for more. Keep in mind that when it comes to private hashgachos the person giving the supervision is always paid by the person or organization being supervised. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 09:28:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:28:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <2dd3576d-2d8e-762e-5afc-570ef2dbaa9c@sero.name> On 10/05/18 10:51, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Me: >>> >>> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. > > RZS: > >> >> Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every >> Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not >> the rav who guided him. > > No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert > on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted > on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. But if the rav paskened that they were wrong they had to obey him. >> But at >> any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the >> full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to >> do their job properly they can't be learning all day. > The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the > claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. And indeed it does; how do you see a contradiction from R Akiva? He didn't say TCh don't have the knowledge to run the town, but that they don't have the time. > Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at > all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his > role? Same story: He is qualified, but he has no time, so he will neglect the work and the town will suffer. That's why we need and have askanim to run things, but they have to know that they are not in charge but must defer to the chachamim. Note that not even the biggest haredi calls for the gedolei hatorah to sit in the knesset themselves, let alone to be mayors and city councillors. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 12:43:38 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 15:43:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: RMB: > > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. I already raised the objection of R Akiva?s advice to his son; RZS?s response is conceptually clean, but (a) it doesn?t fit the words of the text, and (b) according to you it is internally contradictory - - if the rabbis who run the city have a din melech how can they be supervised by others? There?s also the sugya of b'nei ha'ir kofin zeh et zeh ?. Naively the authority of the kehilla comes from din melech, but then why b'nei ha'ir, why not the town rabbi? David Riceman From saulguberman at gmail.com Thu May 10 11:51:40 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 14:51:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > RMWillig has a kezayis of 22.5cc, and writes that Middos veShiurei > haTorah pg 277 reports matzah has half the weight of an equivalent > volume of water. So, RMW says a kezayi matzah weighs 11.25gm. (1cc of > water weighs 1gm, by definition. So, the weight of 2cc of matzah is 1gm.) > We buy matzah by the pound, so you can estimate a kazayis pretty > accurately if you know how many matzos are in a 1lb box. (2lb boxes, > divide by 2, naturally.) There are 40.3 or so kezeisim in a pound. > > matzos / lb -> kezayis matzah > 6 -> 2/13 of a matzah > 7 -> 1/6 > 8 -> 1/5 > 9 -> 2/9 > 10 -> 1/4 > > :-)BBii! > -Micha I wish I had remembered to use this at the seder. My rabbi tells me that he got an electric scale this year and had the grandkids make shiurim bags for the sedorim on erev pesach. Has the benefit of having something for the kids to do and moves the seder along. When I mentioned to my Rabbi that I was looking into smaller shiurim,that are smaller than the plastic sheet that is so popular, he was not interested in continuing the conversation. My daughter informed me that one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in the base of their calculation. Saul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:13:50 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:13:50 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1be6e645-8a41-f71b-3d11-7c7d0823c398@zahav.net.il> IIRC the Ramban writes that David took a census because he made a mistake, he thought that the issur didn't apply anymore. I found that Ramban to be shocking. How is it that no one, no rav, no navi, came to David and said "No, you can't do that"?? Answer - David never bothered to ask and no one had the job of being his poseik. Similarly, there are certain acts that the chachamim praised Hezkiyahu for doing and others that they disagreed with him. I read that as meaning "after he made the decisions, the rabbanim weighed in". I don't get the feeling from any navi that they stood by the sides of the kings and told them "yes you? can do this, no, you can't do that". They only weighed in when society or the melucha was totally out of sync. or when they were specifically consulted or when God told them "Go to the king". I admit that there is an incredible tension between even the good kings, the ones trying to rule according to the Torah, and the prophets (forget the evil kings). The former? were not able to live up to the expectations of the latter. From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 11 03:50:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180511105019.GA17192@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:43:38PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : RMB: : > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took : > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. : : The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give : commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us : what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. Not "implies", we are talking about R Dovid [haLevi] Cohen's explanation of Da'as Torah -- it's the thesis he is trying to justify! However, unlike some other versions of DT, it only speaks of rabbis as communal leadership. Not as advisors on personal matters (whose open questions are not halachic in nature). It has this in common with [pre-Mizrachi] RYBS's version of DT, "hatzitz vehachoshen". : I already raised the objection of R Akiva's advice to his son... There is also the historical precedent of the leadership of the Vaad Dalet Aratzos. There is no record of rabbinic leadership on civil issues. They dealt with halachic matters, eg shochetim, batei din, a law to require haskamos on all published sefarim... :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 41st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Yesod: What is the ultimate measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 of self-control and reliability? From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:02:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:02:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The article is one chapter from an entire book. You walked into the middle of a movie, that's all. Ben On 5/10/2018 2:57 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > In my opinion,? this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much > substance.? What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about > nothing." From isaac at balb.in Thu May 10 21:23:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 14:23:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Eli Turkel asked: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, > from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult > for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat > had to bring the animal as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the > cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of > whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result > in hundreds I suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim. [The Ramban in the 3rd Shoresh there isn't happy with this] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 11 01:40:10 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 08:40:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Shiluach Hakein, Performance of Message-ID: >From yesterday's OU Halacha Yomis Q. How is the mitzvah of Shiluach Hakein performed? A. Before sending away the mother, one should have the intent to fulfill a mitzvah. There is a difference of opinion as to how one should send away the mother. According to the Rambam (Hilchos Shechita 13:5), one should grab the mother bird by the wings and send her away. Though the Torah prohibits capturing the mother-bird when she sits on the nest, when the intention of grabbing the mother is to send her away, this is not considered an act of capturing. However, Shulchan Aruch (YD 292:4) rules in accordance with the Rosh and the Tur that one need not grab the mother bird. Rather, one may use a stick or the back of one?s hand to send away the mother. According to these Rishonim, the important factor is not that you grab the mother but that you cause her to fly away. The Binyan Tziyon (Chadashos 14) writes that some Rishonim disagree with the Rambam on two points. They maintain that if one grabs the mother and sends her away, a) the mitzvah is not fulfilled, and b) one transgresses the prohibition of taking the mother-bird (even though the intent is to send the bird away). It is therefore best to use a stick or, as Rav Belsky, zt?l advised, to push the mother bird off the nest with an open hand, the palm facing upwards so that the mother bird is not accidentally caught. Once the mother bird is chased away, one should pick up the eggs or chicks and take possession of them. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Fri May 11 02:25:19 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 12:25:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: Instead of answering Zev's questions directly let me try and describe how I see the events. I fully admit that the sources of dates for Taananim seem very sparse and I welcome any more information >From the chabad site R Yochanan be Zakai dies in 74 The Sanhedrin under Rabban Gamliel moved about 86 Bat Kochba Rebbelion ended in 133 R Akiva put in prison 134 Mishna completed 189 ------------------------------------------ First most historians take the story that R Akiva (along with several others) lived for 120 years as an exaggeration. Typical dates given are 50-135. This also implies that magic split into 3 sections of 40 years each is also an exaggeration This would give his learning under Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua as after the death of R Yochanan ben zakai about the year 75 when he would be 25 years old I again stress that all dates are speculation. It seems unlikely that R Akiva would have 24000 students when so many older teachers were around. Hence, extremely unlikely that this happened while the yeshiva was in Yavne under Rabban Gamliel. The one date I saw for the death of Rashbi was 150. What seems to be clear is that Rebbe compiled the Mishna after the death of all 5 talmidim of R Akiva (of course we know that the compilation was done over a period of time beginning at least with R. Meir and probably R. Akiva and earlier). Pushing off the death of R. Akiva decades later would give little time for the activities of his talmildim after his death before the time of Rebbe who is the next generation. One date I have seen for Rebbe is 135-220 (again approximately) R Sherira Gaon lists the year 219 as the year Rav moved to Bavel The gemara (Kiddushin 72b) states that Rebbe was born when R Akiva died which gives the birth of Rebba as about 135 assuming he died as part of the Bar Kochba revolt (which the Chabad site seems to also assume) As an aside the dates of Rebbe would seem to be connected with the debate over who was Antoninus see Hebrew Wikipedia on Reeb Yehuda HaNasi This post started with my claim that Rashbi was a student in Yavneh years before the plague that kille3d the 24000 students and so he became a student of R Akiva later in life. I note that the other talmidim also had other teachers. Thus, the gemara notes that R Meir also learned with R. Yishmael and certainly with R. Elisha ben Avuyah though R. Akivah was his main teacher 'The students were given semicha by R Yehudah be Buba R Benny Lau claims that R. Yehuda bar Ilai was mainly a talmid of his father and R Tarfon and only secondary by R. Akiva. R Yisi ben Chalfta also learned mainly from his father and then R. Yochanan ben Nuri both of whom stressed the traditions if the Galil. We have no statements of R. Elazar ben Shanua in the name of R. Akiva. R Benny Lau concludes that the two "talmidim muvhakim" of R. Akiva are R. Meir and Rashbi but both of these also had other teachers besides R. Akiva. Hence, we cannot take the story literally that R. Akiva went to the south and found 5 youngsters who became his students. Rather all 5 were already serious talmidei chachamim before R. Akiva. In addition even later many kept up relations with R. Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 14 09:54:07 2018 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 12:54:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel Message-ID: I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential chillul shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:19:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 02:51:40PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : My daughter informed me that : one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even : smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook : It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in : the base of their calculation. But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be invalid anyway? We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more binding than historical reality? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 44th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Malchus: What type of justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 does unity demand? From saulguberman at gmail.com Mon May 14 12:28:24 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:28:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, > the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis > is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does > that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual > olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be > invalid anyway? > > We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai > and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people > causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more > binding than historical reality? > I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:06:21 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:06:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514190620.GC7492@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:33:02AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent : past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those : practices that can be : traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable... So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 15 04:05:47 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 07:05:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . Shemos 12:39 teaches us: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. Various meforshim deal with halachic problems of this pasuk. For example, they were commanded to eat matzah, and being rushed out had nothing to do with it. Or, chometz was forbidden, and being rushed had nothing to do with it. This thread WILL NOT discuss those issues. If you want to discuss those issues, please start a new thread. My questions have nothing to do with halacha. They relate to the sequence and timing of the events of that night. They relate to "lir'os es atzmo" - I try to imagine myself in Mitzrayim that night, and certain parts of the story don't make sense to me. I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: 1) When was that dough made? 2) When was that dough baked? We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for the trip. I find it difficult to imagine that the flour and water were not mixed until the last 17 minutes before morning. Another problem: Given that they DID take unbaked dough out of Mitzrayim, what happened when they finally decided to bake it? Obviously, if they were able to bake it, it must be that they were not hurrying out of Egypt any more. So why didn't they just wait a little longer, and allow the dough to rise? (Someone might suggest that it was only in Egypt that "it did not become chametz", and that they did let it rise after getting out, but the pasuk disproves that, by telling us that "they baked it into matzah", i.e. that the dough never rose at all, at any point.) There are other questions that could ask, in addition to those, but I'll stop here for now. advTHANKSance Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 15 05:11:46 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:11:46 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Issac Balbin wrote: " suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim." There is a fundamental difference between carrying the aron and the avoda in the mishkan. The Rambam writes explicitly there in the sefer hamitzvos that the mitzva of carrying the aron, was given to the leviim in the midbar "v'af al pi shezeh hatzivuy ba laleviim baet hahe". We do not find any such commandment in the Torah regarding avoda in the mishkan. The Torah ONLY commands/allows Aharon and his sons to do Avoda in the mishkan. Therefore there is no room to say that leviim did avoda in the mishkan in the midbar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at yahoo.com Tue May 15 09:53:47 2018 From: gershonseif at yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 16:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know.TIA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 12:31:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:31:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas In-Reply-To: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20180515193110.GB20847@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 04:53:47PM +0000, Gershon Seif via Avodah wrote: : Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked : many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know. The oldest usage Bar Ilan and I could find was the one I had initially thought of -- the AhS. In OC 494:7, RYME gives 3 reasons for not fasting on that day. #2: And more: On that day, Moshe told them to becom qadosh. Uregilin liqroso "Yom haMyuchas" because of this. Which makes me think the AhS was saying it's just mimetic. Otherwise, I would have expected "uregilin le-" to have been replaced by a source. More than that, his vanilla "uregilin" is more typical of his description of accepted Litvisher practice. He tends to report others' practices by saying whom, even if it's a recent import to Litta. For example, se'if 3 mentions that the Chassidim haQadmonim were up all night on Shavuos, as per the Zohar, "vegam agah harbeih osin kein" and in the morning they go to miqvah, all as a zeikher leMatan Torah. Staying up all night gets a "they", not a "we", and is labeled as lower-case-c chassidic / Zoharic custom. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 15 12:39:06 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:39:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bamidbar Message-ID: <24722D2C-AAFF-48C2-A4B0-144A6165528A@cox.net> THEY DID; SO DID THEY DO According to the Sages, not a single letter is superfluous in the Torah. Anything repeated is repeated for a definite reason and with additional meaning. We may not always comprehend the reason or meaning but that doesn't detract from its significance. Also, there may be various interpretations and reasons given by commentators but that is what makes the Torah so profound. This Shabbos we begin the fourth Book of the Torah, Bamidbar. This portion is read the Shabbat before Shavuot, with rare exception. This year it is read immediately before Shavuot. The reason it usually is read the Shabbat prior to Shavuot is because there is a connection between the subject matter of this portion and the theme of Shavuot. There is a verse in Bamidbar in which appears a seeming redundancy. I grappled with it for a while and came up with an interesting chiddush. The verse states (1:54) "The Children of Israel did everything that God commanded Moses, so did they do." The first part of the verse already says "they did everything," etc. Then at the end it again says: "so did they do." Why is it repeated? First, the Children of Israel did "everything that God commanded Moses" because that was what God commanded and they did it as it was a mitzvah. But then, when it states at the end of the pasuk "so did they do," it already had become part of them. In other words, the initial motivation for performing a mitzvah is because God has commanded it, but then after doing it, one does it automatically and out of love and joy (as opposed to being mandatory). It becomes part of the person -- ("so did they do)." Similarly, when the Jewish people accepted the Torah they said "Naaseh v'nishma" (Exodus 24:7) which means "We will DO and (then) we will understand." In other words, we first will do out of duty and obligation since we are accepting the commandments of the Almighty, and afterwards, we will be doing (observing the mitzvot) out of love and joy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 15:45:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 18:45:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos Message-ID: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> R' Mordechai Torczyner (CC-ed) gave 3 shiurim (chaburos?) on koseiv and mocheiq this past march. Including #2, available here . He raises an interesting (to me, at least) question: Catan, formerly The Settlers of Catan, is a game with a board that changes with each play. The board is tiled from hexagons (and played on the edges and corners between them), where each hexagon has a picture on it denoting a kind of terrain, and by implication the reasources one can get from that terrain. This honeycomb is then held in place by a hexagonal frame, which is assembled from 6 pieces, each of which has jigsaw-puzzle-like edges at the join to hold the whole thing together. See RMT cited in shiur SSJ 16:23 (source #5 on the resource page attached to the YUTorah recording). He says you can play a game with letters or pictures IFF one is placing letters or pieces of letters or pictures or their pieces next to eachother. But not if they are made qeva or put in a frame. And only if they do not attach or stick to one another. So, here is RMT's question... Catan's hexagons do not combine to make one picture, but they do combine to make one "message" -- a usable game board. Is assembling a Catan board mutar on Shabbos? And if not, I wish to add: What if the game is played on a pillow, making it hard to keep the pieces interlocked, and the players agree to end the game before Shabbos? If the assembly is neither made to last nor is there intent for it to last, would it then be mutar? Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:11:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:11:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos In-Reply-To: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> References: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> Message-ID: The frame that comes with the newer editions of Settlers is quite flimsy so I don't believe it can be regarded as "fixing" the hexes together in a way that could even raise this shayla. But leravcha demilsa one can simply lay out the board without the frame, as one does with the older editions (my set is close to 20 years old and therefore doesn't have this problem. From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:30:27 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:30:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Further to your question, we've discussed the time of yetzias mitzrayim before, and some have asserted that it was early in the morning, but the Torah says "be'etzem hayom", and Rashi explicitly says this means high noon. At the time of the discussion I couldn't find this Rashi, but it's in Devarim 32:48. So not only did they have all night to prepare food for the journey, they also had all morning. And yet we're to believe they didn't get around to it until just before noon. However, leaving aside the improbability of this timing, my understanding of the actual event is that they started making dough to bake bread, and would have left it to rise but immediately they got the announcement that they were leaving, so they shoved it straight into the oven and baked it there and then, as matzos. Alternatively, given that they had already been commanded not to bake chametz, we can say that because of this commandment they always intended to bake it immediately, but as it happened the command became irrelevant because the announcement came just as they finished kneading it and were about to put it in the oven, so even had they *not* been commanded they would still have had to bake it as matzos. Which of course is why the commandment was given in the first place. Either way, though, my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the perspective of before it was baked. From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 05:55:56 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 12:55:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? A. The Gemara (Avoda Zara 30a) discusses the laws of giluy (beverages left uncovered). Chazal forbade drinking certain beverages that were left uncovered, due to concerns that venomous creatures, such as snakes or scorpions, might drink from the beverage and leave behind some of their venom. Tosfos (Avoda Zara 35a: Chada) writes that in the countries where we live, this concern does not exist, and beverages left uncovered may be drunk. Ordinarily, once Chazal issue a gezeira (decree), the gezeira remains in force even if the reasoning no longer applies. This case is different since the original gezeira was only enacted for places where snakes were common. Accordingly, Shulchan Aruch (YD 116:1) rules that one may drink a beverage that was left uncovered. However, the Pischei Teshuva (116:1) writes that the position of the Vilna Gaon and the Shelah Hakadosh is not to leave drinks unattended. The commentaries to the Maaseh Rav explain that the Vilna Gaon held that there are secondary reasons for Rabbinic decrees that apply even when the primary reason is no longer relevant. Common practice is to follow the position of the Shulchan Aruch, though some adhere to the more stringent opinion -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:26:24 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:26:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me - perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:27:40 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:27:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Designer Babies? Message-ID: Assume that gene editing technology reaches the point that "designer babies" are possible to an extent. Assume that "intellectual acuity" genes can be identified and screened for. Would a Desslerian philosophy allow (require?) mass screening and eventual genetic tinkering to provide a gadol hador material baby? What if there was a clear tradeoff that this gene also resulted in a materially shorter life expectancy? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Thu May 17 08:29:01 2018 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (M Cohen) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 11:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <09af01d3edf3$c8a0bed0$59e23c70$@com> I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul Shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential Chillul Shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before Shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on Shabbos. ..at least 2 major differences between the two. A. the electricity you use is generated in real time, as you demand it (by turning on the switch) B. but the water you use was made and treated in the past, and now simply stored in water towers until you demand it (by opening your tap) (as the water is used, new water is pumped into the tower at intervals. only a gramma). No melacha is done when you use your water C. electricity production in EY typically involves d'orisa issurim of burning fossil fuels, boiling water to create steam etc D. but water production may only be an rabbinic prohibition (electric pumps and filters, adding chemicals, etc) ======= Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2894, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.22240) http://free.pctools.com/ ======= From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Thu May 17 09:00:40 2018 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:00:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: RMB wrote: 'So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here.' I think the point was there was a tendency not to value or keep minhagim, not an absolute rule. And they possibly gave different status to minhagim which clearly originated with gedolim not un-named masses, eg kabalas shabbos. As for the yamulka example, that's got a makor in shas and is mentioned by rishonim, no? Perhaps another example would be Shir hamaalos before bentching which was innovated by the Chida I think. You'd need a whole range of example and a list of who kept what in order to be more certain, I haven't read the rest of Dr Brown's book to know if he does that. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 12:48:18 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 19:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? Message-ID: The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of externalities at all. YL Unfortunately, the term "chasid," meaning a pious person, has become misunderstood because of misconceptions foisted upon us from without. A "chasid" is a person who totally gives himself in love, does not look out for himself but relinquishes his own claims on the world in order to live only for others, through acts of loving kindness. Far from retiring from the world, he lives in it, with it and for it. For himself, the chasid wants nothing; but for the world around him, everything. Thus we find the term applied to David, a man who, from his earliest youth, labored ceaselessly for the spiritual and material welfare of his people and left the shaping of his own destiny, including redress of the wrong done to him by Sha'ul, entirely to God. No doubt you are familiar with the saying shelach shelach v'sheli shelach - -"He who says 'That which is yours is yours and that which is mine also is yours' is called a chasid." Again, a life of seclusion, of only meditation and prayer, is not Judaism. Torah and Avodah (study and worship) are but pathways meant to lead to deeds. Our Sages say, Talmud Torah gadol she'mavi l'y'day maaseh- "Great is study, for it leads to action" - the practical fulfillment of the precepts. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com Thu May 17 13:03:16 2018 From: gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 20:03:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <306356533.2453717.1526587396833@mail.yahoo.com> On Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:48 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that > there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, > speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of > externalities at all. YL Indeed! See Hirsch's commentary to Beraishis 5:24 where he writes very strong words about this. He says that Chanoch lived a life of seclusion after giving up on his generation. Hashem removed him from the earth because "what use is he here" (or something to that effect). From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 17 20:24:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 05:24:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. At one time calling a child a girl did not mean that you were assuming the child's gender? (girl meant a young person of either sex). Ben On 5/17/2018 9:48 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters? I note > that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of > dress,? speaking a particular language,? etc.? Indeed,? there is no > mention of externalities at all. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu May 17 20:51:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 23:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . I had cited Shemos 12:39: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. R' Zev Sero suggested: > ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked > dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. > I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it > has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the > perspective of before it was baked. It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words to have that meaning, that's okay. But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, > their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Fri May 18 14:41:25 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:41:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: See Malbim, who suggests that according to R Yose Haglili, who says that the issur chometz that year was only for one day, that one day was the 14th, not the 15th, but since with kodshim the night follows the day it was from the morning of the 14th till the morning of the 15th. Therefore they started baking bread at daybreak, intending to let it rise, but they were immediately ordered to leave and had no time. Alternatively, since most meforshim understand the one day to be the 15th, he suggests that they mixed the dough intending to bake matzos, but they didn't even have time to do that and had to take the unbaked dough, which would naturally have become chometz during their journey, but miraculously it did not rise and when they got where they were going they baked it as matzos (or, according to pseudo-Yonasan, the sun baked it, which presents halachic problems of its own, since sun-baked bread doesn't have the status of bread). On 17 May 2018 at 23:51, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I had cited Shemos 12:39: > >> They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves >> of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were >> driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare >> any provisions for themselves. > > R' Zev Sero suggested: > >> ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked >> dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. >> I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it >> has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the >> perspective of before it was baked. > > It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the > pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words > to have that meaning, that's okay. > > But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > >> They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, >> their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. > > This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of > Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is > unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff > they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that > the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. > > Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS > for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why > didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. > > The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not > make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then > they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just > before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to > departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water > together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. > > Akiva Miller > _______________________________________________ > Avodah mailing list > Avodah at lists.aishdas.org > http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org -- Zev Sero zev at sero.name From doniels at gmail.com Mon May 21 03:55:24 2018 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 13:55:24 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Generators_on_Shabbos_in_Israel?= Message-ID: R' Ben Rothke wrote: > I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, > AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. Also, apparently, as a form of protest. > With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is > automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the > potential chillul shabbos? R' Israel Meir Morgenstern put out an entire Sefer on this - http://www.virtualgeula.com/Stock/Books/Show/11160 - and regular updates as booklets. According to him, it's not nearly as automated as they pretend. IIRC he did on-site research, not relying on what the Electric Company wants people to believe. > Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before > shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. There are those who do that too. Check the roofs in Charedi neighborhoods - those with huge black reservoirs are doing just that. That said, I asked his father, R' D. A. Morgenstern shlita about getting one of those water reservoirs and he said it wasn't necessary. (I didn't ask him about electricity.) - Danny From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 20 14:10:28 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 00:10:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance Message-ID: <> What effect does this have on shabbat -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon May 21 23:19:20 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 02:19:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 17/05/18 09:26, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) > one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? > What is the source of this practice? (Me ? perhaps the original practice > of only one person saying Kaddish). I assume you mean in a shul where most of the kadeishim are said by multiple people. If so, I have never seen or heard of such a practise until you described it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 03:52:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:52:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Please see Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part I at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FCT8ohf&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=CAO%2FIULzGszY4Io1E7bD7BDzBnrECxpPQX6SlNtHF%2BU%3D&reserved=0 and Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part II at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FKVjQ16&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=RY%2FzL7M3vLMiFdh1MlJcdiMfMVPVPkRXx%2FtVGOhRiWk%3D&reserved=0 If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 05:04:49 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 08:04:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on > a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking > their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me ? > perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). In all the shuls in Elizabeth NJ, the practice is as follows: If no one has yahrzeit, then there are no restrictions on Kaddish. If someone does have a yahrzeit that day, then the Kaddish after Aleinu is said only by him/them (including anyone still in shloshim). As RJR guessed, this is in deference to the original minhag (still practiced in German shuls) that no Kaddish is ever said by more than one person. [A gabbai usually calls out "Yahrzeit!" in addition to the table-banging.] In Shacharis, the other kaddishes (such as after Shir Shel Yom) are said by all kaddish-sayers. After mincha, an additional Tehillim (usually #24) is recited, so that the other kaddish-sayers will have the opportunity to say kaddish. This is done at maariv too, except for situations (such as in Elul) when there's another Tehillim anyway. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:12:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:12:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 06:52:26AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly : going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. But it could still not be worth the learning missed. There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more "nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. micha at aishdas.org Thus excellence is not an event, http://www.aishdas.org but a habit. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aristotle From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 04:01:35 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:01:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Birkat Kohanim Message-ID: 1) The Priestly Threefold Benediction had the following: The first blessing has three words, the second five, the third seven. They remind us of the foundation for all blessings: The tree Patriarchs, the five books of the Torah, and the seven Heavens. Bachya 2) Israel said to God: "Why do you tell the priests to bless us? We desire Your blessing alone!" Said the Holy One: "Although I have told the priests to bless you, I shall stand in their company to give effect to the benediction." Therefore, at the end of the section it states explicitly (verse 27): "I will bless them." Midrash Numbers R. (11:2, 8, end). 3) Why do we ask God first to bless us and then keep or guard us? Because, if He does give us material blessings, we need to be protected from the evil results such prosperity may bring. The Hasidic Anthology P.359 quoting the Tzechiver Rebbe. 4) There is an interesting connection between Parshat Naso, which is the longest parsha in the Torah, comprising 176 verses, and the 119th Psalm (of Tehillim), which also contains 176 verses and is the longest in the book of Psalms. This psalm carries the distinct title, "Torah, the Way of Life." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 03:57:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:57:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Who Sings In This World Will Sing Also In The Next." Joshua b. Levi, Sanhedrin, 91b Message-ID: <37067FE1-055D-4504-A143-8FB433E508DE@cox.net> LA'AVOD AVODAT AVODA VA'AVODAT MASA 4:47... Note the four words in a row with the same root. (Probably the only place in the Torah with four words in a row with the same root). Rashi says the Avodat Avoda (kind of a strange phrase) refers to playing musical instruments. As far as Avodat Masa (Work of burden) is concerned ? the Gemara in Chulin comments that only when there is heavy manual labor involved, then there is an age limit for the Leviyim (as with the others). And it seems that the age limit of 50 was only for the carrying. In other words, a Levi was able to continue serving in the Mishkan after 50, but only for SHIRA and SH'MIRA. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 04:29:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:29:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor Message-ID: We are told that Hashem spoke the words Shamor and Zachor together, and I have presumed that we heard them together as well. But the Ramban (Devarim 5:12) suggests that "He (Moshe) is the one who heard Zachor, and they (heard) Shamor." The ArtScroll Chumash (page 969) quotes Rav Gedalya Shorr as explaining: <<< At the highest spiritual level - the one occupied by Moses - the awesome holiness of the Sabbath is such a totally positive phenomenon that one who understands its significance could not desecrate it. Thus, the positive remembrance of the Sabbath contains within itself the impossibility of violating it, just as one who loves another person need not be warned not to harm that person. This was the commandment that Moses "heard." Lesser people, however, do not grasp this exalted nature of the Sabbath. They had to be told that it is forbidden to desecrate the sacred day; when they absorbed the Ten Commandments, they "heard" primarily the negative commandment *safeguard*. >>> Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue May 22 08:19:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 11:19:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 22/05/18 06:52, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going > there and seeing the falls is not nothing. Not at all. One says a bracha on many things that one would much rather *not* see, and that one would certainly not go out of ones way to see. Also consider the rainbow. If one happens to see it one says a bracha, and quite a positive one, but one still should not tell others to go outside and see it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:27:43 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:27:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet : he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. But AGAIN, no one obligated RAMiller to hold like RSRH. Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim around, etc... : R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or : taken a plane and learned on the plane. : Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the : world as it is, namely, mostly gray. But this isn't about how RAMiller lived now about life in general. It's advice to a school, an institution dedicated to learning. What I am actually taken by is the importance RAM is giving girls' education. Contrast that to the number of seminaries today that are so exclusively focused on inspiring that textual education is limited. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When we are no longer able to change a situation micha at aishdas.org -- just think of an incurable disease such as http://www.aishdas.org inoperable cancer -- we are challenged to change Fax: (270) 514-1507 ourselves. - Victor Frankl (MSfM) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:54:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:54:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522135452.GC14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 07:29:51AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be : understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so : supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", : I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Except that the Rambam believes the Qol had nothing to do with accoustics or physical sound to begin with. That the term is just being used as a metaphor to help those of us who never experienced such things. (Moreh 2:48) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 06:52:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:52:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:12 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >But it could still not be worth the learning missed. > >There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples >of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at >the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. >And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more >"nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. I know that Rav Schwab also went to Switzerland. Many gedolim in Europe went in the summer to vacation resorts, and there are pictures of Mir students at summer camp. See http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rkimble/Mirweb/YeshivaStudents2.html R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or taken a plane and learned on the plane. Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the world as it is, namely, mostly gray. I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:08:39 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:08:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522140839.GD14915@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 05:24:24AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. ... With that in mind as a caveat, let's look at Chazal's chassidim harishonim. Aside from famously spending 9 hours a day (12 on days when Mussaf is said?) on tefillah, Our sages repeated [in a beraisa]: The early Chassidim would hide their thorns and broken pieces of glass in the middle of their fields 3 tefachim [roughly one foot] deep, so that it would not [even] stop the plowing. Rav Sheishes would put them to the fire, Ravan would place them in the Tigres [the large river alongside which his home city of Pumbedisa was built]. Rav Yehudah said: The person who wants to be a chassid [he should take care] to follow the words of [the tractates on] damages. Ravina said: The words of [Pirqei] Avos. Others say in response [that Ravina said]: the words of [the tractate] Berakhos [blessings]. - Bava Qama 30a "Amrei leih" as the end is most ocnsistent with what we normally discuss about them. However, notice everyone else assumes a BALC definition of chassidus. They come up in Seifer Hakabiim I as among the bravest of warriors, and among the last to accept the permissibility of fighting on Shabbos. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:22:35 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:22:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522142235.GE14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:05:47AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about : the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: : 1) When was that dough made? : 2) When was that dough baked? We are talking about 600,000 or so homes. I assume there are a range of answers. And when the Torah says they didn't have time for it to become chameitz, it means that in many or most of those homes... enough that the haste came to characterize how we left. Just trying to aid the imagination by three-dimensionalizing the peopl involved. : We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally : irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as : Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the : Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to : leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for : the trip... Already in this discussion it was raised that in Shemos we're told we left "be'etzem hayom". And yet, in yesterday's leining, we're told "hotziakha H' E-lokekha loylah" (Devarim 16:1) Rashi ad loc (based on Sifrei Devarim 128:5, Barakhos 9a) says that we got permission from Par'oh at night (Shemos 12:31). So there was, as you write, PLENTY of warning. But they also had get their neighbors' valutables, pack, get the animals in hand, find Yanky's favorite bottle, figure out who was getting custody of those kids wandering around that neighborhood that choshekh obliterated... So, little things like what to pack for lunch was rushed, and in most cases, that meant they were left with matzah. (Despite likely promising themselves that if they ever got out of Egypt, they would never eat lechem oni again!) Your 1 mil assumption, BTW, might come from the matzah of the seder they were commanded to make, and that this matzah was not necessarily KLP. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 11:02:42 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:02:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <24.27.04381.9FB540B5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:27 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls >will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. >It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim >around, etc... The question was asked about girls' high schools, not yeshiva boys! Do you really think he was concerned about the reduction in learning for the girls! I think not! He held that Niagara is "nothing" something that makes no sense to me in light of the fact the Falls are one of Hashem's wonders. [Email #2.] Here is what R. Miller actually said in response to a question about going to Niagara Falls. the question was asked about high schools taking girls to the Falls. As you can see, his statement about Niagara Falls being "nothing " had nothing to do with bitul Torah. I find his response baffling to say the least. YL Rav Avigdor Miller on Niagara Falls Q: What is your opinion of the importance of a high school taking their students on a trip to Niagara Falls? A: My opinion is that it's nothing at all. You have to travel so far, and spend so much money to see Niagara Falls?! Let's say, here's a frum girls' school. So they have the day off, or the week off, whatever it is. And where do they go? To Niagara Falls. What's in Niagara Falls?! A lot of water falling off a cliff. Nothing at all. Nothing at all! It's the yetzer harah. The yetzer harah makes everyone dissatisfied. People who are really happy with what they have are almost impossible to find. They may say, "We're happy," but they're not. And therefore, they're always seeking something else. And so, they travel to Niagara Falls. You might say differently, but I'm telling you, that's the reason why people travel to Niagara Falls. It's the yetzer harah that is making you dissatisfied. So you have to go to see water falling off a cliff. But really it's nothing at all. Of course, you yield a little bit to the yetzer harah in order that more girls should come to your school. You have an outing every year to get new talmidos, new students. But really it's nothing at all. TAPE # E-193 (June 1999) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:41:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522184112.GC16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 03:28:24PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to : be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to : area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume : measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they : were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. >From what I posted in the past from the AhS (OC 373:34), is seems the definitions themselves were not constants. A person is supposed to be using their own thumb, fist or forearm when the din is only about them. And standardized numbers are only invoked for things like eiruv where one has to serve many people and "ameru chakhamim denimdod lechumerah" -- use an ammah that covers a very high percentile of the people relying on it. And I tried to discuss what this would mean for shiurim like kezayis, where a person isn't using his own body or something he could only own one of, as a measure. But the discussion went in its own direction. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, micha at aishdas.org if only because it offers us the opportunity of http://www.aishdas.org self-fulfilling prophecy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:33:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:33:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:10:28AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : > By 2025, 10,000 satellites will provide constant Israeli video : > surveillance of the Middle East sufficient to carry out targeted killings ... : What effect does this have on shabbat How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space that has security camteras? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue May 22 16:41:12 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 19:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> References: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 22, 2018, 2:33 PM Micha Berger wrote: > How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space > that has security camteras? No major difference except that some people still avoid security cameras. As they become more common it will be harder to do. It is already difficult to go to many hotels over shabbat. As these devices appear everywhere some argue that poskim will be forced to accept some minority opinions or else we all stay home From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 23 07:53:38 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 14:53:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: From today's Hakhel email bulletin. THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 23 10:12:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:12:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:53:38PM +0000, Professor L. Levine forwarded (from Hakhel, who were forwarding as well): :> THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted :> at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. :> http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg It's very al-menas-leqabel-peras collecting a list of havtachos and segulos.. There is the stretch from the Rambam onward talking about how davening haneitz is better, or how one should daven as soon after as possible. (Which implies kevasiqin is superior, but not actually saying that.) But the general tenor of the list is about mystical rewards; even the references to the gemara. I didn't think it would be your speed. Also, Hakhel pushed my button on a pet peeve. Whomever at Hakhel writes titles knows diqduq better than whomever sent in about the poster. (Compare the subject line of this thread'S "K'Vosikin" with the quoted text's "VASIKIN".) "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. The words are "kevasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. No "the" there to remove; omitting the "ha-" is just wrong. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The meaning of life is to find your gift. micha at aishdas.org The purpose of life http://www.aishdas.org is to give it away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Pablo Picasso From zev at sero.name Wed May 23 10:21:31 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:21:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2f7061f4-8f98-52f7-67af-3204e6dd8b76@sero.name> On 23/05/18 13:12, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. That would be davening *laneitz*. I'm not sure what "davening neitz" might mean, but whatever it is, it's not AZ. I wonder about those who, on a plane going directly to or from EY, daven out the side windows. Are they davening to the Great Penguin Spirit at the South Pole? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed May 23 10:23:14 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 17:23:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <0A36D278-B7B9-4326-9245-B993DE48CB97@tenzerlunin.com> ?I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you?? I am certainly no chassid if Rav Miller. But criticizing anyone, and certainty not criticizing a Talmid chacham, for personal feelings about a family matter, seems to me to be in poor taste. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed May 23 12:42:02 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:42:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin References: Message-ID: At 01:12 PM 5/23/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >The words are "KEvasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, >and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. I use the terminology K'Vosikin, but Hakhel used Vasikin so I left it. I have often quipped that the only people who know Dikduk are maskilim! >:-} (Note the wicked grin.) Regrading segulos, I found the following of interest. From a footnote to letter 15 of the 19 Letters of RSRH "Segulah" denotes a property belonging permanently to an owner, to which no one else has any right or claim (cf. Bava Kamma 87b). YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 05:59:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 12:59:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? Message-ID: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 06:01:44 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 13:01:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life by a community. Do you agree? It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit and then no more rain falls. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 24 10:39:09 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 17:39:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Does_Ru=92ach_Ra=92ah_=28negative_spiri?= =?windows-1252?q?ts=29_still_exist_today=3F?= Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru?ach Ra?ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra?ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra?ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye. Scientists have revealed the presence of numerous invisible forces in the universe, such as gravity and electromagnetic waves. In fact, scientists today theorize that dark matter, which no one has ever seen, accounts for 80% of the matter in the universe. Just as G-d created indiscernible physical forces in the universe which physicists have shown to exist, Chazal identified invisible spiritual forces that potentially impact negatively on both the body and soul (see Teshuvos Vihanhogos 1:8). The Gemara (Shabbos 109a) states that when awakening in the morning, a person must wash his or her hands (three times) to remove Ru?ach Ra?ah. Until one does so, one must be careful not to touch the mouth, nose, eyes or ears so as not to allow the Ru?ach Ra?ah to enter into the body. Also, one may not touch food, since the Ru?ach Ra?ah will spread to the food. Although the Maharshal (Chulin 8:12) questions whether any form of Ru?ach Ra?ah still exists today, the consensus of most poskim is that this is still a concern. The Halachos of removing Ru?ach Ra?ah from one?s hands are codified in Shulchan Aruch (OC 4:2-5). If one touched food before washing in the morning, the Mishnah Berurah (4:14) writes that bedieved (after the fact) the food may be eaten, but if possible the food should be rinsed three times. The Gemara warns us about other forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah (damaging spirits). However, the Magen Avrohom (173:1) writes that there are some forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah that no longer pose a danger. For example, the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru?ach Ra?ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru?ach ra?ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one?s hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Fri May 25 00:10:22 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:10:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were > all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, > a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype > (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and I cringe every time I go past. But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 04:51:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 07:51:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 03:10 AM 5/25/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: >This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards >went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing >towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and >I cringe every time I go past. > >But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" >from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun >"netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There >certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 >in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not found in TANACH, so why not this one? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 06:49:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 09:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 07:51:45AM EDT, Prof. Levine wrote: : Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not : found in TANACH, so why not this one? Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different topic. People are trying to "do halakhah" without understanding the language the categories they're trying to implements are labeled in. Without understanding the language of Chazal, we are missing a lot of subtlety about what they meant. With bigger problems (if less about din) if you don't know the workings of the language of Tefillah, Tehillim or Chumash. Judaism without diqduq is a paler, less nuanced, thing. I expect you have a LOT from RSRH in your cut-n-paste library on this. Earlier, at 10:10:22AM IDT, Simon Montagu wrote the post that Prof Levine was replying to: : But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from : the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the : root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word : meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's : description of his dream and in Hazal. Nitzotz. Yeshaiah 1:31 uses it to refer to a spark, as it's something that starts a fire. Comes up a number of times in Chazal. Most famously to people who daven Ashkenaz, Shabbos 3:6: nosenin keli sachas haneir leqabeil nitzotzos. There is a beis hanitzotz in the BHMQ. Libun requires nitzotzos coming out of the keli. "Nitzotzos ein bahen mamash". (Shabbos 47b) BUT... getting back to that nuance theme... Haneitz is when there is enough light to make things like that sparkle. It's before alos, which is when the first spark of the sun is visible. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, micha at aishdas.org Our greatest fear is that we're powerful http://www.aishdas.org beyond measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anonymous From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 07:38:32 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:38:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:49 AM 5/25/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This >is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. >There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh >and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from >English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different >topic. Sadly, with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and texting, the English language is, IMO, going down the drain. People do not spell properly, write things that are not words, etc. This is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 08:22:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:22:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525152241.GC9702@aishdas.org> This isn't an MO issue, even if the subject line mentions the affiliation of the mechaneikh. For many people in yeshivish minyanim I attend, davening with a tzibbur is something one does between gaps in looking at a seifer. And among the yeshivish-lite (Shababnikim?), minyan is an excuse to get together for the qiddush. We really don't know how to daven. And all the time we spend teaching how to learn contributes to that. Defining religious inspiration in terms of learning, new knowledge, makes it hard to find what the point is in saying the same words yet again. When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. We define it those terms, tefillah won't get anywhere. On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:01:44PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have : the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community : and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that : did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their : prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life : by a community. Do you agree? I think so, because gap year subtlely teaches the message that true spirituality is incompatible with "reeal life". And that's why they need to go to a 1 year religious experience, with no job, no secular studies, no other concerns, not even the usual setting, in order to get inspiration that is supposed to last year the rest of your life. I believe it's an underdiscussed factor (among the many others) as to why so many MO youth go yeshivish during gap year or upon return. That implied message is not fully compatible with TuM or TiDE. That said... There are other factors. Telecom means you can hear from a famous rosh yeshiva regularly, and don't need to "settle" for someone local as a role model. Never mind that you can regularly connect with the LOR, so that he is actually in a position to better model the role. Also, the whole universal post-HS yeshiva thing feeds the RY-centric view (outside of chassidishe admorim) of religious leadership now prevalent, rather than the rabbinate. The shift from Agudas haRabbanim to the Agudah's (or in Israel, Degel's) Mo'etzes haRabbanim. Secondary effects: There is less tie and sense of belonging to a particular qehillah. More and more people daven in a handful of places, because this one is more convenient Fri night, another Shabbos morning, a third for Shabbos afternoon, Sunday, weekdays... Qehillah could be a source of positive peer pressure when inspiration is running low. But only if you feel attached to one. (An LOR mentioned to me this effect as a factor in OTD rates...) As per the famous machgich line: It's chazaras hasha"tz, not chazaras haSha"s! : It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately : go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit : and then no more rain falls. Although it's less that no more rain falls as much as the crops no longer accept irrigation water. Okay, the metaphor doesn't really work. A good rav who one can interact with regularly may be more useful :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals micha at aishdas.org is not as important as http://www.aishdas.org what you become by achieving your goals. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Henry David Thoreau From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 25 08:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos Message-ID: Halacha L'kovod Shabbos - "Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos" According to some Poskim it is prohibited to intentionally tan in the sun on Shabbos. Nevertheless it is permitted to walk or sit outdoors on a sunny day even if there is the probability of becoming tanned (even if one would be pleased that this happened - so long as one is not intentionally tanning) because the tanning is not intentional. One may also apply a thin and pourable suntan lotion for protection against sunburn when walking or sitting outdoors. However, one may not use a cream. S'U Minchas Yitzchok 5:32, Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchasa 18:70, Sefer 39 Melochos YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri May 25 08:56:20 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:56:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Questions on Theologically Motivated Message-ID: <3CB5DF8F-56E4-482D-BA72-9328800F007E@cox.net> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. 1) What is the difference between ?The religious person? and ?the truly religious person?? 2) What exactly do you mean by "cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:11:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:11:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: In this case, the problem pre-dated the smart? (or cell) phone. On 5/25/2018 4:38 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Sadly,? with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and > texting,? the English language is, IMO,? going down the drain.? People > do not spell properly,? write things that are not words,? etc.? This > is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:05:52 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:05:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular Message-ID: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Ever wonder what is the nafka mina of deciding if secular people are tinok sh'nishba or not? Here is a biggy. There is (apparently) a machloket between Rav Kanyevski and Rav Edelstein if it is permitted to donate a kidney if it may end up in someone secular. RK believes it shouldn't be done because he paskens like Rav Elyashiv that no one today has the din of tinok sh'nishba and therefore they shouldn't get this type of help from the religious. RE paskens like the classic Chazon Ish psak that today's secular people do have the tinok din? and therefore it is permitted to donate a kidney to a secular person. See the article (Hebrew) for more details. http://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/558795 From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 09:31:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:31:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? In-Reply-To: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525163124.GF9702@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:59:56PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious : person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are : theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic : inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral : creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a : Supreme Law?" : Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would : be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a : judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? I think it's self-evident. If the gov't is "of the people and by the people" (regardless of "for the people", appologies Pres Lincoln), then the only way to really seperate church and state would be to separate church and people. And "church" here includes not only all religion, but all religious stances. Including atheism, agnosticism, apathy and Sherleyism. A person's vote should be informed by their values. And a person's values by their religious stance -- whether religious, "truly religious", or an atheist. After all, an atheist cannot phrase abortion or end-of-life issues in terms of souls and therefore their etheism will inform their vote when Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice is a key issue. (Looking at you, Ireland!) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man micha at aishdas.org is how he treats someone http://www.aishdas.org who can do him absolutely no good. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Samuel Johnson From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:11:20 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:11:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Professor L. Levine" T >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra'ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra'ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye....? .....the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru'ach Ra'ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru'ach ra'ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one's hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL ? >>>>> ? It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children.? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:05:24 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:05:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398431932-c8d-935e@webjas-vaa194.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Rich, Joel" >From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" ? Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich ? ? >>>>> ? There is no constitutional requirement, no legal requirement, no ethical requirement and no logical requirement for each individual to erect a wall of separation between church and state in his own heart and mind.? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:52:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:52:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> >>>>> It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ============= IIRC R? A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 12:26:01 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:26:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525192601.GC25353@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 05:52:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : IIRC R' A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. It was ruach ra'ah, as per our discussion. Thus, neigl vasr. I think RAS's understanding was that Chazal were using evidence-based reasoning. People were getting sick, and since bad vapors were believed to be the cause of disease, Chazal presumed there was a ru'ach ra'ah. Which means that given that we today attibute disease to microbes, we would transvalue ruach ra'ah to refer to germs. I don't think too many others understand ru'ach ra'ah as a physical threat. Rashi (Taanis 22b "mipenei ruach ra'ah") understands ru'ach ra'ah to be a sheid entering the person -- "mipenei ruach ra'ah: shenichnas bo ruach sheidah..." and then he might drown or fall and die. Perhaps psychiatric illness? In which case, there is no clear transvaluation to today's science, as minds kind of straddle the physica - metaphysical fence. Sheidim /are/ intellects; so how do we map sheidim talk to rationalist psychology talk? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. micha at aishdas.org If you want time, you must make it. http://www.aishdas.org - Charles Buxton Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 09:30:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:30:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2 Message-ID: It is often confusing when trying to determine whether an item is subject to bishul akum or not. This article should help. YL Click here to download "Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2" From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:50:45 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:50:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular In-Reply-To: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> References: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <8849942693d54a55aab7bd43e07dddc7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/901388/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/from-the-rabbis-desk-choosing-a-recipient,-diverting-tzedakah/ Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz-From The Rabbi's Desk - Choosing a Recipient, Diverting Tzedakah Listen to the 1st part-lots to discuss KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 26 12:17:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:17:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Ben On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Toby Katz via Avodah wrote: > >>>>> > > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? > So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their > children. From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 14:07:40 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:07:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? Message-ID: <1639920e25b-c96-3738@webjas-vaa110.srv.aolmail.net> From:?"Prof. Levine" Date:?Wed, 22 Aug 2012 Subject:?Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? One may download this article that appeared in Tradition at http://www.mesora.org/mezuza-gordon.pdf Towards the end of this article the author writes To claim, then, that the Divine inscription, which directs the attention of the Jew to God, is possessed of its own potency, generating protective benefits, perverts a spiritual instrumentality into a cultic charm.... YL >>>> ? I hope I will be forgiven for resurrecting an old, old thread -- from 2012.? But I recently came across something when I was preparing for my Pirkei Avos shiur, and it made me think of this old thread. ? This is from _Ethics From Sinai_?by Irving Bunim.? On Pirkei Avos 5:22 he talks about the difference between the disciples of Avraham and the disciples of Bilaam.? The former have a sense of security; the latter have no sense of security in the world.?? ? ---quote-- Today we have all sorts of insurance policies: fire insurance, flood insurance, life insurance. On one level they represent a wise precaution [but mainly] the man of piety places his trust in the Almighty. When he closes his place of business at night, he knows there is a mezuzah on the door, to betoken His protection. At bedtime he recites the Shema, to invoke His protection. This is his basic insurance policy.... . The Sages tell of Artaban IV, the last King of Parthia, who sent his friend Rav a priceless jewel, with the message, << Send me something equally precious>>; and Rav sent him a mezuzah.? The king replied, <> Answered Rav < >> --end quote-- ? In a footnote, Bunim explains that that last sentence is a pasuk, Mishlei 6:22, and it applies to the mezuzah. This doesn't make the mezuzah an but does say that the mezuzah is protective. . (I am using << and >> instead of quotation marks in the hope of minimizing the number of random question marks AOL strews in my path.? If anyone can help me solve this problem please let me know.) . --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri May 25 13:29:34 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 16:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: . R' Simon Montagu wrote: > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards > went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing > towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", > and I cringe every time I go past. > > But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. ... I used to cringe too. But then I thought of a different limud zechus, and it's not just an excuse. I really believe this: They are not speaking the language that you'd like to think they are speaking. We are in the process of developing a new dialect, or creole, ... I don't know or care what the technical term might be, but consider the following phrases: making kiddush will be davening had paskened was mekadesh Technically speaking, I do concede that "davening k'vasikin" is meaningful, while "davening vasikin" is bizarre. But the truth, whether you like it or not, is that when someone says "davening vasikin", EVERYONE knows what the speaker meant. In this new language, there's nothing wrong with saying "davening vasikin". It is (I think) EXACTLY like the phrase "Good Shabbos", when the first word is pronounced "good" (and not "goot") and the second word is pronounced "SHABbos" (and not "shabBOS"). What language is that???? It's not Hebrew. It's not Yiddish. It's not English. It's something new. (Where "new" can have values of 50 to 100 years. Maybe more.) I am reminded of going to the bakery when I was twelve years old, and the sign by the brownies said that the price was: .10? each (If your computer messed that up, it is a decimal point, followed by a one, and a zero, and a "cents" sign. You know, a "c" with a line through it.) Twelve-year old me looked at the decimal point, and noted that the sign had a cents sign, and not a dollar sign. So I concluded that the price for the brownies was one-tenth of a cent each. I tried to buy ten of them for a penny. It didn't work. And I was pretty upset about it too. I knew I was right. Plenty of people tried to console me, but no one could explain my error. I was right, and everyone seemed to agree. It took about 40 years, but I finally figured out the lesson of that incident: What people SAY is not nearly as important as what they MEAN. Focus on the ikar, not the tafel. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sat May 26 19:46:16 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 22:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <68109a23-b784-405e-60d5-b1c30853273a@sero.name> Think of saying "netz" instead of "honetz" the same way you do about saying "bus" instead of "autobus", "phone" instead of "telephone", or "flu" instead of "influenza". I recently saw "'bus" written with an apostrophe, but that's very unusual. Most people have no idea that these are abbreviations of longer words. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Sun May 27 05:00:54 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 12:00:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is the meaning of Cholov Yisroel? Message-ID: Please see the video at https://goo.gl/S5mPTn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat May 26 18:36:57 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:36:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Behaaloscha YOU CAN'T WIN 'EM ALL Message-ID: <89C443B9-BCD6-4E3D-A485-59F3CF2C7515@cox.net> Both dedications, the dedication of the Mishkan by the Nesiim and the dedication of the Menorah by Aharon were required. The Midrash mentions that Aharon was depressed that neither he nor his tribe was included in the dedication of the Mishkan. This brings to mind the time when I gave a student of mine a part in the family service that he considered inferior and unimportant. Convinced I had the perfect answer, I confindently and proudly informed him about the dedications of the Mishkan and of the Menorah and how God comforted Aharon by saying that his part of the dedication ceremony was the greatest of all, in that he was charged with the kindling of the Menora. I was sure that would make my pupil feel much better but without batting an eyelash, my student immediately retorted: "Yeah, but you're not God!" I ended up being more depressed than Aharon! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:25:32 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:25:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? Message-ID: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and Reuvain claims insolvency. Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an ongoing business for Pesach? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:27:43 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:27:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? Message-ID: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose. (The gemara in b"b is worth looking at-what exactly is the halachic force of "people don't sell their homes"). Two items: 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? 2. What if the other fundraising fails-would the community sell the Beit Knesset? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 31 11:22:30 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:22:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns > beer over pesach), one source quoted is S?A C?M 99:7, which deals with a > case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows > money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din > is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and > Reuvain claims insolvency. > Do you think it?s a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an > ongoing business for Pesach? Not at all, for two separate reasons. First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. So in this case where the Jew sold not the chametz but the entire business, there's nothing to indicate that the sale was anything but serious and effective. Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to "pierce" it in the name of equity. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 1 03:28:46 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 06:28:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra Message-ID: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> With discussed "Higher" Bible Criticism before, we've discussed the IE on the topic before, RGS went the next step -- the Ramban on the IE on Bible Criticism. I am includng the comment, and I would have written something similar. :-)BBii! -Micha Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student R. Avraham Ibn Ezra has long been a controversial figure. R. Shlomo Luria (Yam Shel Shlomo, intro to Bava Kamma) respectfully but strongly rejects his entire approach to Torah commentary. What does the Ramban, one of the classical commentaries whose work serves as a foundation for modern Jewish thought, think of his predecessor, Ibn Ezra? He certainly disagrees often with Ibn Ezra, sometimes sharply. But there may be a more fundamental reason for opposition. At the end of Ramban's commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim, he writes that anyone who says that Ezra the scribe added to the Torah -- such as Gen. 13:6 or Deut. 3:11 -- is a heretic (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 p. 548). Ibn Ezra famously suggests that four verses imply post-Mosaic interpolations -- Gen. 12:6, 22:14, Deut. 3:11, 31:22. Ramban, who shows clear expertise in Ibn Ezra's Torah commentaryn quotes two of these four verses in describing the heretic! Coincidence? R. Betzalel Naor, in his annotated edition of Rashba's Ma'amar Al Yishma'el (Orot: Spring Valley, NY, 2008, pp. 25-27) finds this correspondence convincing. The author of the commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim must have been condemning Ibn Ezra as a heretic. Even though some supercommentaries and scholars dispute the claim that Ibn Ezra ever intended anything other than that Moshe wrote those verses prophetically, many believe he made the more radical claim.[1] If so, this passage from the Shir Ha-Shirim commentary condemns him as a heretic. However, R. Naor points out that Ramban did not write that commentary. R. Chaim Dov Chavel argues cogently in his introduction to that work that it was written by the earlier, kabbalist R. Ezra of Gerona (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 pp. 473-475). If so, we can ask whether Ramban agreed with R. Ezra's evaluation. R. Naor (ibid., pp. 136-143) makes the following points and suggestions: 1- Even in his introduction to his Torah commentary, Ramban expresses his mixed attitude toward Ibn Ezra, which he calls "a public rebuke and private affection." This might be used to describe a commentary that is both brilliant but occasionally sacrilegious. However, Ramban calls him "Rabbi" Ezra, a term of respect. 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him about Ibn Ezra. 3- Ramban unquestionably rejected any post-Mosaic interpolations into the Torah, as seen in his general introduction to his commentary. While hiss attitude toward the level of prophecy of the Torah varies (commentary to Num. 16:5), that is nowhere near the claim that any verse postdates Moshe. 4- Rabbeinu Tam wrote a poem in praise of Ibn Ezra. Perhaps this influenced Ramban to judge him favorably as an inadvertent heretic, which was a status that, according to the Ra'avad (Hilkhos Teshuvah 3:7), even great scholars fell into. 5- The Chida (Shem Ha-Gedolim, part 1, alef 89) quotes R. Binyamin Spinoza, a late eighteenth century rabbi, who deduces from Ramban's failure to argue against Ibn Ezra's radical suggestions that those comments must be late forgeries (interpolations?). Had Ramban seen them, he would surely have objected. In the end, once we determine that the commentary to Shir Ha-Shirim is misattributed, we can only speculate about Ramban's attitude toward Ibn Ezra. Maybe he agreed with R. Ezra of Gerona's condemnation or maybe he felt the belief was wrong but not heretical. Or maybe, as R. Naor suggested, he rejected the belief as heretical but not the person. (Republished from May '13) [1] On this disagreement, see R. Yonatan Kolatch, Masters of the Word, vol. 2 pp. 310-318. ------------------ J. C. Salomon May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late addition to the text. I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 1 08:03:13 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:03:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <70c7cc6f-c870-c610-b592-25a81940172f@sero.name> I find the entire idea that RABE's "secret of twelve" was a secret heresy to be without foundation, and think it more likely that this is wishful thinking by heretics who would like to find "a great tree" on which to hang their heresy. We don't know what the secret was, because it was a secret, but his comment on Vayishlach makes it unlikely to be what the "bible critics" claim it is. On Bereshis 12:6, he simply says: "If it is not so, then there is a secret here, and the intelligent person should be silent". On Bereshis 22:14, and Devarim 3:11 and 31:22 he makes no comment at all, and indeed there's nothing unusual to hint at, no reason to even suppose these pesukim might not have been written at the same time as what surrounds them. The "secret of the twelve" is in Devarim 1:1, on the words "Eleven days out of Chorev", which makes me think whatever this secret is relates to that, and perhaps to a mystical "twelfth day". It's there that he cryptically mentions these four pesukim, with no context or explanation; the theory that he was hinting at a deep secret heresy in his heart is therefore pure speculation and should be rejected. The Ramban's (or whoever wrote it) comment in Shir Hashirim only means that there existed such heretics in his day; there is not even the hint of a hint that RABE might have been among them. These are the same heretics who claimed him; there's no reason to suppose the Ramban agreed with that claim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sat Jun 2 20:49:06 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2018 23:49:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: >From R'Micha (Avodah V36n64): > When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? > We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. < If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; and "vaya'as kein Aharon." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 00:42:20 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 10:42:20 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua Message-ID: In last weeks parsha we have the Torah stating that Moshe's nevua was unique that Hashem spoke to him directly (see Rambam Yesodei Torah for the list of differences). However, I was bothered by the following question. A number of times the Torah writes Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe v'Aharon leimor where certain halachos are given over to both Moshe and Aharon. The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? In Behaalosecha it is clear that Aharon and Miriam dd not know that Moshe's nevua was different then theirs, yet, if Aharon heard these like a regular nevua as a vision not clearly then how did he not realize that Moshe got a clearer nevua then he did? The first thing Moshe did after getting halachos from Hashem was go over them with Aharon and his sons. Also, the pasuk says that Hashem called out to all 3, Moshe Aharon and Miriam to go out, and Rashi comments that it was one dibur something that a person cannot do. If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 01:54:52 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 11:54:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? Message-ID: At the beginning of Bamidbar the Meshech Chochma asks the following question. A Baal keri is prohibited from being in the machane leviya, if so how could the Leviim ever live with their wives (in the machane leviya) and become a baal keri? Ayen sham his answer. Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A Baal keri is prohibited from going there. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Jun 4 11:24:18 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:24:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> Message-ID: On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns >> beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a >> case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows >> money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din >> is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and >> Reuvain claims insolvency. >> Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an >> ongoing business for Pesach? [Zev Sero:] > Not at all, for two separate reasons. > First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones > property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a > going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and > continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected > to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. AIUI there was no change in the business other than the 'titular" ownership > Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get > away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently > made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of > the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that > the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he > still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity > the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the > Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that > he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So > none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not > an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own > chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, > and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that > CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to > "pierce" it in the name of equity. https://headlinesbook.podbean.com/mf/download/reyy6b/headlines_6-2-18.mp3 6/2/18 Owning Businesses in Halacha and Hashkafa: People who are making a difference- Freddy Friedman, Elchonon Schwartz, Rabbi Yosef Kushner, Nesanel Davis, Shimon Webster, Mr. Sol Werdiger The first half deals with a similar type of arrangement for nursing homes-so aiui you're saying it's up to the Rabbis to evaluate the "need" in each case to determine if haaramah is allowable? KT Joel Rich From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 13:46:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:46:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180604204625.GA25546@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:28:46AM -0400, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : : Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student ... : 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, : as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could : agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him : about Ibn Ezra. ... : J. C. Salomon : May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm : Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that : the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, : before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late : addition to the text. : I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that : certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might : have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate : extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight : verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. Except that the tell-tale idiom is "sod ha-12", not 8. From Devarim 1:1: ... And if you understand sod hasheneim asar... Pit stop: the standard text doesn't even say that, it says "(hasarim) [tz"l hashneim] asar". So there is a slight chance it doesn't even say 12. Back to the IE: ... also "Vayikhtov Moshe" (31:22), "VehaKenaani as Ba'aretz" (Bereishis 12:6), "Har H' Yeira'eh" (Bereishis 22:14), and also "arso eres barzel (Devarim 3:11), you will regonize the truth. If it does refer to the last 12 pesuqim (from Moshe going up Har Nevo), then there are 5 quotes in discussion. 4 refer to the future, likely quotes for someone to say were actually written later. But Og's iron bed? And besides, it's the last 8 pesuqim that amoraim argue how and if Moshe could have written them. Now, if Moshe couldn't write "and Moshe died", then it makes sense to argue that he couldn't write "and Moshe went up Har Nevo" if he never came back. But that is more conjecture, that this "12" is "12 pesuqim", and the last 12 pesuqim at that, and that it is related to chazal's discussion of last 8 pesuqim, and all this despite one of the quotes not having this "problem" of not being true when Moshe left us. And for all we know, the secret could be about prophecy. Even if all 5 were about the future, who knows what secret the IE posited to explain them? One of the parts of the Torah that is NOT in this list is the list of kings of Edom "lifnei melokh melekh liVnei Yisrael", Bereishis 36:31. On which the IE qrites: Some say that this parashah was written bederekh nevu'ah. And Yitzchaqi says in his book that this parashah was written in the days of Yehoshafat, and he explains the generations as he wished. This is why his name was called Yitzchaq -- kol hashomeia yitzachaq li. .. Vechalillah chalilah that the matter is as he said about the days of Yehoshafat. His book is worth burning... And he explains that the kings ran in rapid succession, this being warrior tribes of Edom. And the melekh Yisrael in the pasuq was Moshe, "vayhi bishurun Melekh. A lot of work if the IE was okay with later interpolations of narrative snippets of 12 pesuqim or less. In 2002, RGStudent reposed something from Cardozo at . See fn 50: Most enlightening is Spinoza's observation that some texts of the Torah, such as the ones in Genesis 12:6; 22:14, and Deuteronomy 1:2, must have been written many years after Moshe's death, since they reveal information that refers to latter days. Spinoza relies here on the famous Jewish commentator Ibn Ezra (1088-1167), who wrote that these verses were "mysteries" about "which the wise should be silent" (on Deuteronomy 1:2). The traditional understanding of Ibn Ezra, as also confirmed by the modern Jewish scholar Samuel David Luzzatto (ShaDaL) (1800-1865), is that these passages must be understood as prophetic and anticipating the future. .... However, in RGS's own essay on that web site writes: Also, phrases and even verses were added to the texts that perhaps even these prophets could not have written. For example, Ramban explains (Genesis 8:21) "G-d said in His heart" as meaning that this was only revealed to Moshe at the time of the writing of the Torah. See also Ralbag there and Moreh Nevuchim 1:29. Another case is Genesis 32:33, "Therefore the Children of Israel are not to eat the gid hanasheh." According to the Mishna and Gemara in Chullin 101b, as explained by Rashi, this verse was a later insertion by Moshe. See the Radak's commentary to this verse. It is possible that Ibn Ezra, in his "secrecy", believed that many more verses fall into this category and were inserted into pre-existing narrative by G-d to Moshe. His thesis there is that the Torah was redacted from pre-existing scrolls during the Exodus; that it was this redaction that was dictated to Moshe in Sinai. Since such megillos are named in a few places, it's a pretty hard thesis to totally dismiss. The only question is how much was already given in writing in texts like Seifer Milkhamos Hashem (cf Bamidbar 21:13). Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 14:21:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 17:21:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 11:49:06PM -0400, Michael Poppers via Avodah wrote: : If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two : recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; : and "vaya'as kein Aharon." But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. Y-mi Nedarim 9:4 (violna ed. 30b) has the famous machloqes between R' Aqiva and Ben Azai about whether the kelal gadol baTorah is "ve'havta lerei'akha" or "zeh seifer toledos adam". In the version in the introduction to the Ein Yaaqov, he quotes Ben Zoma, attributes Rav Akiva's opinion to Ben Nanas, and then adds a new opinion: Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi says: We have found a more inclusive verse than that, and it is, "The first lamb you shall sacrifice in the morning and the second lamb you shall sacrifice in the evening." Rabbi Ploni stood up and said: The halachah is like Ben Pazi as it is written, "As all that I show you, the structure of the Mishkan and all its vessels: so shall you do." That makes constancy kind of important. FWIW, here is how my discussion (ch 2. sec. 3) of that quote goes: There are two interesting implications to Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi's and Rabbi Ploni's words. First, Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi could be making the point that Rabbi Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov found in Ben Azzai's position -- the role of personal development. After all, there are a number of verses that discuss this offering; Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi chose a verse that discusses its constant and regular nature. In his opinion, this is the most important verse in the Torah -- even in his or our day, after the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash and there are no korbanos. Perhaps the point here is consistency in avodas Hashem in-and-of-itself, not limited to this one mitzvah. Just as service in the Mishkan has its schedule and routine, so too our observance must be a discipline with well-defined structure and consistency. Second, the anonymous rabbi endorses this view by quoting a verse about the Mishkan and its vessels' structure, their composition, not their service. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi statement is about something done in the Beis HaMikdash as part of its daily service, but the proof is about its structure. This rabbi is relating "so shall you do" not only to following the description of that structure Hashem gave us when building it but also to the discipline of the ritual within it. The discipline in avodas Hashem of the previous implication is a taken as fundamental part of what the building is. At least homiletically, we can say this is true of both microcosms -- not only the Mishkan, but also the human soul, as Rav Shimon ben Pazi is giving importance to structure and consistency even in our era, without a Mishkan or Beis HaMikdash. Discipline in avodas Hashem is not only part of the structure of what the Mishkan is, but also our own soul's structure. This homily would be consistent with Rav Shimon's statement ... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search micha at aishdas.org of a spiritual experience. You are a http://www.aishdas.org spiritual being immersed in a human Fax: (270) 514-1507 experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 15:06:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:06:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180604220616.GC25546@aishdas.org> On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Rn Toby Katz Avodah wrote: > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be > bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before > feeding their children. According the Tosafos (Yuma 77b) and the Yam Shel Shelomo (Chulin 8:31) there isn't any ru'ach ra'ah anymore. Unsurprizingly, the Rambam (Rotzeiach 12:5) doesn't mention ru'ach ra'ah when he discusses not putting food under your bed, his reason is "shema yipol bo davar hamaziq". If it is a modern and mundane issue, I would think ru'ach ra'ah is depression, not a physical illness. The day after Shaul learns he lost his throne, "vatilach ruach E-lokim ra'ah el Sha'ul". (Shemu'el I 18:9) On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:17:24PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Actually, you need to do both for neigl vasr, as you need to get rid of chatzitzos. AhS 161:1, MB s"q 7,10. So the question might be... What's the problem with chatzitzos? Can someone make an argument that it's about places where disease can hide? Then why haqpadah? I really don't know what to do with RASoloveitchik's suggestion that ru'ach ra'ah can be things like germs. If it's a saqanas nefashos thing, then pesaqim should indeed be more maqpidim about things like soap than about using a cup, koach gavra, etc... BUT... this is RAS. I am assuming he did indeed have an explanation. Keeping the discussion alive (and CC-ing R Harry Maryles) to see if we can get down to one. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water micha at aishdas.org that softens the potato, hardens the egg. http://www.aishdas.org It's not about the circumstance, Fax: (270) 514-1507 but rather what you are made of. From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Tue Jun 5 19:06:11 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 22:06:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. < Agreed, and both examples I mentioned are examples of doing, not knowing. The point is that not just "v'halachta bidrachav" but also that "v'halachta" in the path of the noted examples, that one should imitate paragons of *derech H'*. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 05:07:43 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah Message-ID: The article below gives many halachas that are applicable to situations where gentile workers are employed in one's home. IMO it is worth reading carefully. YL Click here to download "Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 6 10:49:54 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:49:54 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Why I support the private kashrut initiative of Tzohar rabbis Message-ID: <628e074c-450f-a464-ed95-2eca5d3ed825@zahav.net.il> Placing this article in Avodah because Rav Melamed uses the model of the 70 elders to show how differences in community leadership should be handled. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22250 A few critical paragraphs: But when groups and institutions try to impose their opinion on members of another circle, and abolish the status of their rabbis (and to boycott them from becoming rabbinical judges and rabbis) we are no longer speaking of a situation where the rabbis of Tzohar should also establish a kashrut organization, but rather a situation in which it is almost obligatory for them to establish one, just like other accepted rabbinic organizations, in order to give halachic and Torah expression to their part in the Torah. If they do not, then they are similar to a prophet who suppresses his prophecy, or as our Sages said: ? Yea, all her slain are a mighty host? ? this refers to a disciple who has attained the qualification to decide questions of law, and does not decide them? (Sotah 22a). How Does a Difficult Dispute Develop? At first, there is an argument over a focused halakhic issue. However, when an agreement is not reached, instead of agreeing to disagree and continuing to respect each other, one side thinks that the other has no authority to retain his position, because, essentially, his position is inferior, since he belongs to a liberal circle, or his position differs from that of most rabbis. Then, that same party departs from the particular halakhic issue they have debated, and moves on to a more acute arena, in which the main argument is that the rabbi against whom he is arguing with is not authorized to express a halachic position, for in any case, who appointed him to be a rabbi who can express a position at all? Since this argument is not convincing enough, and the rabbi who is being attacked remains in his position, consequently we are now moving over to a dispute of a different magnitude ? since we are no longer dealing with a person who rules on a matter without authority, but with a person who undermines the foundations of authority as a whole, and thus, it is compulsory to wage an all-out war against him? From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 11:31:07 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 18:31:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: Please see the article at Eretz Yisroel, Zionism,and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH This article is from The Jewish Observer Vol. 23 No. 6 September 1990/Adar 5751 and is available at https://goo.gl/LNRpZZ YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 7 01:06:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 08:06:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra Message-ID: The letter below appears on pages 113 - 114 of this week's Flatbush Jewish Journal. It is not clear to me that all FJJ readers appreciate the gadlus of Rabbi Shamshon Raphael Hirsch when it came to Torah. Indeed, last week MW (whomever this may be) referred to RSRH as "Reb Shamshon Refoel Hirsch" rather than as Rabbi or Rav or even Rabbiner. Therefore, I feel that I should refer FJJ readers to Rav Yaakov Perlow's article Rav S. R. Hirsch - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra that appears in The World of Hirschian Teachings, An Anthology on the Hirsch Chumash and the Hashkafa of Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, Published for the Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer Foundation, Feldheim, 2008. Reading this article will give one a true understanding of how great a Torah scholar RSRH was. Moreover, the following is from page 102 of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, Architect of Torah Judaism for the Modern World by Rabbi Eliyahu Meir Klugman. We also have the assessment of the K?sav Sofer, Rabbi Avrohom Shmuel Binyamin Sofer, Rabbi of Pressburg and leader of Hungarian Jewry. The K'sav Sofer first met Rabbi Hirsch in Vienna, not long after the latter assumed his post in Nikolsburg. On the first Shabbos after his return to Pressburg, a large crowd came to his home for Shalosh Seudos in order to hear his observations about the new Chief Rabbi. Their curiosity was understandable, since, as followers of the Chasam Sofer, the K'sav Sofer's father, they harbored deep suspicions of anyone versed in secular studies, which they considered a potent danger to the Jewish people. The K?sav Sofer described his meeting with Rabbi Hirsch in the following terms: ?We spoke at length on Torah subjects with the new ?Rosh Medinah? and whatever topic we discussed, his reply showed that he had Shas and poskim on his fingertips. We, the rabbonim of Hungary, have to consider ourselves very fortunate that he holds us to be his superiors as scholars, for if he were only aware of the extent of his own scholarship, we would have no rest from him.? Finally, a talmud muvhak of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, ZT"L, told me that Rav Hunter once told him that anything that Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch wrote is Kodesh Kedoshim. Based on this It should be clear to all that what RSRH wrote about one going to see the wonders of nature is to be taken very seriously. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 7 06:02:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 13:02:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? Message-ID: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, how else might the desired result be accomplished? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 7 07:48:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 10:48:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: [VBM] Chassidic Service of God (continued) Message-ID: <20180607144830.GA19716@aishdas.org> This is where our compartmentalization into camps holds us back. The Piaseczner Rebbe (the "Aish Qodesh", R' Kalonymous Kalman Shapiro zt"l Hy"d) is largely reinventing Mussar. Admittedly his goals are different; the elements of the ideal Jew that are emphasized in Chassidus and Mussar differ. But he procedes to build and advocate from scratch a toolset for somthing that another tenu'ah invested the lion's share of their effort on -- self-awareness. To quote RYGB's loose translation of REEDessler (MmE vol 5 pp 35-39), cut-n-pasted from : In our times: The qualities of "Emet" that personified the Ba'alei Mussar [Mussar Masters] are already extinct. We no longer find individuals whose hearts are full with profound truth, with a strong and true sense of Cheshbon HaNefesh [complete and rigorous reckoning of one's spiritual status and progress]... Contemporary Chassidus lacks the component that was once at its core: Avodas Hashem with dveykus... For today's era, there remain only one alternative: To take up everything and anything that can be of aid to Yahadus; the wisdom of both Mussar and Chassidus together. Perhaps together they can inspire us to great understandings and illuminations. Perhaps together they might open within us reverence and appreciation of our holy Torah. Perhaps the arousal of Mussar can bring us to a little Chassidic hislahavus. And perhaps the hislahavus will somewhat fortify one for a Cheshbon HaNefesh. Perhaps through all these means together we may merit to ascend in spirituality and strengthen our position as Bnei Torah [adherents of a Torah centered lifestyle] with an intensified Judaism. May G-d assist us to attain all this! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight, micha at aishdas.org and he wants to sleep well that night too." http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok Fax: (270) 514-1507 Yeshivat Har Etzion PHILOSOPHY > Great Thinkers > The Piaseczner Rebbe > Shiur #24: Chassidic Service of God (continued) Dr. Ron Wacks Ways of Achieving Hitragshut (continued) The Importance of Self-Awareness One of the primary keys for entering the gates of inner service is self-awareness. Remarkably, although a person is generally concerned for his own wellbeing, he is not always aware of what is happening in his own inner world. His psyche is in constant movement, expressing its will and its aspirations, but even though the person may sense something going on, he is not equipped to interpret it and to take the appropriate steps: The hiddenness and imperceptibility of what is happening inside him distances a person greatly from himself. He is unfamiliar with himself and ignorant of what goes on inside him. Even the psyche of the simplest person never ceases its restlessness and writhing, crying out in supplication over its lowliness, and over all the blows and trials and tribulations that he causes it through his foolish actions, speech, and thoughts. The fact that he senses none of this is because he gives no thought to listening to this tempestuous wretch.[1] A person naturally tends to occupy himself with matters external to himself; he is not attentive to his own inner workings. It is easier to engage with the outside world, with its affairs of greater and lesser importance, than it is to listen inwardly. Even when he detects inner movement, he is unable to decode and make sense of it: For that is the way of man: he always strive for that which is extraneous to himself, the affairs of the world, both those that are vital and those that are not. He interests himself in what happens at the end of the world, but he pays no heed to his own psyche, and does not listen and give attention to the business that is within him. Or he may sense it, but since even at the moment that he senses it his desire, his attention, and his thought are turned to the lowly muck of this world, he hears the moaning and its voice only weakly. This may be compared to a person who is asleep and a mosquito bites him on his forehead. If he is a merchant, he dreams that a bag of his merchandise has fallen on his forehead and struck him; if he is a tailor, he dreams that his needle has pricked his forehead, etc. Each individual perceives his inner workings in the guise of his own dreams.[2] The psyche expresses its longings in different forms, but often a person is unable to decode any of these spiritual needs, such as a desire for teshuva and the fear of God. Sometimes, when he feels something oppressive inside him, he goes to the refrigerator and takes out a bottle of sweet drink and some cake, or he tries to distract himself by joking with his friends. Often, a person makes the mistake of thinking that it is his body that is suffering physical hunger, and he believes that he can satiate it by filling his stomach - while in fact it is his psyche that is starved and crying out in distress: Sometimes the psyche of a Jew is animated by regret, teshuva, submission, fear of God, and so on, and the person feels some sort of movement and restlessness within himself, but he has no idea what the problem is. He thinks he may be hungry, or thirsty, or in need of some wine and wafers, or he may think that he has fallen into melancholy, and in order to lift his spirits he chatters playfully with the members of his household, or goes over to a friend to joke and engage in lashon ha-ra, gossip, foolishness, etc.[3] R. Kalonymus's grandfather, author of Maor Va-Shemesh, also addresses the connection between an unhappy psyche and stuffing oneself with food. Attention should be paid to the chain of wrongdoing: Bnei Yisrael complain, convincing themselves of how bad things are for them. This leads them to melancholy, which gives rise to the craving for meat and the punishment that follows: "And when the people complained, it displeased the Lord" - This means that they fell into melancholy... and the Lord's fire burned amongst them, for black bile is detestable and abhorrent, for it is a tinge of idolatry... and for this reason they were punished. And Moshe prayed, and the fire subsided, but it continued through their melancholy, for they felt a lusting and they said, "Who will feed us meat?" For as we explained, the lust for food is drawn from black bile... Therefore, one has to distance oneself far from melancholy, for it brings a person to all sorts of sins. And despondence begins with a growing desire to eat, as we see when a person is mired in black bile, heaven forfend, he eats with lust, ravenously, and very quickly.[4] When a person tries to "quiet" his inner distress with sweets and snacks, not only has his psyche not received what it really wanted, but it is greatly pained by his failure to understand its true needs. Sometimes, after a person continually ignores and steamrolls his inner voice, it simply grows silent: Sometimes, after all of these actions which he has done, he still feels inner discomfort, since with these worthless medicines not only has he not cured the sores of his psyche, nor given it relief from the blows that he has administered to it, but he has in fact added further injury and assault. But sometimes it happens that after these misguided actions he actually feels better, and his spirit is quieted within him, because the blows and injuries and sores that he has added through his actions have rendered his psyche unconscious, or he has piled mounds of dirt and refuse over it to the point that it is completely hidden. Then he will no longer hear even the slightest peep out of it - and he can relax.[5] The psyche also transmits signals of joy, not only distress. A person often misses these signals too, failing to give them expression. For example, when a person fulfills a mitzva or rejoices in his prayer, and his psyche awakens with joy and hitragshut, he will fail to notice this - both because of his general insensitivity to his inner world and because his attention is oriented elsewhere. R. Kalonymus argues that the way to achieve hitragshut and hitlahavut is not by "importing" new feelings from outside of oneself; they are already to be found inside him. However, they must be given more powerful expression and allowed to effect a greater influence on his consciousness: It is not new excitements that you need to seek, nor a heavenly-initiated awakening. First and foremost, the work is required of you yourself, for everything exists within you. You are capable of hitragshut, and you are a person who is able to attain fervor; you simply need to try to get to know yourself and what is going on inside. Your psyche is full of signals, shouts, and supplications, and all you need to do is to provide space within yourself within which it can be revealed and strengthened. Then you will come to know and feel your natural hitragshut, with no need to garb yourself and your needs.[6] R. Kalonymus not only demands self-awareness, but also explains how to attain it. A person has to learn to listen to his own inner world and ask himself questions: Is my psyche happy, and if so, about what? Is my psyche sad, and if so, why? What are the inner feelings that accompany me in this situation, and how did they come about? At first, this work will involve only the major movements of the psyche. It is not advisable to start with weaker movements, since, owing to their delicate nature, their meaning is not always clear. Attention should therefore be paid to the stronger signals, and when one notices them, he should "provide space" and allow them expression. This is facilitated through paying attention to them, strengthening them, and allowing them to reveal themselves through our power of imagination. We will now elaborate on each of these tools individually. (To be continued) Translated by Kaeren Fish _______________________ [1] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 29. [2] Ibid., p. 40. [3] Ibid. [4] R. Kalman Kalonymus Epstein Ha-Levi, Maor Va-Shemesh (Jerusalem, 5748), Parashat Beha'alotekha. [5] Ibid., p. 29. [6] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 30. Copyright ? 1997-2017 by Yeshivat Har Etzion From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 7 21:17:05 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 06:17:05 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <950f4b82-36d2-0f57-abef-73c113119730@zahav.net.il> RSH's third objection to Rav Kalisher is the key one (RSH couldn't imagine that non-religious Jews could be the vehicle for redemption). Once you say that "I can't imagine. . . " than everything else has to fit into that paradigm that you just set up for yourself. The author's conclusions are also strange. To mention all the benefits and great things that have come from the state but to still look at it as if it is a treif piece of meat boggles my mind. I would also add that if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - he should move here. Like I always tell my Reform Jewish friends - If you move here, you get a vote which is 10,000 times (at least) more important than Facebook posts. Ben From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 07:09:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:09:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi Sacks on 'The Great Partnership' Message-ID: <20180608140928.GA11777@aishdas.org> R/L J Sacks on Science and Religion. In short: It's Gould's notion of non-overlapping magesteria -- they can't contradict, the discuss different topics. But RJS says it so well, giving the idea emotional "punch". And sometimes even maaminim need a reminder that the point of religion isn't to fill in the gaps in our scientific knowledge. (I know I do.) Our rishonim offer answers to the question of why an Omnicient and Omnipotent G-d would create a universe that requires His intervention once in a while. His Wisdom inheres more in the things science CAN explain than in the miracles that even in principle can't be studied scientifically. (Pace the Ralbag, whose actual position on nissim is a longer discussion.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LltoUg_WL2k That said, I think this is overstatement, as they do overlap when it comes to discussion of origins. I would instead posit "barely overlapping magesteria" -- they only overlap at the fringes, where no open question can threaten my trust in either. Yahadus explains the "why?" of life to well to question, and many scientific theories do too well at the "how?" I have a question about where they seem to contradict? Nu nu. Scientists believe that quantum gravity has an answer, and don't expect either QM or Relativity to be overturned just because we have a question where their fringes overlap. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 09:19:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 12:19:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? Message-ID: From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) apply only to male Kohanim, or does it also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V?kidashto applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K?Hilchaso 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash. This description applies only to men and not to women. Although the daughters of Kohanim are entitled to eat Teruma and may eat from certain Korbanos that are designated only for Kohanim, they are not eligible to serve in the Beis Hamikdash. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:48:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:48:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? Message-ID: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> I wanted to talk this out here, as this se'if in the AhS appears to use the kind of reasoning that is exactly what I argued for decades with C rabbis (and more recently with one or two of the more innovative OO rabbis) isn't how halakhah should be done. AhS CM 89:2 discusses the reason for a taqanah that if a sakhir and the BhB disagree about whether the sakhir had been paid, the sakhir can make a shevu'ah binqitas cheifetz, and the employer would have to pay. Normally, f two sides make conflicting unsupported claims, the rule would be that the defendent (the nitba) would make a shevu'as heises (which is a less demanding shevu'ah than the shevu'ah BNC) and not pay. A taqanah beyond the usual hamotzi meichaveiro alav hara'ayah to disuade liars. The stated reason for treating the sakhir as a special case is that many times the employer has many workers, and it's more likely he wouldn't remember the details of who he paid what than the employee not remembering the details of getting paid. However, the AhS continues, this doesn't explain why chazal worried more about employers than salespeople. Someone who has a lot of customers is prone to the same parallel likelihood of confusion. So, he explains that the iqar haataqanah is because employees have a lot riding on getting paid, "nosei es nafsho lehachayos nafesho venefesh benei beiso, chasu chaza"l alav..." And therefore even if it's a boss who has only one employee, and he isn't overhwlmed keeping track of vay, lo chilqu chakhamim. Doesn't this sound bad? Chazal really had some social end in mind, so they invented some pro forma excuse to justify their conclusion. I guess that in dinei mamunus, Chazal can do whatever they want -- hefqer BD hefqer -- and therefore on /that/ ground they can force payment of a worker for the sake of social justice. But that's not what the AhS invokes. Thoughts? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 12:15:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:15:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din but a takanah. By definition, takanos are ends-driven; they're made not because this is what we believe Hashem ordered, nor to avoid some issur, but in order to achieve some desirable goal. The same applies to the usual shvuas hesses that Chazal instituted; it's to achieve the two desirable goals of creating a disincentive for defendants to lie, and of assuring the plaintiff that the courts are not biased against him. So I see no problem with Chazal making a special takana for the benefit of employees, since the Torah itself gives their needs priority, and gives the reason that employees often risk their lives for their livelihood. And just as the Torah does not distinguish between those employees who actually do risk their lives and those who sit on comfortable chairs in air-conditions offices and risk nothing more serious than a paper-cut or RSI, Chazal saw no need to distinguish between a lone employee and one among many. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 12:53:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:53:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:35PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din : but a takanah... Not just a taqanah, a taqanah that needs an justification for why they're not following the din deOraisa. And so simply saying "it's a taqanah" doesn't really satisfy me. DeOraisa, the employer would have the right to not pay the money. The usual taqanah for conflicting claims would require he make a shevu'as heises first. Here, we're putting the power to extract the employer's money despite the deOraisa. Had the taqanah not violated the deOraisa, but went "beyond" it, I wouldn't have asked. And as I said, had the AhS invokved hefqer BD hefqer, we would need no excuse for how Chazal can move money despite the deOraisa. But he doesn't. Instead, he says they came up with a justication that isn't real. That opens a whole pandora's box of ascribing hidden "social justice" reasons for legislation that has an explicit explanation already given. And it makes it sound like legal mechanism can indeed be nothing more than a hopp to jump through, rather than justification in-and-of itself. So my question isn't "how did they make this taqanah", but "how can you claim that they wanted to ignore a deOraisa because they thought they had a 'more moral' alternative, and then just found some way to legally justify it?" :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the micha at aishdas.org second time and as if you had acted the first http://www.aishdas.org time as wrongly as you are about to act now! Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 12:15:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 15:15:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:52 PM 6/8/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's >OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: >: A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto >: applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso >: 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he >: offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... > >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to be "honored" like all other Kohanim? I recall that there was a Kohein when I lived in Elizabeth who had a deformed hand. However, I think that he still got the first aliya. However, I do not think that he duchened. He left the shul right before duchening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:52:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:52:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: : A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto : applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso : 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he : offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 13:21:23 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:21:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:09PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to : >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. : : If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability : that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to : be "honored" like all other Kohanim? ... I think aliyah laTorah is different than duchaning because it's not about the kohein as a kohein, but mishum tiqun olam. So, we divy out the kavod according to strict rules, so that society runs smoother. Not based on qedushah. Maybe it's even kavod vs qedushah. Tangents: BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not a kofer. There is also a separate discussion is someone who is wheelchair bound can get an aliyah at all, or if the chiyuv for an oleh to stand is me'aqiev. From the pasuq "amod imadi". The accepted pesaq really only permits calling someone who can't stand if their reason for not being able to stand is obvious or known to the tzibbur. IOW, oneis Rachamanah patrei for his non-standing, but the kavod haTorah is an issue if it looks bad to the tzibbur. I didn't spend the same time researching this tangent, as you can tell by the lack of a single source. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe micha at aishdas.org you can be certain of improving, http://www.aishdas.org and that's your own self. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aldous Huxley From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:41:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9e545852-4e47-2e1a-0f1b-f6fe418d3daa@sero.name> I don't think it's accurate to say that mid'oraisa he doesn't have to pay. If he really does owe the money then mid'oraisa he has to pay, and has an *additional* obligation to pay this debt over all other debts, because of "lo solin". The only question is whether he really owes the money or not. Normally, the way the Torah left things, we can't be sure he owes it, so we can't *force* him to pay; we have to leave it up to his own conscience. But his obligation (or lack thereof) is unchanged. Now Chazal come along and meddle with that setup, for social reasons. In order to discourage defendants from falsely denying their liability, and in order to give plaintiffs a sense that justice has been done, they instituted the sh'vuas hesses. If you don't swear we'll make you pay, despite the Torah saying we can't. According to you, how could they do that? Here Chazal went a bit further: We can't make the defendant swear, because he may honestly have forgotten or got confused, so we tell the plaintiff that if he's willing to swear, not just hesses but binkitas chefetz, then we'll believe him, and once we do believe him the *Torah* says the defendant must pay. Comes the Aruch Hashulchan and asks, what about the exceptional case where the defendant is not confused and unlikely to have forgotten? And what about other defendants who may be confused or have forgotten? And he answers "lo plug" because there's a deeper reason for the takana here. It's not just that we're worried about the defendant inadvertently making a false oath; if he's really worried about that let him pay up, but if he's not worried we won't be. The deeper reason why we've given the plaintiff a slight edge here is that we're emulating the Torah itself, which made the "takana" of "lo solin" for the explicit reason that employees *in general* risk their lives and so deserve extra protection. And just as it did not distinguish between employees, so we won't either. I have a bigger question, though: This takana seems to be biased *against* the employee whose employer is a yerei shamayim. Without the takana the employer would decline to swear because he can't be sure he's right, and he'd have to pay. Now we say no, you don't have to pay until we test the employee, more rigorously than we were going to test you. So mah ho'ilu chachamim betakanasam? It seems as if our real concern here is not for the employee's welfare but to protect honest employers from employee fraud! That's surely a worthy goal, but opposite to the one the AhS posits. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 9 20:19:14 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2018 23:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Korach "There's Good Even In The Worst Of Us" Message-ID: The rabbis saw a hint that while the Korah rebellion ended so tragically, it had the seeds of redemption. In the Shabbos Maariv we recite Psalm 92: Tzaddik katamar yifrach, the righteous will blossom like the palm tree (v. 13). The last letters of those 3 Hebrew words (kuf, reish, chet) spell Korah. Although blinded by anger and envy, Korah's egalitarian vision will indeed be established. Then the "righteous will blossom like the palm tree, and grow mighty like a cedar in Lebanon, planted in the house of the Lord." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:47:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <36fd05b2-e021-0e98-cdcc-6e84353eb84b@sero.name> On 08/06/18 16:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. > Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the > first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not > a kofer. This is not just RMF, it's the plain halacha. A kohen who eats treif and breaks shabbos can even duchen, let alone get the first aliyah. Even if he's living with a nochris he can still duchen. But the moment she converts and marries him he can no longer duchen. And if he can't duchen then of course he can't get the first aliya either. (The baal mum is different. The only reason he can't duchen is because the deformity is in his hand; if it were anywhere else he could duchen. And even so he still has a *chiyuv* to duchen, which is why he has to leave before retzei in order to avoid it. A cohen married to a grusha doesn't have to leave, since he is a temporary chalal and thus has no chiyuv.) It seems to me that "vekidashto" *does* apply to the wives of cohanim, because for purposes of kavod the general rule is ishto kegufo, and a wife who marries up gets her husband's social status. As for his unmarried daughters, it seems to me that they too are included in their father's status for this purpose, since they are called by his name. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 11 08:07:53 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:07:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. There are two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Should the Kohanim be asked to leave the shul during Kriyas HaTorah, so that both Yisroelim will receive aliyos? A. The Mishnah Berurah (135:9) writes that a Kohen may not give up his aliyah because we are obligated to honor a Kohen. This is the case not only on Shabbos or Yom Tov when the Shuls are crowded and it will be noticeable, but even on a Monday or Thursday when it is less obvious. However, many poskim, including Igros Moshe (OC 3:20), write that if there is a pressing need on a Monday or Thursday, a Kohen may be mochel (forgo) his kovod and give up his right to the first aliyah. In such a situation, the Kohen exits the Shul before the Torah reading so as not to cast any doubts on his lineage. In contrast, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt?l held that it is not proper for a Kohen to relinquish his aliyah. Aside from the issue of the Kohen being mochel (forgoing) the honor of receiving the first aliyah, there will also be a deficiency in the Kriyas HaTorah itself. The Gemara (Megilla 21b) states that the three aliyos on Monday and Thursday and on Shabbos Mincha were instituted to correspond to the three categories of Jews: Kohanim, Levi?im and Yisroelim. If a Kohen is not called up for an aliyah, the Kriyas HaTorah is lacking this kiyum (fulfillment) of reflecting the three categories of Jews. Therefore, one should not ask a Kohen to forgo his aliyah, since this would diminish the fulfillment of the mitzvah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Jun 11 19:53:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:23:36 +0930 Subject: [Avodah] Kashrus - Wooden Sticks and Feathers Message-ID: If a wooden stick is used to stir a hot pot of non-K meat, it becomes non-K. It will in turn, render a pot of hot Kosher food non-K, if it is used, whilst fresh, to stir that pot. But, wood is not a food. May one eat the shavings of that wooden stick? Probably yes. Hog hair is not a food and it cannot be deemed to be non-K. Therefore one may sprinkle hog hair on ones food, or cook it in ones soup. Does it get worse if the hog hair is first cooked in a pot of non-K meat? Probably yes. This is an issue faced today by Kashrus agencies regarding food ingredients/additives that are extracted from non-foods, like bird feathers. In order to facilitate plucking, the dead, non-Shechted birds have been plunged into a tank of boiling water. Thus the feathers have absorbed the non-K taste of the birds. Although the feathers are dissolved in acids in order to extract what will be used as food additives, this consideration is not accepted regarding gelatine since gelatine is a 'food' at the conclusion of its processing, and it is similarly not accepted by the Kashrus agencies for feathers. Some suggest that there is a difference between the two. Gelatine is worse because it is extracted from the non-K item itself i.e. the skin and bones, whereas the non-K absorbed in the feathers, is not the source of the extracted food/additive which are derived exclusively from the feathers that are a non-food. Therefore, even though skin and bones do become inedible during their processing, this is just a temporary state, generated by acids and alkali, which are removed from the finished product and the finished product is essentially still the same skin and bones. Whereas the product extracted from feathers is entirely disassociated with the absorbed non-K flavour and is therefore K. Nevertheless, a well known Rav argues that in any case where the chemical is removed, the product returns to its non-K status, even in the case of feathers. It will permitted only if the chemical remains but is camouflaged by other additives. Therefore, feathers and what is derived from them remain prohibited because whatever chemicals are used to process and extract the foods/additives, are removed. Is it possible that the foods/additives extracted from the feathers are permitted because all, or almost all of the absorbed non-K flavour is removed - in other words, just as we can Kasher our wooden stick, so too we can deem the feathers to have been Kashered? Now if we were to actually Kasher the feathers or the wooden stick, we require 60 times the volume of the stick. For example, a 500g stick requires 30 litres [500gX60=30,000g] and 3 tonnes of feathers would require [3,000litresX60=500,000 litres] which we obviously dont have in the normal processing. Now the only reason we cannot Kasher in less than 60 is ChaNaN [ChaTiCha NaAsis Neveilah] This means, Kashering is not a process of dilution of the prohibited component that is absorbed until it is less that 1:60, in which case we could immerse the non-K spoon or feathers in 100 small pots of boiling water and each dip would further dilute the concentration of the absorbed Issur Kasheing is rather a process that MUST revoke the prohibited status. If it is not revoked - i.e. it is immersed in a pot that does not have more than 60, then EVERYTHING becomes non-K and the spoon is just as non-K as it was before it was immersed. In other words ChaNaN applies to Kelim. And yet the Kosher agencies permit the additives extracted from non-K feathers because the feathers are not food but a Keli, and are therefore not limited by ChaNaN. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Jun 11 11:09:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:09:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:19 PM 6/11/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would also add that >if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >he should move here. Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who come here collecting for all sorts of things? What would they do if there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious community of Jews in the US? Indeed, how many religious Jews living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things. Is this not a huge mitzva? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 11 20:48:41 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 05:48:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <4a055873-1dcb-8b0f-2b31-69cec4cbdb81@zahav.net.il> 1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. 2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - what does that mean? Ben On 6/11/2018 8:09 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the > frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who > come here collecting for all sorts of things?? What would they do if > there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious > community of Jews in the US?? (1) Indeed, how many religious Jews > living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things.? Is > this not a huge mitzva? (2) > > YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 12 05:36:49 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah Message-ID: Please see the article at Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah by Dr. Leo Levi This article appeared in the December 1988 issue of the Jewish Observer which is available at https://goo.gl/9JUkt4 YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 11:25:42 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:25:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? In-Reply-To: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <10180612182542.GA32068@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 01:27:43PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a : Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) : but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose... However, when fundraising, pidyon shevuyim comes first, even after the funds were raised and the building materials bought for the not-yet-existent shul. SA YD 252:1. And the Tur says this is the only mitzvah we may sell those building supplies for. : 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities : and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent : in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? Is this distinction more than semantic? You are asking whether the "other priorities" are outside the label "tzedaqah" and therefore "other halakhot", or within the label, and therefore tzedaqah's priorities would be "multivariate". But the word "tzedaqah" has multiple usages. For example, in the sense we have been using it, we've been including pidyon shevuyim and binyan bhk"n. But it could be used to refer to supplying the poor with their needs exclusively. Or to mean their needs and dei machsero. Etc... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. micha at aishdas.org I awoke and found that life was duty. http://www.aishdas.org I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:31:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 10:42:20AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like : Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem : spoke to both? ... : If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would : seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply : they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. Like "shamor vezakhor bedibur echad"? There is no proof they all heard the same thing, never mind in the same way. But that's not where I wanted to go. If we take the Rambam's approach to the uniqueness of Moshe's nevu'ah, then the difference isn't in the "Dibbur" (which didn't actually involve heard words, leshitaso). It's in the shomeia'. Moshe's seikhel was able to accept the nevu'ah unmediated. Others, the same message could only be received via koach hadimyon so that it reaches the navi's conscious mind cloaked in visions and metaphoric sensations. So, if Hashem did make one dibbur to both, Moshe would still receive it Peh-el-peh and Aharon would experience the revelation as a prophetic vision. OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then we are left with two possibilities: - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, and passing Torah down the generations, etc... - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording the kelal, there could be others. There are other potential exceptions, most enigmatically Bil'am (Yalqut Shim'oni 966) on the very pasuq that describes Moshe's nevu'ah as being "Panim al panim" -- "velo qam navi od beYisrael keMoshe", but among the other nations, there was Bil'am. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that micha at aishdas.org a person can change their future http://www.aishdas.org by merely changing their attitude. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:39:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:39:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? In-Reply-To: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180612203937.GB20060@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 01:02:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 : minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority : of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to : reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish : the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, : how else might the desired result be accomplished? Through unofficial norms. It wasn't all that long ago (at most a couple of decades) when speed was left to the chazan watching the rav (or the chazan himself, if the rav is at another minyan), and the norms of the minyan set the chazan's pace without a watch and often without conscious thought. But then, even in those days people were coming late. I think you're dealing with a misdiagnosis. To my mind, the only real way to get people to come on time and to stay for davening and not spend the time learning with breaks for prayer is to offer programming that helps people relate to davening. If you don't cure the problem of boredum, people will come late regardless of the scheduling system, and find excuses to step out, whether physically or mentally. I would suggest the minyan in question explore in that direction, rather than worry about how Yishtabach time is determined. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. micha at aishdas.org - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 12 14:24:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 17:24:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> References: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <233e14ea-9b86-d3dc-f8fc-2d8bb4c8c50c@sero.name> On 12/06/18 16:31, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part > of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah > itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, > and passing Torah down the generations, etc... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording > the kelal, there could be others. Other possibilities: * Moshe told Yehoshua what he should write the next day. * The Rambam says that after a navi's vision a mal'ach explains it to him. I see no reason why the mal'ach in Yehoshua's vision could not have told him exactly what he should write. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Wed Jun 13 06:07:13 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:07:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW SHOULD COME FROM THE LETTER Message-ID: <9D3675F5-16E2-4542-A632-D76A033B1BCE@cox.net> There?s the story of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi who, when studying Torah, heard the crying of his infant grandson. The elder rebbe rose from his studying and soothed the baby to sleep. Meanwhile, his son, the boy?s father, was too involved in his study to hear the baby cry. When R. Zalman noticed his son?s lack of involvement, he proclaimed: ?If someone is studying Torah and fails to hear the cry of a baby, there is something very wrong with his learning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 13 12:29:17 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 21:29:17 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Perhaps there are several aspects of nevuah. One is the hearing, which Moshe did better. Another is the experience itself.? Here, it doesn't matter if Moshe's experience was "better" than Aaron's and in fact the word better doesn't apply. Aaron experienced this totality called nevuah and he did it his way. After doing that, he isn't the same person, or the same cohen. The same would apply to the hundreds of thousands of people who experienced nevuah but didn't have anything recorded. They became different people, and their avodat Hashem was completely upgraded as a result of the experience. Ben On 6/3/2018 9:42 AM, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was > the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 13 12:51:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:51:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah Message-ID: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> >From your friendly neighborhood clipping service. Taken from , with transliteration added for Avodah digest purposes. R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" of "Torah lishmah" means. I intend to reply, once I have time to collect a mar'eh maqom or two. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Tvunah in English Beit Midrash for Birurei Halachah Binyan Zion Under the Leadership of Maran HaRav Asher Weiss Shlita Learning Torah L'Shma Introductory Note Our Sages[1] have greatly commended one who learns Torah Lishmo -- literally, for its own sake.[2] Many times in the Talmud [Pesachim 50b, Nazir 23b, Horiyos 10b, Sotah 22b, Sotah 47a, Sanhedrin 105b, Erchin 16b] they have stated that one should always learn Torah, even if it not Lishmo, for through this one will eventually reach Lishmo. The goal, though, is total Lishmo. Two questions have to be dealt with: Firstly, is there anything negative or positive if one enjoys one's learning? Secondly, what precisely is Torah Lishmoh? Position One -- Enjoyment Is Not Ideal The Agrah D'Kallah[3] states that the disciples of the Ba'al Shem Tov asked their master if there is a problem if one enjoys learning Torah. He answered that since this is the very nature of Torah, as is written in Tehillim[4], "the statutes of Hashem are straight, [they] gladden the heart," Hashem will not act unfairly towards a person[5] and punish him for having had such enjoyment. This statement seems clear that the ultimate aim would be not to derive any enjoyment from one's learning. A similar sentiment seems to have been echoed by Rav Chaim Volozhiner. He seems to writes[6] that one who enjoys his learning does not commit a sin.[7] On the other hand, the Eglei Tal[8] writes that he has heard some people make a grave mistake, thinking that the ideal is for one to learn without enjoyment. He argues vehemently that one must love and enjoy one's learning. The one whom the Eglei Tal was arguing with was the Yismach Yisrael. He writes[9] that the true learning of Torah is only when one learns with no intention of any enjoyment at all. My feeling is that there is room for both the position of the Eglei Tal and that of the Yismach Yisrael to be correct. On one hand, Hashem wants us to enjoy His Torah, and, as we shall discuss in length soon, it is the proper way for one to study Torah. However, there are many instances where one does not enjoy learning, either because one has had a bad day, or because it is a piece of material which really does not grab his interest. In such a case, one needs to recall the words of the Yismach Yisroel that one needs to study Torah even if one does not have any enjoyment. Position Two -- Enjoyment Is Ideal In my opinion, it seems clear from many Rishonim that enjoyment and pleasure in one's learning is an integral part of the process of Torah study. Firstly, the Mishnah in Avos[10] states that when one studies Torah one needs to know in front of Whom one toils. Rabbeinu Yonah[11] explains that just as the Torah was the plaything of Hashem[12], so to speak, before the creation of the world, so too one's Torah should be one's own plaything. This seems to state clearly that deriving pleasure for Torah study is an ideal. Secondly, the general rule regarding commandments is that they were not given for pleasure[13], and therefore the pleasure of having fulfilled a commandment is not Halachikally considered pleasure. For example, if one took a vow not to derive pleasure from one's fellow, one's fellow may still blow the Shofar on his behalf, since the mere fact that one's fellow is enabling the fulfilment of one's commandment is not considered pleasure.[14] However, regarding the commandment of Torah study, Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar writes[15] that the essence of the commandment is to enjoy one's learning. Therefore, says Rabbeinu Avraham, if one forbade one's fellow from using one's Torah scroll, one's fellow may not use it. Again, this is a clear statement that enjoying one's learning is ideal. [A note of explanation is in order. It is difficult to understand how Rabbeinu Avraham can state that enjoyment is the essence of learning Torah. It is understandable how it is an integral part -- but to be the essence? I think his intent is as follows. The Shulchan Oruch HaRav[16] argues that there are two separate commandments of learning Torah. One is to study the Torah, and the other is to know the Torah. In my opinion this particular formulation is difficult, since we do not find that the Rishonim count the commandment of Torah study as two separate commandments.[17] Rather, it seems that these two categories make up the commandment. The commandment is to learn, while the essence and purpose of this learning is in order to know the Torah. The proof to this understanding of the commandment is that the commandment of Torah study is the verse veshinantam levanekha -- "And you shall teach your children,"[18] and our Sages explain[19] that the word veshinantam is to be expounded from the root shinen -- sharp. The words of Torah should be totally clear to oneself, to the extent that if one is asked about a given Torah matter one should be able to answer immediately, without babbling. This teaches us that the essence of the study is to achieve clear knowledge. Since the clarity of Torah knowledge is the essence of the commandment of Torah study, and this clarity of knowledge brings one great pleasure, Rabbeinu Avraham writes that the essence of the commandment of Torah study is to have pleasure from it.] A third proof: If deriving pleasure from the study of Torah is not the ideal state, how could it be that our Sages instituted the words, "veha'arev na es divrei Sorasekha befinu" in the morning blessing on the Torah? However, it could be that this is not a proof. The Avudraham[20] cites two verses to explain the word ????? in this context. The first is from Malachi[21] -- Ve'orvah Lashem minchas Yehudah viYrushalayim kiymei olam ukhshanim qadmonios -- "And the flour-offering of Yehudah and Yerushalayim will be pleasing to Hashem as the days of old and the years past." However, his second verse is from Tehillim[22] -- arov avdekha letov, which the Ibn Ezra[23] explains is the same root as an areiv -- a guarantor -- "Guarantee Your servant for good". Accordingly, the blessing is to be understood as a request from Hashem that He should act as a guarantor that our children should know the Torah, and does not refer to a request for having pleasure from the Torah. On the other hand, Rashi[24] explains that this blessing is a request that the study of Torah be with the tremendous pleasure of loving, feeling loved by, and being close to, Hashem. His interpretation is also cited by the Avudraham.[25] According to this interpretation, there is strong proof that pleasure is an ideal part of the study of Torah. Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind on this thought. 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must learn Torah in order to fulfil it. Support for these Positions All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the Rishonim. 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov. 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Uniting the Opinions However, in my opinion, it seems that these are really three sides to one coin. Before I demonstrate this, I would like to show some indications in this direction: 1. Although Rashi in Brachos[38] writes that Lishmo means in order to find out what to do, however in his commentary to Ta'anis he writes[39] that Lishmo means to fulfil Hashems will. 2. Although the Ba'al Shem Tov seems to be of the opinion that Lishmo means in order to fulfil the will of Hashem, however two of his main disciples[40] write that one must learn in order to act. Therefore it seems to me that all these three interpretations are really three parts of one whole. The first step is that one has to learn in order to fulfil the will of Hashem. However, what is His will? It is that one should learn and know clearly His Torah. What is the purpose of us knowing his Torah? In order that one should know what to do. In light of this, it would seem that we can understand that which we quoted from Rav Chaim Volozhiner in the beginning of the Shiur[41], even though at face value his statement that "there is no sin," seems to contradict that which we quoted later in the Shiur from him.[42] According to my understanding of Lishmo it is not a contradiction. The earlier quote is directed at one for whom part of his motivation to learn is because of his enjoyment. The motivation, ideally, should be purely because Hashem said so. But one should most definitely enjoy one's learning when one is learning. [1] For example, Mishnah Avos 6:1 and Sanhedrin 99b [2] We shall later discuss another manner to translate this word. [3] Agrah D'Kallah Parshas Chayei Sarah d"h BeMidrash BeParsha Zu Kad Damich Rebbe Avahu [4] Tehillim 19:9 [5] Avodah Zarah 3a [6] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [7] We shall return to this statement in the end of the Shiur [8] Hakdamah to Eglei Tal [9] Yismach Yisrael Parshas Bechukosai [10] Mishnah Avos 2:14 [11] Rabbeinu Yonah ibid d"h VeDah Lifnei Mi [12] Mishlei 8:30 [13] Rosh HaShannah 28a [14] Ibid, as explained by Rashi d"h Mutar Litkoah Lo [15] Peirush Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar Nedarim 48a d"h Sefarim [16] [Blank on web. -mb] [17] See, for instance, Rambam Sefer HaMitzvos Mitzvah 11 [18] Devarim 6:7 [19] Kiddushin 30a [20] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [21] Malachi 3:4 [22] Tehillim 119:122 [23] Ibn Ezra ibid [24] Rashi Brachos 11b d"h Ha'arev [25] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [26] Degel Machane Efraim Parshas Vayishlach d"h Ba Na El Shifchasi [27] Yosher Divrei Emes Os 7 [disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch, who was a major disciple of the Ba'al Shem Tov]; Ma'or VeShemesh Parshas Vayetzei d"h Vayomer Eilav Lavan [disciple of the Noam Elimelech, who was a major disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch] [28] Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 2 and 3 [29] Chiddushei Chasam Sofer Nedarim 81a d"h Shelo Borchu [30] Reishis Chochmah, Hakdamah [31] Shnei Luchos HaBris, Chelek 1, Ba'asarah Ma'amaros, Ma'amar 6, Os 187 [32] Yerushalmi Brachos 1:2 [33] Peirush HaRosh Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen [34] Mefaresh (Rashi) Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen. [There is doubt whether the commentary printed as Rashi on Nedarim is actually from Rashi, hence this commentary is commonly referred to as "the Mefaresh (commentator)"] [35] Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah 10:5 [36] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [37] Tosfos Pesachim 50b d"h Vekan [38] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [39] Rashi Ta'anis 7a d"h Lishmo [40] Likutei Amarim of the Maggid of Mezeritch (otherwise known as Maggid Devarav LeYa'akov) Siman??, Sod Yachin U'Boaz Perek 2 [41] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [42] [Ed. Note] According to the later quote, as is clear from the end of Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 4, learning for the love of the pure understanding of Torah is Lishmoh. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 04:22:44 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:22:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How to pour nesachim, major differences between the first and the second beis hamikdash Message-ID: Yesterdays daf (Zevachim 61b) says that the mizbeach in the first beis hamikdash was 28x28 amos and in the second beis hamikdash was 32x32 amos. Rabin explains the difference as follows: In the first Mikdash, Nesachim would flow into Shisim (a pit south-west of the Mizbe'ach) down the wall of the mizbeach. In the second Beis Hamikdash they enlarged the Mizbe'ach in order that the Shisim would be within (under) the Mizbe'ach and they made the corners of teh mizbeach hollow so that they could pour nesachim in the mizbeach. At first (during the first Beis Hmikdash), they learned from the words "Mizbe'ach Adamah" that the mizbeach has to be completely solid. In the second beis Hamikdash they thought that drinking ('consumption' of libations) should be like eating (Korbanos that are burned, i.e. within the boundaries of the Mizbe'ach) and therefore made the holes to pour the Nesachim as part of the mizbeach. Therefore, they understood that Mizbe'ach Adamah" teaches that the Mizbe'ach cannot be built over domes or tunnels (that are not needed for the Mizbe'ach). According to the Rambam in Hilchos Mamrim, this is perfectly standard practice. Any Beis Din can come and darshen the pesukim differently then a previous beis din. However, according to others this is not so simple. For those who hold that there is one halachic truth, this would seem to be very difficult, in either the first or second beis hamikdash they did the avoda of the nesachim wrong. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 05:50:21 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:50:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40a627c0-37a1-a74d-6f72-165b6d6d9469@gmail.com> On 6/14/2018 8:17 AM, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org wrote: > Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 From: Micha Berger > ...who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah? If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah ... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. ... Another possibility: Hashem dictated the last pesukim about Moshe's death to Moshe beforehand, even before Moshe ascended the mountain, and Moshe dictated them to Yehoshua, who did not write them down until after Moshe's death. Thus, all the Torah, to the last letter, was revealed to Moshe, but it was Yehoshua who put the last pesukim in writing. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Jun 14 06:47:54 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: At 08:17 AM 6/14/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you >regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. >2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That >isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >what does that mean? I am going to give you an answer that I know you will not like and will dismiss out of hand, but IMO, it is the truth. Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to Eretz Yisroel. After all, I said, Orthodox Jews are interested in doing mitzvahs, and one can certainly do more mitzvahs in Israel. He responded by pointing out that the additional mitzvahs that one can do in Israel are only of rabbinical origin at this time. Furthermore, he went on, one has to keep in mind the following. The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the right spiritual level before you go." While reciting the Shema twice a day we say, ?Beware lest your heart be seduced and you turn astray And you will swiftly be banished from the goodly land which G-d gives you.? Thus it is clear to me that one must be on the appropriate spiritual level to live in Eretz Yisroel. Encouraging those who are not on this level to settle in Eretz Yisroel was and is perhaps a mistake. This is a radical statement, and many will react strongly to it. However, is it possible that part of the reason for what is going on in Israel today is a result of the fact that the vast majority of Jews living in Israel are not properly observant, and the statement quoted in Shema is being, G-d forbid, fulfilled? I am not the one to judge anyone else, but each person should look in the mirror and ask themselves if they are sure that they are spiritually elevated enough to live in Eretz Yisroel. As Reb Dovid said, "You just don't go to Israel." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:19:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:19:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? Message-ID: We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping that stringency. Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? KT Joel Rich From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:18:14 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:18:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? Message-ID: The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases (each iteration away from the primary source can cloud fine points, or Godel's incompleteness theorem at play?). I also see much more of the implicit sociological assumptions made over time (and wonder how we define the community [e.g., town, city, continent...] and time [every decade, exile...] that we measure). Two examples: 1) S"A O"C 153:12 (MB:76) discusses an individual who had a stipulation with a community to build a Beit Knesset (synagogue), it stays with him and his family but it's not transferable. Why not? "Mistavra" (it's logical) that that's what the community had in mind unless specifically stipulated differently at origination (me -- who measured? How?) 2) S"A O"C 153:18 (MB:95) concerning a private object (e.g., Menorah) used by the synagogue. Originally, the assumption was they became kodesh once used, however, "now" it's assumed that they remain totally private (as if this were the original stipulation). So how, when, and where did this change? Were the first people who acted this way sinners, but enough sinners makes it OK? KT Joel Rich From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:35:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:35:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17593052-ba12-6371-5050-960187b566d0@zahav.net.il> Yes we have heard this answer before, several times. Putting aside its multiple problems, it is basically rejecting the paper you linked, given that the paper's author supports the state albeit with several large reservations. You can't say that the aliya of the vast majority of people to Israel is a mistake and support the state at the same time. Ben On 6/14/2018 3:47 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if > one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the > exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D > forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong > deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be > on the right spiritual level before you go. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:36:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:36:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. ?Ben On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > > Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? > From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 14 15:07:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:07:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, micha at aishdas.org but it's smarter to be nice. http://www.aishdas.org - R' Lazer Brody Fax: (270) 514-1507 From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 14:18:33 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 21:18:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: , <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. > Ben ?1?/??? Which raises a question I?ve been thinking about lately. When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From zev at sero.name Thu Jun 14 15:39:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:39:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <76b76294-55ee-c10b-66b4-858544078685@sero.name> On 14/06/18 18:07, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the > : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to > : Eretz Yisroel... > > : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one > : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact > : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, > : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed > : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the > : right spiritual level before you go." > > This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It's much earlier than that. It's a Tosfos (Rabbenu Chaim, quoted in Tosfos, Kesubos 110b, sv Hu Omer). -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 22:37:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 07:37:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> Message-ID: <1d515cf4-41e6-53ed-9246-feaee76b81cd@zahav.net.il> I'd guess the latter - the Gemara is telling us you have to decide for yourself and that while the Gemara will give values and weight, it? leaves the final choice up to you. On 6/14/2018 11:18 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 15 01:27:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 04:27:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 06:07 PM 6/14/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the >: Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to >: Eretz Yisroel... > >: The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one >: does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact >: same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, >: in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed >: here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the >: right spiritual level before you go." > >This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. If so, then why are there Satmar Chassodim living in Israel? Are they all on a high spiritual level? And could it be that the Satmar Rebbe left Israel, for this reason? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmeisner at mail.gmail.com Fri Jun 15 05:27:58 2018 From: jmeisner at mail.gmail.com (Joshua Meisner) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 08:27:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > Question -- is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? On Jun 14, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Ben Waxman wrote: > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a > bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. The implication of this sugya is that given that one has made a neder, it is better not to keep it than to keep it. Clearly, it is not suggesting that one violate the neder but rather that one be matir it before a chacham. The meforshim provide different reasons why this is the case -- e.g., because the neder was made out of anger that would hopefully subside or because the neder is characteristic of ga'avah -- but a chumra taken on because a person perceives a need for a s'yag or similar reasons (or, for that matter, a neder bish'as tzarah) may not be what the gemara is referring to. Going back to RJR's question, to provide a few data points, while on the one hand offering a korban without making a neder is assur, one tanna used to be makdish his korban only after he brought it to the mikdash to avoid the possibility of stumbling. Not sure if these cases can be translated into nidrei issur. Josh From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 15 12:02:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 15:02:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Referring to "the holy month of Ramadan" In-Reply-To: References: <163fc9b81f2-c8f-124c4@webjas-vaa038.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180615190235.GA17319@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:18am EDT, Prof. Levine wrote on Areivim: : What about referring to the "holy month of Ramadan"? Aren't their : restrictions regarding what a Jew is allowed to do when it comes to : non-Jewish holidays? Interesting question... Yes, if Moslems are aku"m. But Islam is monotheistic. In fact, they're more pedantic about it than the Torah requires. E.g. Many Moslems believe that the Torah's use of "Yad Hashem" et al even acknowledging they are meant as metaphors shows Shaitan's alleged corruption of the text. So, it's not yom eideihem in the normal sense. For that matter, one might even argue that many versions of Ramadan observance are actually qadosh (in our sense of the word). They fast to learn self-discipline and empathy for those who are less fortunate, they give sadaqah to the poor (I'm bet you can guess that Arabic) and there is a point of having a nightly meal, iftar, in fellowship with the broader community, not alone or as a nuclear family. All values the Beris Noach would want them to be fostering. So, the previous intentionally provocative paragraph aside, is there really a problem talking about Ramadan or referring to it as they do, as "the holy month of"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The trick is learning to be passionate in one's micha at aishdas.org ideals, but compassionate to one's peers. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 12:09:48 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:09:48 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? Message-ID: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with whom did the PC disagree? Ben From hanktopas at gmail.com Sun Jun 17 18:49:29 2018 From: hanktopas at gmail.com (Henry Topas) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch Message-ID: Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in a din Torah pls? Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. Thank you and kol tuv, HT Sent from my iPhone From zev at sero.name Sun Jun 17 21:42:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:42:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? In-Reply-To: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> References: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 17/06/18 15:09, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. > In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered > putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim > on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with > whom did the PC disagree? The issue was the way he wrote about gedolei haposkim, especially the Bet Yosef. http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1640&pgnum=250 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 23:10:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 08:10:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] machloquet - good or bad Message-ID: <5c275a89-82ba-3763-db85-3c8663f1b5a9@zahav.net.il> Summary of a talk given on Shabbat and then my commentary: According to the Rambam, machloquet is a fashla, something we don't want. It started when students didn't properly learn from their teachers. Had they done so, Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai would not have had so many disagreements. Rav Kook and Rebbe Nachman had a much more positive approach to machloquet. According to RK, when say that talmidei chachamim bring peace to the world, it is because they know how to argue with someone yet respect him and his opinion. A talmid chacham knows how to be inclusive, how to allow for and even want other opinions. According to RN, machloquet is a reenactment of Creation. God created the world through tzimmzum, allowing space for others. When there is one opinion only, that opinion fills the entire space so to speak. When someone else comes up with a different opinion, the first person has to contract to allow room for the new idea. This in turn allows for even more opinions. Ad kan the class. Today we don't do machloquet very well or at least we struggle with it. We try and either destroy the other side or we say that the other position doesn't really exist. This week a rav made a statement about Rav Lichtenstein tz'l and his position regarding (a very minor) women's issue. The easiest thing to do if one wanted to know RL's opinion about something is to pick up the phone and ask his sons, his daughter, an extremely close talmid. Instead the rav simply heard something and made a conclusion. When he was shown that his conclusion was incorrect, he pontificated that RL really didn't accept the more liberal position, he simply gave in to pressure. Occam's razor says that if RL said something and did something, it is because RL believed that to be the right thing to do. There is no need to come up with any explanation. Simply accept that there is a machloquet in the matter. Similarly, there is a mechina whose rosh yeshiva said things about women's role in society which people in the left wing MO world don't accept. No one says that anyone needs to send their kid there, but to try and work to shut down the mechina? You can't accept that someone, who BTW probably agrees with the LW on a whole bunch of other subjects, differs with you? You want to shut them down? Come on people, get a grip. From yherczeg at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:15:11 2018 From: yherczeg at gmail.com (Yisrael Herczeg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:15:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Re: Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." ::This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It is also in the Tashbetz Kattan. Yisrael Herczeg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:53:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:53:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is One Required To Live In Israel? (Bava Batra 91a) Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NKZ2eR by Raphael Grunfeld. (Note: Raphael Grunfeld is a son of Dayan Dr. Grunfeld who translated the Horeb and other works by RSRH from German into English.) First, it is not universally accepted that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel. Rashi?s commentary on the Torah as understood by the Ramban implies that there is no obligation to live in Israel. Rabbeinu Chaim, one of the Tosafists of the twelfth century, states clearly that following the destruction of the Second Temple and the exile from Israel, there is no longer any requirement to live in Israel. The Rambam agrees with Rabbeinu Chaim and accordingly did not include living in Israel in his list of the positive commandments. In more contemporary times, the Rebbe of Munkatch, in his responsa Minchat Eliezer, endorses Rabbeinu Chaim?s position. The Rebbe of Satmar, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, points out that the Shulchan Aruch does not include the mitzvah of living in Israel in its code of law. The majority opinion prevailing in the halacha, however, follows the Ramban and maintains that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel today. Although it is preferable to live in Israel, there is no obligation to go. However, once you live in Israel, there is an obligation not to leave. In fact, the language used by the Ramban in his supplement to Sefer Hamitzvot is that ?anyone who leaves Israel? ? ?kol hayotze mimenah? ? is like an idol worshiper. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:56:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:56:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In just a few weeks, we will observe Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av. This particular Rosh Chodesh is always only one day long, and this year it happens to fall on Erev Shabbos. This means that when Shabbos occurs, Rosh Chodesh will be over. I want to discuss the ramifications of a person who begins Shabbos early in this situation. Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal. (I know that there are poskim who advise one to eat a kezayis of bread after tzeis, but they don't require it.) In my experience, mealtime goes much quicker when there are fewer people at the table. This past Friday, for example, I went to a very nice minyan, beginning Kabalas Shabbos and Maariv shortly after Plag, I took a leisurely stroll home, and despite our best efforts at taking our time through the meal, my wife and I were still ready for Birkas Hamazon a full five minutes before shkiah. In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? I don't recall ever learning about this particular situation. There is an analogous but very different situation that I *have* seen discussed, namely that of a Seuda Shlishit that begins on Shabbos Erev Rosh Chodesh, and continues into Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos. In that case, the poskim give a wide variety of answers, but (among the poskim who *don't* pasken to say both) it is not always clear whether their rule is to base oneself on the beginning of the meal, or the end of the meal, or the holier of the two days. Further, some of them make a distinction, paskening differently for one who is merely benching after tzeis but didn't actually eat after tzeis, as opposed to one who actually ate [food in general or perhaps bread specifically] after tzeis. All that is a good starting point for my situation, but it is only a starting point. A tremendous difference between the two cases is that in the more common case, the calendar day DID change during the meal, to some extent or another. But in the case that I'm asking about, the calendar day did not actually change, only that the people involved are doing the mitzvah of Tosefes Shabbos. To be more explicit: Imagine a couple that goes to an early minyan on Erev Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Av. They daven Maariv, make Kiddush, and say Birkas Hamazon, all before shkiah. Then, after benching but still before shkiah, imagine that the wife gives birth to a boy. This boy will have his bris milah a week later on *Erev* Shabbos, and his bar mitzvah will be on Rosh Chodesh. Is it possible that his parents should have omitted Yaaleh V'Yavo from Birkas Hamazon? Of course, I understand that the answer may depend on details like whether or not the meal continued after shika, or even past tzeis. But I am most curious about the simple case, where benching was before shkiah. And the other cases will perhaps flow from that one. Any and all sources are appreciated. Thanks in advance. (Disclosure: I have other questions about the calendar and a person who begins Shabbos early, but I'm starting with this one, and perhaps I'll open new threads later about the others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:10:57 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:10:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What to do with old pots Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I found an old set of pots in my parents' basement. They have not been used in many years. No one remembers if they were milchig or fleishig. I would like to use them for milchig. May they be kashered and used for milchig? A. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Commentary on Nidah 27a) writes the pots may be designated for meat or dairy without kashering. The pots have not been used in more than 24 hours. After 24 hours any taste that was absorbed in the pot becomes foul, and on a Torah level the pot can be used for meat or dairy without kashering. Nevertheless, there remains a Rabbinic obligation to kasher pots even after 24 hours have elapsed. However, in this case, we may apply the principal of ?safek d?rabbanan l?kula? (in cases of doubt that pertain to a Rabbinic prohibition one may be lenient). Additionally, Igros Moshe (Y.D. II:46) writes that if a utensil is not used for more than a year, there is an opinion that holds that it does not need kashering. Although we don?t follow this opinion, it can act as an additional mitigating factor. However, since one can avoid the doubt by kashering the pot, it is proper to do so. Although the Magen Avrohom (OC 509:11) writes that the custom is not to permit kashering a fleishig pot to use it for milchig, in this case kashering is acceptable since it is only a chumra (extra stringency). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 04:30:24 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:30:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder Message-ID: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don?t know the exact reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That?s only known by HQBH. However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah that you?ve taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 07:50:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:50:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Learning, Spirituality, and Neo-Chassidus In-Reply-To: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> References: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180618145018.GE28907@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 1:14pm, R Aryeh Stein wrote on Areivim: > Rabbi Shafran's letter to Mishpacha included the following paragraph: >> It's easy to say that a person has a relationship with Hashem wherever >> he is, regardless of what he is doing, but it's not true. Many of us break >> that connection through destructive habits and the like, and sugarcoating >> them doesn't make them any less destructive. "Feeling spiritual" may >> be better than feeling bad about yourself, as quoted in the article, >> but are we to be content with feeling spiritual? I think the real problem with R' Avi Shafran's article was picked up in the replies. It's not an either-or. Rather, people whose core learning is the regular gefe"s or shas-and-posqim aren't getting inspired by intellectual pursuit *alone* and are looking for a better connection to the emotional and experiential aspects of Yahadus. Addition, not replacement. The question is more: Are we content with thinking the right thoughts while being parched spiritually? > Rabbi Moshe Weinberger was very disturbed by this paragraph in which > Rabbi Shafran seems to state that one's relationship with God can be > severed if one engages in destructive behavior. > He didn't discuss this specific point in his response to Rabbi Shafran > that was printed in Mishpacha, but he dedicated two shiurim to > demonstrate that Hashem's love for every Jew is eternal and > unconditional (see links to shiurim below) At 03:59:40PM -0400, Zev Sero via Areivim wrote: : To Hashem's love may be unconditional, but the direct connection a : person has with Him can certainly be severed; that is what kares : means. See Igeres Hateshuvah ch 5-6: : https://tinyurl.com/y9hckn5t : https://tinyurl.com/y6wtghxf But on another level, I don't think a person or even an object can be fully severed from the Borei, because withough Or Ein Sof, there is no such thing as existing. This fits kareis as per the Rambam, that the onesh after misah is ceasing to exist. (Except that we would have to translate the Baal haTanya's "Or Ein Sof" language into the Rambam's chain of sikhliim.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:14:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:14:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180618151454.GF28907@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:49:29PM -0400, Henry Topas via Avodah wrote: : Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in : a din Torah pls? : Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. A to'ein is a plaintiff. Could you ever have a din Torah in CM without a to'ein and nit'an? Ah, just googled. I take it you mean a to'ein rabbani, a modern Israeli coinage in order to avoid calling someone an oreikh din, since the job was defined in a way so as to avoid violating "al ta'as atzmekha ke'orkhei hadayanim" (Avos 1:8). The Yerushalmi, Kesuvos 4:10 and BB 9:4 (same quote; both gemaros are short and it's easy to find the quote), says the issur in the mishnah is telling only one side the law when they're still trying to phrase their claim. See also Kesuvos 52b and the Ritva d"h "asinu". So, while I don't have a maqor for when it became normal to have to'anim rabbaniim, I would think the place to look is the earliest shu"t that explain how they're not orkhei din. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, micha at aishdas.org The end is near. http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Moshe Sherer Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:57:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:57:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms Message-ID: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> See "Hezekiahs Religious Reform -- In the Bible and Archaeology" on the Biblical Archeology Society web site at . Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to get rid of everything hidden in private homes. A large 9th-century horned altar was discovered [in Beersheba] -- already dismantled. Three of its four "horns" [rectangular projections on the four corners of the top of the altar] were found intact, embedded in a wall. Their secondary use indicates that the stones were no longer considered sacred. The horned altar was dismantled during Hezekiah's reign, which we know because some of its stones were reused in a public storehouse that was built when the Assyrians threatened Judah and was destroyed by the Assyrian army in 701.... Next we move to Lachish. The second most important city in Judah after Jerusalem, Lachish was a military and administrative center in the Judean hills.... In 2016, an 8th-century BCE cultic place at Lachish was uncovered next to the main city gate. Archaeologists have called this cultic place a "gate-shrine." In it were found two small horned altars, whose horns had been cut off and embedded in an adjacent wall. Further, a square toilet was found installed in the shrine but was never used. The toilet was more of a symbolic act of desecration (see 2Kings 10:27) -- part of Hezekiah's cultic reforms. The best candidate for the elimination [of these cultic sites and others] is King Hezekiah, who probably ordered the abolition of all official cultic sites. Only the Jerusalem Temple and small, household shrines were spared. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. micha at aishdas.org Life is about creating yourself. http://www.aishdas.org - George Bernard Shaw Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:48:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:48:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder In-Reply-To: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> References: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180618154848.GG28907@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 07:30:24AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don't know the exact : reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That's only known by HQBH. : However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah : that you've taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. To do a mitzvah Hashem obligated you in, yes. But one you've taken on yourself? I don't know. As for untuitiveness, see my 9/8/2001 post at . But it ties together why Hashem would command men in something He didn't command women to that mitzvah likely being of more value to a man, to the greater reward. A line of reasoning that doesn't apply to volunteerism. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten micha at aishdas.org your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, http://www.aishdas.org and it flies away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 18 12:50:21 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:50:21 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? On 6/18/2018 5:57 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's > portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the > archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to > get rid of everything hidden in private homes. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 12:13:52 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:13:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chukas Message-ID: <0955AA8C-8FE3-48BA-A965-3E9AA6A10782@cox.net> 1) Four Torah laws cannot be explained by human reason but, being divine, demand implicit obedience: a) to marry one's brother's widow (Deut. 25:5); b) not to mingle wool and linen in a garment (Deut. 22:11); c) to perform the rites of the scapegoat (Lev. 16:26, 34); and d) the red cow. Satan comes and criticizes these statutes as irrational. Know therefore that it was the Creator of the world, the One and Only, who instituted them. Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 19:8). 2) [Ch.19:1] "Hashem spoke to Moses and to Aaron saying:" Symbolically the cow came to atone for the sin of the Golden Calf, as if to say let the mother come and clean up the mess left by her child. If this be the case, this explains why the commandment was directed to Aaron, the one who made the calf. 3) [19:2] "Zot chukat ha-Torah...." This is the statute (also translated as "ritual law," or "decree") of the Torah......" This unusual expression occurs only once more in Bamidbar 31:21. The rabbis have commented that it should have said ?Zot chukat ha parah.? Why does it sound as if this chok is the whole Torah? There are several explanations such as only Jews can be ritually impure. A non-Jew cannot have tum?ah. Also, since a chok is incomprehensible, it is as if you have observed the whole Torah if you follow an irrational, illogical commandment. 4) The Midrash to this chapter focuses primarily on one paradox in the laws of the Red Cow: Its ashes purify people who had become contaminated; yet those who engage in its preparation become contaminated. I thought of a contemporary example of something that would appear just as paradoxical. Radiation treatment is used to treat many forms of cancer, and yet, the same radiation can cause cancer. For someone who has no knowledge of medicine, this would appear as irrational as the paradox of the Red Cow. In a similar vein, the Midrash notes a number of such paradoxical cases of righteous people who descended from wicked parents, such as Abraham from Terach, Hezekiah from Ahaz, and Josiah from Ammon. The Talmud adds the paradox that it is forbidden to drink blood, but an infant nurses from its mother, whose blood is transformed into milk to become the source of life (Niddah 9a). You won?t go broke if you follow the chok. But if you don?t keep trying, you?ll end up dying. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 12:24:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:24:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180618192417.GC12350@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:50:21PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, : had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real : reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split : with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have : been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira : in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? I dunno. Look at David haMelekh. He had what to do teshuvah for as well. (Yeah, yeah, I know, kol ha'omer David chatah... But let's look at the navi's presentation of David, if not the historical figure.) However, he owned his mistakes, did teshuvah. And indeed, excelled at singing shirah. It seems there is a big difference between someone who errs, but stays connected to the Borei through it all well enough to be moved to song, and someone who doesn't. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, micha at aishdas.org and after it is all over, he still does not http://www.aishdas.org know himself. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Jun 19 00:15:18 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:15:18 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive into a hostile Arab town? Ben From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 19 03:01:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 06:01:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive : into a hostile Arab town? I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, no? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 19 06:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Used Metal Pots Bought From a Non-Jew In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Q. I bought a set of used metal pots from a non-Jew. Do I kasher them first or do I tovel them first? A. Shulchan Aruch (YD 121:2) writes that one should first kasher the pot and afterwards immerse it in a mikvah. If one toveled the pot first before kashering, it is a matter of dispute among Rishonim whether the tevila was effective. The Rashbam (cited in Beis Yosef YD 121) writes that toveling a pot before kosherization is like immersing in a mikvah while holding a sheretz (unclean item) and the tevila is ineffective. However, other Rishonim disagree and maintain that tevila is a separate mitzvah and is not connected with kashering. The Shach (YD 121:5) writes that if one was to tovel a pot before kashering, tevila should be repeated without a bracha because of the uncertainty. Nonetheless, the Dagul Merivava writes if the pot had not been used in the past 24 hours, one may tovel before kashering. After 24 hours, the non-kosher taste that had been absorbed in the pot is ruined. At that point the absorbed taste is no longer similar to a sheretz. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 19 08:17:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:17:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <3cd91821-d660-3a72-164e-c3abb8aaf807@sero.name> On 19/06/18 06:01, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone > : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the > : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the > : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive > : into a hostile Arab town? > > I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, > no? I don't know the answer, and wouldn't dare try to pasken it, but I do see a big question. The person is in no danger now. He will be in danger only if he chooses to drive on Shabbos. Is it permitted to help him do so safely? Does it make you an accomplice to his avera? Does hal'itehu larasha' perhaps apply here? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ydamyb at mail.gmail.com Tue Jun 19 05:19:56 2018 From: ydamyb at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:19:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 6:17 PM Akiva Miller wrote: > Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and > begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal > before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal... > In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a > regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling > Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Akiva Blum From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jun 19 09:44:50 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 16:44:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10d8a9cc4d8f47e593bd2928a907b8fd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. -------------------------- I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you can daven maariv after plag-would he say if you did that you don't say retzeih if you ate later? BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 05:11:06 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 08:11:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some degree or another. Would they pasken the same way if the Seuda Shlishis was earlier, and - for whatever reason - he had davened maariv and said birkas hamazon on Saturday afternoon after Plag Hamincha? I concede that it is a bizarre example, but the boundaries of halacha are defined by exactly this sort of situation. It's not done nowadays, but a person *IS* allowed to daven maariv on Shabbos afternoon after Plag. If someone did so, and did it during seudah shlishis, and then chose to say Birkas Hamazon while the sun was still above the horizon on Shabbos afternoon, perhaps he should indeed say Retzeh? Perhaps not, but I'd love to know what a posek might say. Summary: The question in this thread concerns someone who is benching on Friday afternoon which is Rosh Chodesh but he already said the non-RC maariv. This is VERY analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday afternoon which is Shabbos but he already said the non-Shabbos maariv. It is NOT so analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday night and he already said the non-Shabbos maariv, and the only argument in favor of saying Retzeh is that the meal began on Shabbos. I just thought of another difference between Friday Rosh Chodesh and the situation cited by RAB. If a person davened Maariv during seuda shelishit - and presumably included Ata Chonantanu - then he has verbally and explicitly declared Shabbos to be over, and it would be contradictory to reverse this by saying Retzeh in the benching (even if the sun is still shining on Saturday afternoon). BUT: When someone says maariv on Motzaei Rosh Chodesh he merely omits Yaaleh V'yavo, and there is no explicit declaration that RC has ended, so perhaps he could still include Yaaleh V'yavo on Friday afternoon. [There would still be a problem of including both Retzeh and Yaaleh V'yavo in the same benching, but some poskim do allow that in the Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos situation.] Akiva Miller From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 20 13:47:08 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:47:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi S. R. Hirsch Takes On The Rambam Message-ID: My grandson Daniel Levine who is studying in Yeshiva KBY and I are in the process of reading RSRH's Nineteen Letters with the notes written by Rabbi Joseph Elias. Today we read part of letter 18. While I knew that RSRH criticizes the RAMBAM, I was surprised at how strong this criticism is. Some of what is in letter 18 is posted at https://goo.gl/o3uXdg Below is a sampling. "Pressure of the times demanded more: the underlying ideas of the Tanach and the Talmud were recorded in the aggados, but again, in a veiled form, requiring of the student an active effort on his part in order to grasp the inner spirit, which really can be passed down only by word of mouth." "However, not everybody grasped the true spirit of Judaism. In non-Jewish schools Yisrael's youth trained their minds in independent philosophical inquiry. From Arab sources they drew the concepts of Greek philosophy and came to conceive their ultimate aim as perfecting themselves in the perception of truth. Hence rose conflict. Their quickening spirit put them at odds with Judaism, which they considered to be void of any spirit of its own; and their view of life was in contradiction with a view that stressed action, deeds, first and foremost, and considered recognition of the truth to only be a means toward such action." And so the times brought forth a man of spirit who, having been educated within an uncomprehended Judaism as well as Arab scholarship, was compelled to reconcile this dichotomy within himself. By giving voice to the way in which he did this, he became the guide for all who were engaged in the same struggle. It is to this great man alone that we owe the preservation of practical Judaism until the present day. By accomplishing this and yet, on the other hand merely reconciling Judaism with the ideas from without, rather than developing it creatively from within, and by the way in which he effected this reconciliation, he gave rise to all the good that followed- as well as all the bad. His trend of thought was Arab-Greek, as was his concept of life. Approaching Judaism from without, he brought to it views that he had gained elsewhere, and these he reconciled with Judaism. Thus to him too, the highest aim was self-perfection through recognition of the truth; and the practical, concrete deeds became subordinate to this end. Knowledge of God was considered an end in itself, not a means toward the end; and so he delved into speculations about the essence of God and considered the results of these speculative investigations to be fundamental axioms and principles of faith binding upon Judaism. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ydamyb at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 21:34:54 2018 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:34:54 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, 4:46 p.m. Akiva Miller via Avodah, < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > R' Akiva Blum wrote: > > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. > > Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are > presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and > benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some > degree or another. > > Please see the MB 424:2 where he quotes the MA specifically about where one davened maariv while still day that he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. I wonder about a case where one said kabolas shabbos, then ate and davened maariv later. I would think that too would be sufficient. Akiva -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 21 03:56:40 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:56:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Timeless Rav Hirsch Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/ZEcnxP The writings of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (RSRH) deeply resonate with many people today, as they have since the time he penned them in the middle of the nineteenth century, using them to recreate a community of modern, Torah-faithful Jews in Frankfurt that had all but disappeared. Many find that, ironically, his words seem more suited for our times than when he composed them. He stands almost alone among commentators in dealing with many themes of modernity: cultural evolution; our relationships with non-Jews; the Jewish mission to the rest of civilization; freedom of the will versus determinism; autonomy and totalitarianism; understanding the impact of paganism on the ancient world. Of course, his treatment of symbolism. This web page contains links to commentaries on the parshios by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein based on the writings of RSRH. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 06:00:23 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:00:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: Perhaps the machmirim would say to respond, "It is Shabbat and it is assur to drive, so I cannot tell to how to go. BUT I will tell you this: Do not go on such-and-such a road, because it will take you through such-and-such a dangerous area." That would not be a problem by those who the OP refers to as machmirim, it seems to me. (Of course, personally, I would label Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as the machmir, and would use the response he suggests: "It pains me that you are driving on Shabbat, so to minimize the Chilul Shabbat, I will give you the very best directions...") Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 21:02:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:02:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. And R' Joel Rich asked: > I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent > and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you > can daven maariv after plag - would he say if you did that > you don't say retzeih if you ate later? This situation is raised by Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen in "The Radiance of Shabbos" (ArtScroll). He writes (pg 95?), "If one interrupts a prolonged meal to daven Maariv or recite Havdalah, he does not say Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon afterwards. If one merely said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, he should still recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon. Rabbi Cohen cites MB 263:67 that if one said "Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol" during the meal, it is a "Tzorech Iyun" whether he can say Retzeh. Then he cites Eliya Rabba 299:1, Petach Hadvir there, Chayei Adam 47:24, Kaf Hachayim Palagi 31, and Rav Moshe Feinstein all as saying that one *can* still say Retzeh, but that Shulchan Aruch Harav 188:17 says not to. Personally, I am surprised that so many poskim distinguish between Maariv/Havdala on the one hand, vs. Omitting Shem Umalchus on the other hard. Here is a situation which will illustrate this point: Suppose someone had a long seuda shlishis, and after Tzeis he said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, and then he actually did a melacha. Would those poskim still say that he should recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon? Akiva Miller From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 21 18:01:47 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 01:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Individualism? Message-ID: <6b39dd928de144b0ba94b9a16c4318c5@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Anecdotally, it seems to me I've seen an increase in "individualistic" practices across the orthodox spectrum [e.g., davening at one's own pace with less concern as to where the tzibbur is up to (shma, shmoneh esrai, chazarat hashatz . . .), being obvious about using a different nusach hatfila, wearing tfillin at mincha . . .] I'm curious as to whether others have seen this? If yes, any theories as to why? (e.g., outside world seeping in?) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Jun 22 13:51:26 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:51:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In Avodah V36n72 (to which I'm humming "Chai, Chai, Chai/Am Yisrael Chai" :)), RJR asked: > BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? < Iff we're considering when one ended the meal; but then you're comparing unlike items (BhM vs. Ma'ariv), not to mention that BhM is a Torah-level *mitzva* while Ma'ariv is .... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 23 19:24:37 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 22:24:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BALAK "JACOB'S TENTS, ISRAEL'S DWELLING PLACES, MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD" Message-ID: "How goodly are your tents, O Jacob; your dwelling places, O Israel." [Num. 24:5] Why the repetition? What does each of these terms [tents and dwelling places] represent? And furthermore, why is the first appellation used "Jacob" and the second one "Israel?" In addition to the sensitivity and modesty demonstrated by the arrangement of the tents and camps, the Sages (Sanhedrin 105b) expound that these terms refer to the habitats of Israel's spiritual heritage. Tents (Ohalecha), alludes to the study halls, and dwelling places (Mishk'nosecha), which is related to Shechinah, or God's presence, alludes to the synagogues and Temples (Sforno). Rav Kook has a novel interpretation. He says that the verse, which mentions tents first, reflects a lower level and hence, uses the name Jacob, the first and lesser name. However, the verse which mentions dwelling second, reflects a higher level. Thus, it uses the name Israel, Jacob's second and more elevated name. The reason Rav Kook considers "tents" to reflect a lower level and "dwelling places" a higher level is because the tent is inherently connected to the state of traveling. It corresponds to the aspiration for continual change and growth. The dwelling is also part of the journey, but is associated with the rests between travels. It is the soul's sense of calm, resting from the constant movement, for the sake of the overall mission (sort of a parallel to Shabbos). I delved into the gematria aspect of this and came up with some heavy, mystical stuff. The gematria for "Ohalecha Ya-akov" (your tents O Jacob) is 248. There are 248 positive mitzvot. The word 'Avraham' and 'bamidbar' (In the wilderness) is also 248, as is the phrase 'Kol Adonai Elohim' (the voice or sound of Hashem, God). The word 'romach' (spear) is also 248. Now to tie all this together-- Balaam had intended, in a manner of speaking, to use a 'spear' to harm the Jewish people and curse them 'in the wilderness.' However 'the voice of Hashem, God' caused Balaam to turn the negative to the positive, (symbolized by the 248 positive mitzvos). Thus when Balaam said "How goodly are your tents O Jacob," he was blessing the Jewish people completely right from 'Abraham.' The gematria for "Mishk'nosecha Yisrael" (Your dwelling places, O Israel) is 1,381. As Rav Kook said, this part of the verse was on a higher level. In Gen: verse 25 (last part) and verse 26 (first part) we have: "Vayar Elohim ki tov. Vayomer Elohim na-a-seh Adam b'tzalmeinue" ("And God saw that it was good. And God said: "Let us make man in Our image..."). The gematria for this is also 1,381 as is the word "Ha-ashtaroth" (the principal Phoenician goddess, the consort of their chief male deity, Baal). Though Balaam was steeped in idolatry ("Ha-ashtaroth"), when he pronounced the second part of the phrase, ("mishk'nosecha Yisroel") God 'saw that it was good.' And so, the "image of God" wins out! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 25 07:17:25 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:17:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Waiting After Some Cheeses Before Eating Meat Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I know that we are supposed to wait after eating certain cheeses, before we can then eat meat. After which cheeses should one wait, and what is the basis for this practice? A. The Rama (Yoreh Deah 89:2) writes that the custom is not to eat meat after eating hard cheese. The waiting time for this is equivalent to the amount of time that one waits after eating meat, before then eating dairy foods. (See Taz ibid. 89:4, Aruch HaShulchan ibid. 89:11, Chochmas Adam 40:13.) There are two reasons that one needs to wait after meat before then partaking of milk; these two reasons apply as well to eating certain cheeses after meat. The first reason is that of basar she?bein ha-shinayim ? meat that gets stuck between the teeth ? which takes a considerable amount of time to dislodge or disintegrate, before which one may not consume milk. (Rambam, Hilchos Ma?achalos Asuros 9:28) The second reason for waiting after eating meat is meshichas ta?am ? an aftertaste left in the mouth, due to meat?s fattiness; only after a substantial lapse of time does this aftertaste dissipate, whereupon one may then consume milk. (Rashi in Chullin 105a s.v. ?Assur?) Poskim apply both of these reasons to cheese: Hard cheese, due to its firm and brittle texture, is like basar she?bein ha-shinayim, and is termed gevinah she?bein ha-shinayim ? cheese that gets stuck between the teeth. One therefore needs to wait a considerable amount of time for such cheese to dislodge or disintegrate before then consuming meat. (Sifsei Da?as Yoreh 89:2) Also, cheeses that are very pungent and leave a noticeable aftertaste are like meat that has meshichas ta?am; one must wait for the aftertaste to dissipate before then eating meat. (Taz Yoreh Deah 89:4) Although some classical poskim argue as to whether one or both of the above rationales for waiting apply to cheese, contemporary poskim rule that both apply. The next installment of Halacha Yomis will discuss further details. View OUKosher's list of Aged Cheeses. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sun Jun 24 23:26:22 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:26:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] [Commentary] Rabbi Meir Soloveichik: Why Christians Are Reading the Rav In-Reply-To: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: [RET emailed me this under a subject line that began "Too long for Avodah thought you might be interested..." But I thought his reluctance was missplaced. I just held on to the piece for its own digest. -micha] Jun 20, 2018 The nature of the dilemma can be stated in a three-word sentence. I am lonely. - Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik In 2015, I was invited to a conference held at a Catholic University in Spain, celebrating the first Spanish translation of *The Lonely Man of Faith*, the seminal philosophical essay of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik (my great uncle), reverently referred to by many Orthodox Jews as "the Rav." Published 50 years earlier, the essay contrasts two biblical accounts of the creation of man and teases out two personas, known as Adam the First and Adam the Second. In the first chapter of Genesis, humanity is created in the image of God and instructed by the Almighty to "fill the world and subdue it." Adam the First, Rabbi Soloveitchik suggests, is majestic; through his God-like creative capacities he seeks scientific breakthroughs, to cure disease, to build cities and countries, to advance the health and comfort of mankind. But then there is Adam the Second, who in Genesis 2 is created from the dust of the earth and remains in the sanctity of the garden of Eden, "to work and protect it." This represents the religious aspect of man, man who is ever aware of his finitude, who finds fulfillment not in majestic achievement but in an intimate relationship with a personal God. These two accounts are given, Rabbi Soloveitchik argued, because both are accurate; both Adam I and Adam II are divinely desired aspects of the human experience. One who is devoted to religious endeavors is reminded that "he is also wanted and needed in another community, the cosmic-majestic," and when one works on behalf of civilization, the Bible does not let him forget "that he is a covenantal being who will never find self-fulfillment outside of the covenant." The man of faith is not fully of the world, but neither can he reject the world. To join the two parts of the self may not be fully achievable, but it must nevertheless be our goal. In his letter of invitation to the conference, the president of the Spanish university reflected on how Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings spoke to his own vocation. As a leader of a Christian school, he said he grappled constantly with the challenge of being an *hombre de fe* in a Europe that, once the cradle of Christendom, was now suddenly secular: As Adam the First understandably and correctly busies himself with the temporal concerns of this world, we encourage our students to not lose sight, within their own hearts, of Adam the Second, the thirsting Adam that longs for a redemption that our technological advances cannot quench. We hope that our students, who come to our university seeking degree titles that will translate into jobs, will leave it also with awakened minds and hearts that fully recognize the deep aspirations that lie within their youthful spirits, and which *The Lonely Man of Faith* so eloquently describes. The letter reflected a fascinating phenomenon. As Orthodox Jews mark this year the 25th anniversary of Rabbi Soloveitchik's passing, more and more of his works are being studied, savored, appreciated, and applied to people's own lives -- by Christians. As interesting as this is, it should not be surprising. *The Lonely Man of Faith* actually originated, in part, in a talk to Catholic seminarians, and today it is Christians who are particularly shocked by the rapidity with which a culture that was once Christian has turned on them, so that now people of faith are quite lonely in the world at large. In his essay, Rabbi Soloveitchik notes that though the tension between Adam I and Adam II is always a source of angst, "the contemporary man of faith is, due to his peculiar position in secular society, lonely in a special way," as our age is "technically minded, self-centered, and self-loving, almost in a sickly narcissistic fashion, scoring honor upon honor, piling up victory upon victory, reaching for the distant galaxies, and seeing in the here-and-now sensible world the only manifestation of being." Now that the world of Adam I seems wholly divorced from that of Adam II, people of faith seek guidance in the art of bridging the two; and if, 70 years ago, Reinhold Niebhur was a theologian who spoke for a culture where Christianity was the norm, Rabbi Soloveitchik is a philosopher for Jews and Christians who are outsiders. The Catholic philosopher R.J. Snell, in a Christian reflection inspired by the Rav's writings, wrote that "like Joseph B. Soloveitchik in *The Lonely Man of Faith*, I am lonely," and he tells us why: In science, my faith is judged obscurantist; in ethics, mere animus; in practicality, irrelevant; in love, archaic. In the square, I am silenced; at school, mocked; in business, fined; at entertainment, derided; in the home, patronized; at work, muffled. My leaders are disrespected; my founder blasphemed by the new culture, new religion, and new philosophy which...suffers from an aversion to the fullness of questions, insisting that questions are meaningful only when limited to a scope much narrower than my catholic range of wonder. Yet Rabbi Soloveitchik's thesis remains that even when society rejects us, we cannot give up on society, but we also cannot amputate our religious identity from our very selves. Adam I and Adam II must be bridged. This will not be easy, but a theme throughout Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings is that all too often religion is seen as a blissful escape from life's crises, while in truth the opposite is the case. In the words of Reuven Ziegler, Rabbi Soloveitchik insisted that "religion does not offer an escape from reality, but rather provides the ultimate encounter with reality." Traditional Jews and Christians in the West face cultural challenges to their faith -- disdain, scorn, and even hate -- but if the challenge is faced with fortitude, sophistication, and honor, it will be a religious endeavor worthy of being remembered. And as both traditional Jews and Christians face this challenge, it will often be as compatriots, in a fellowship that we may not have foreseen 50 years ago. After attending the conference, I was emailed by another member of the administration, the rector of the university. He thanked me "for the pleasure of sharing that deep friendship which is a sign of the community inspired by the principles of the second Adam," and added, "[I] really enjoyed the time we passed together and the reading of the book of Rabbi Soloveitchik," which was, he reflected, "so stimulating for a better understanding of my own life and my faith." To be a person of faith is indeed to be lonely in this world. But more and more, lonely men and women of several faiths may be brought together by *The Lonely Man of Faith.* From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:42:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:42:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627194234.GE22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:18:14PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand : the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic : sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's : underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases... This is why the Maharal (Be'er 1, ch 19 or so) says that the Tur is only usable because of the BY, and SA, because it comes with the suite of nosei keilim. Speaking after years of learning AhS daily... There is a strong feel for the flow of the pesaq and how each area of halakhah is reasoned through by going to Tur, BY, SA, nosei keilim, AhS. It could be the Maharshal too would be more bothered by the Yad than by the other codes, IFF once studies the Tur or SA (or MB) with the other texts that explain how we got there. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The worst thing that can happen to a micha at aishdas.org person is to remain asleep and untamed." http://www.aishdas.org - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:36:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:36:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627183655.GC22635@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 11:54:52AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At : the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking : against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi : comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas : keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same : question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A : Baal keri is prohibited from going there. Or to put it less obliquely... The pasuq there (Bamidbar 12:4) refers to their location as Ohel Mo'ed. But the idiom is not necessarily referring to the Mishkan. Moshe went to the Ohel Mo'ed to get nevu'ah *outside* the camp. (Shemos 33) It had a pillar of cloud at the door, not at a mizbeiach. In Bamidbar 11:16 we learn that the 70 zeqeinim, after getting ruach haqodesh at the Ohel Mo'eid, returned to the camp. The Sifrei Zutra where (Bamidbar 11) writes: And he set them round about the tent the tent for speaking which was outside the camp. They made two tents, a tent for service and a tent for speaking. The outer tent had the same dimensions as the inner one, and the Levites served in both with the wagons. Two ohel mo'eds, the mishkan, and the nevu'ah center. The Ohel Mo'eid in this story also has a cloud at the door. So, I would think it was Moshe's place of nevu'ah, not the Mishkan. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and micha at aishdas.org this was a great wonder. But it is much more http://www.aishdas.org wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a Fax: (270) 514-1507 "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:38:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:38:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627193824.GD22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:19:19PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency : greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? It depends why gadol hametzuveh ve'oseh. The accepted theory is that it's because the YhR chimes up when a prohibition -- issur or bitul asei -- is involved (what pop-psych would describe as the attractiveness of "forbidden fruit"), so so one gets greater sekhar for winning the greater battle. Lefum tzaara agra. In which case, the YhR would work against keeping a neder, and so one should get more sekhar for fighting that battle. I argued that it's that someone we are obligated to do is indeed obligated because we need its effects more than someone who isn't. In which case, no one *needs* the chumerah for basic development; because if they did, it would have been obligatory. Then there would be no added value for keeping the chumerah in terms of the substance of what he's doing, but there is added value to keeping a neder. Meanwhile, it's subject to the Chullin 2a: "Tov shelo tidor mishetidor velo meshaleim." (Qoheles 5:4) Utanya: Tov mizeh umizeh, she'eino nodei kol iqar. -- Divrey R' Meir. R' Yehudah omer: Tov mizeh umizeh, nodeir umeshaleim. The gemara then continues by limiting R' Yehudah to nedarim of "harei zu" not shavu'os of "harei alai". Which would appar to include maintaining a chumerah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:07:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:07:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah In-Reply-To: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> References: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180627180708.GB22635@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 03:51:17PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote: : ... : R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" : of "Torah lishmah" means. ... :> Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions :> :> We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing :> opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. :> :> 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion :> of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent :> generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to :> fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice :> was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind :> on this thought. :> :> 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing :> in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo :> [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, :> one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is :> learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] :> :> 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh :> means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to :> learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah :> is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- :> i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar :> with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must :> learn Torah in order to fulfil it. :> :> Support for these Positions :> :> All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the :> Rishonim. :> :> 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara :> in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir :> bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the :> commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, :> that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." :> :> 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text :> reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake :> of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, :> for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out :> of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of :> the Ba'al Shem Tov. :> :> 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] :> and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Along the lines of #3, Yesushalmi Beraikha 1:1 (vilna 1a), Shabbos 1:2 (vilna 7b): One who learns but not in order to do, would have been pleasanter that his umbilical cord would have prolapsed in front of his face and he never came into the world. The Meshekh Chokhmah, Devarim 28:61, explains this in terms of the idea that the soul learns Torah with a mal'akh before birth. Someone who wants to learn as an end in itself would have been better off staying with that mal'akh! And (citing the intro to Qorban Aharon) a soul that was not born is a seikhel nivdal who grasped his Creator. All that is being given up by being born. But, if one is learning al menas laasos, which one can only do after birth, then their birth had value. The other opinion in the Y-mi is that someone who is lomei shelo al means lelameid is better off not existing. Again, the MC, notes, because the point of learning is to bring it into the world. The MC also gets this from Sanhedrin 99b, where the gemara concludes that "adam la'amal yulad" is for amal peh -- speaking Torah. While the gemara doesn't say al menas lelameid is a definiition of lishmah, the transitive property would lead me to conclude that's the implication. Al menas and lishmah... can they be distinguished? And if not 4. Al menas laasos. (I have discussed this MC before. He ends up showing that in terms of priorities, one who is going somewhere to teach doesn't have to stop to do mitzvos maasiyos; but someoen who is actually learning (and not teaching) has to stop even for a hakhsher mitzvah (maasis). This is one of my favorite shtiklach; worth a look! (There is a complete copy with a bad translation scattered among .) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jun 29 11:07:36 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 18:07:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? Message-ID: >From OU Kosher Yomis Q. What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? A. Chazal, the Talmudic Sages, prohibited cheese that is not made under the special supervision of a Jew (Avodah Zarah 29b, 35a-b). Various reasons are advanced for this rabbinic prohibition, but the reason accepted by most halachic authorities is the concern for the use of rennet enzymes from the stomach flesh of neveilah/non-kosher animals. Unsupervised cheese is termed Gevinas Akum. Cheese is only permitted if it is Gevinas Yisroel ? Jewish-supervised cheese (Yoreh Deah 115:2). This rule is unrelated to the rules of Cholov Yisroel (Jewish-supervised milk) and Cholov Akum/Cholov Stam (milk not under Jewish supervision). Therefore, even if a person eats Cholov Stam dairy products, he may only eat Gevinas Yisroel cheese. According to the Rama (Yoreh Deah 115:2) and many other poskim, Gevinas Yisroel is obtained by the mashgiach visually supervising the incorporation of the enzymes into each vat of milk in the cheese-making process; this way, the mashgiach will verify that the enzymes are kosher. According to the Shach (ibid. 20) and many other poskim, the mashgiach must manually add the enzymes to each vat of milk in the cheese-making process. The Vilna Gaon (ibid. s. 14) provides the rationale for this: Gevinas Yisroel is similar to Pas Yisroel (bread with onsite Jewish involvement) ? just like Pas Yisroel means that a Jew actually participated in the baking process, so too does Gevinas Yisroel mean that a Jew actually participated in the cheese-making process. Contemporary poskim rule that the basic halacha follows the Rama, although kashrus agencies typically endeavor to fulfill the Shach?s requirement as well. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:00:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:00:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Game Theory and Bankruptcy Message-ID: <20180629190056.GA23432@aishdas.org> Nobel Laureate R/Dr Robert Aumann famously (in our circles) explained the distribution of funds in the mishnah on Kesuvos 93a. In that mishnah, a man left behind 3 wives -- but the case works for 3 debts in general. Whatever wife 1's kesuvah is worth in the mishnah would be the same as if 1 of 3 creditors were owed the same amount. It is the creditor version that is the topic of AhS CM 104:15. But it only holds in cases where the assets aren't real estate, or if the debts are loans without certified contracts, if all the debts' contracts have the same date -- in other words, in cases where one doesn't pay the oldest loan fast. Creditor A is owed 100 zuz, creditor B is owed 200 zuz, and creditor C, 300. And the debtor has left than 600 zuz to divide. The AhS notes that there is a minority opinion that would have them divide as we today would probably consider more intuitive -- proportionally. A gets 1/6 of the assets, B gets 1/3 (ie 2/6) and C gets 1/2 (=3/6). And in his day this was a common practice. So, while one may say this became minhag hamaqom and thus a tenai implicitly accepted when doing business or lending money, the AhS recommends that if the creditors assume this division, beis din seek pesharah and divide this way. However, iqar hadin is as per the mishnah. Which the gemara tells us is R' Nasan, and R' Yehudah haNasi disagrees. (Stam mishnah, and the redactor of mishnayos doesn't mention his own opinion???) The first 100z has three claims on it and is divided in thirds. The second 100z has two claims on it, and is divided equally between B & C. And whatever is left is given to C. What this means is that whomever has the biggest loan is most likely to absorb the loss. RRA explains this case in two papers. The first, aimed more at mathematicians, invokes the Game Theoretic concept of nucleolus. (R.J. Aumann and M. Maschler, Game Theoretic Analysis of a Bankruptcy Problem from the Talmud, Journal of Economic Theory 36, no. 2 (1985), 195-213.) In the second, written for people who learn gemara, he avoids all the technical talk. ("On the Matter of the Man with Three Wives," Moriah 22 (1999), 98- 107.) The second paper compares this mishnah to the gemara at the opening of BM, and derives a general rule, RAR saying that no other division in Qiddushin would follow the same principles as the 2 person division in BM. Here is an explanatory blog post on Talmudology blog ("Judaism, Science and Medicine"), by R/Dr Jeremy Brown. (The blog would particularly be interesting to someone learning daf who is interested in science or math.) The aforementioned AhS gives two sevaras for R' Nasan's position: The first is that the first division is taken from the beinonis (mid-quality property) of the debtor's or the estate's holdings. Therefore, it has to be divided separately from the rest of B & C's debt. Each has claim to the full 100z, so each gets equally. The second division is taken from the beinonis of what the person owned that the time he started owing B & C money, and if there is non left, from the ziburis (lesser quality). Again, different material, so it is divided without consideration to the remainder of the debt to C. merchandise. Therefore, it is accounted for separately The second explanation focuses on why this case is different than shutefus, where the shutefim do divide proportionally to their investments. The debtor's assets are entirely meshubadim to A just as much as to B or C. C can't get his 300z until A's 100z is accounted for, no less than the other way around -- each has full power to halt distribution of any of the man's assets. So the division is by shibud, which is equal. But with shutefim, the profit is clearcut. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late micha at aishdas.org to become the person http://www.aishdas.org you might have been. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - George Eliot From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Migo vs Chazakah Message-ID: <20180629194917.GA8106@aishdas.org> AhS 82:18 is a qunterus on migo. Looking at #6 (within se'if 18), RYMEpstein looks at two gemaros that discuss migo bemaqom rov -- BB 5a and Qiddushin 64. In BB, Raza"l say that while rov adif meichazaqah, this is not true for every chazaqah. Chezqas mamon outranks rov (you don't make someone pay up on a "probably"), because the mi'ut yeshno ba'olam, so we can't take something out of his hands -- maybe he is of the mi'ut. This is true even though chezas haguf adif mechezqas mamon and migo adif meichezqas haguf. So chazaq IOW: rov > migo rov > chezaqa chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon So rov > chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon But chezqas mamon > rov -- where mi'ut yeshno be'olam, without bitul Acharei rabim lehatos is a case of bitul, so if the majority of dayanim rule that the nit'an has to pay up, that rov does trump chezqas mamon. Hoserver the gemara in R' Nasan says: "Mah li leshaqer?" ki chazaqah dami. Lo asi chazaqah ve'aqrah chazaqah legamrei. (R' Nasan shows up in two of my posts in a row!) Migo doesn't trump chazaqah, because assuming a person wouldn't give that particular lie is itself a chazaqah. Which is it? Another related issue that confuses me is what kind of chazaqah is a chezqas mamon: One could say it's a chazaqah demei'iqara -- preserving the status quo of who has the money. One could say it's a chazaqah disvara -- normally property belongs to the person holding it. Now, say the to'ein is tofeis the money he claims. This can at times work, because it shifts which is hamotzi meichaveiro when they get to BD. However, we know this is a normal case of the person holding the money, we know how he got it. So how would my chazaqah disvara apply? OTOH, it's not your usual case of presrving the old halachic state, because everyone agrees that before the dispute, the property was the nitan's. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger How wonderful it is that micha at aishdas.org nobody need wait a single moment http://www.aishdas.org before starting to improve the world. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anne Frank Hy"d From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jun 30 21:01:59 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? Message-ID: Naaah, of course he was not Jewish. The subject line was just to get your attention. But then again.... I would not have surprised me if Bil'am had said, "I can't do what my god doesn't let me do." After all, religious people of *any* religion generally refrain from going against the will of their god. Likewise, I would not have been surprised if he said, "I can't do what Hashem doesn't let me do." He is a professional, and he knows the rules of the game (most clearly seen in maftir). He knows who he is dealing with, and if he is trying to curse the Jews, it would be a good idea to follow the rules of the Jewish God. But Bil'am didn't say either of those things. What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase. There have been plenty of polytheists who accept the idea that there are many gods, One of them being Hashem, the God of the Jews. But in this pasuk, we see that Bil'am goes beyond accepting Hashem as *a* god - he accepts Him as "my God". I checked my concordance and found about 50 cases in Tanach of the phrase "Hashem Elokai", spelling "Elokai" with either a patach or a kamatz. It seems that this was the ONLY case where this phrase was used by a non-Jew. Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Sat Jun 30 22:44:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 01:44:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180701054415.GA28439@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 12:01:59AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me : do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase... : Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding : has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply : spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now : it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not : have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I : guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. This works well with my recent (few minute old) blog post. I argue that the whole point of Bil'am might have been to illustrate how monotheism and deveiqus don't guarantee being good people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Aspaqlaria Bil'am the Frummy by micha ? Published 18 Tammuz 5778 - Sun, Jul 1, 2018 Sun, Jul 1, 2018 The Medrash Tankhuma (Balaq 1) says: And if you ask: Why did the Holy One blessed be He, let his Shechinah rest upon so wicked a non-Jew? So that the [other] peoples would have no excuse to say, `If we had nevi'im, we would have changed for the better', He established for then nevi'im. Yet they [these nevi'im] broke down the moral fence of the world... For that matter, the Sifrei says on the last pasuq of the Torah: And another navi did not arise again in Israel like Moshe: In Israel, [another] one did not arise, but among the nations of the world, one did arise. And who was it? Bil'am ben Be'or. So here you have a prophet with the abilities of Moshe (whatever they meant by that) and yet he was no paragon of moral virtue. He didn't teach them how to lift themselves up, but how to corrupt the Jews. So how does that address the complaint of the nations? They had their navi, but they said it was unfair that they didn't have nev'i'im to give moral instruction -- and Bil'am wasn't capable of leading them in that way. Perhaps Bil'am stood for them as an example to teach them just that point. The nations are described as complaining that if they only had a navi they would have been as good as the Jews. But Bil'am was there to show them nevu'ah wasn't the answer. Even being a navi and having the Shechinah rest upon them is not sufficient to make an ideal person. The whole detour into telling us about an event in the lives of Balaq and Bil'am is such a departure from the rest of the Torah, it is considered a separate book. "Moshe wrote his book and Parashas Bil'am" (Bava Basra 14b) So why it it included? Based on the above suggestion, the section teaches us about the dangers of frumkeit. We can get so caught up in the pursuit of deveiqus, one's personal relationship with G-d, one can end up as self-centered and honor-seeking as Bil'am. We need to start out pursuing moral and ethical behavior, ehrlachkeit, and then the connection with the Divine can be harnessed to reach those goals. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 30 21:01:27 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pinchas Message-ID: <56A42568-E095-442F-A19F-017F306492C3@cox.net> ?Pinhas? has turned back Chamasi, my wrath, from the people of Israel.? (Num.25:11) Pinhas has proven his unusual power to turn back God?s wrath from Israel through a very courageous, difficult and controversial act. The Vilna Gaon brilliantly observes that in the word chamasi (my wrath), the two outside letters ches and yud read chai ? life ? while the inside letters mem and sav read meit ? death. The hidden meaning is that by Pinchos facing squarely what has taken place on the outside, he has miraculously turned back the wrath of the Almighty. In doing so, he has removed death (meis) from the inside, replacing it with life (chai). Why do we pray with a set text? An opinion recorded in the Talmud states that prayers correspond to the daily sacrifices offered in the Temple which are mentioned in this coming week's portion of Pinchas. (Numbers 28:4) It has been argued that this opinion may be the conceptual base for our standardized prayer. Since sacrifices had detailed structure, so too do our prayers have a set text. If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 08:09:35 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 01:09:35 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: This year's incarnation of the Gebrochts discussion attempts to discuss the Halacha and I think traverses territory not clearly enunciated in the past. Also I would not characterise this as Gebrochts-bashing; I dont believe anyone is troubled by those who say, "My Rebbe/My tradition is not to eat whatever it may be" the issue is that Gebrochts is promoted as Halachically legitimate and therefore preferred if not mandated. The ShA HaRav declares firstly, that as far as the Halachah is concerned, there is no concern with Kneidlach during Pesach, see the link - http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=25074&st=&pgnum=486 He does however advise that it is a valid stringency his first observation/proof however is that flour can be found on the surface of the Matzos and later on says this is quite common However, A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years B] no other Posek ever verified this claim this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within the finished Matza - but C] there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already been made D] even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link provided - It is universally accepted these days that flour is not added to a dough already made and there is no Matza baking program that permits adding flour to the already made dough Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 18:30:38 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 21:30:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The not-Korban Pesach Message-ID: I had asked: : It has come to me attention recently that the Torah never refers to : the Pesach as a Korban... : My question is this: Whatever reason it was, why the Torah avoided : using that word in this context ... why did Chazal feel differently? Upon further research, it seems that my question was based on the *mistaken* assumption that the Pesach was unique in this regard. It turns out that while the Torah does use the word "korban", it never uses phrases such as "Korban Tamid", "Korban Todah", or "Korban Musaf". These were referred to simply as the Tamid, the Todah, and the Musaf, just as the Pesach was. Apparently, construction of the phrase came much later, and was applied to them all. Exception: The "Korban Mincha" is mentioned three times in Vayikra 2, but that would change the whole question drastically. I should also clarify: these phrases aren't missing only from the Torah, but from the whole Tanach. They seem to have arisen after the Tanach. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sun Apr 1 20:40:08 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 23:40:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b27445d-5dde-c27e-a809-871e12258604@sero.name> On 01/04/18 11:09, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years Who is "we"? > B] no other Posek ever verified this claim > this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within > the finished Matza - but > > C]? there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not > thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product > the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already > been made Perhaps you mean no *other* posek, because this one clearly says it. It's no surprise that nobody before him mentions it, because he says it's a recent phenomenon. > D]? even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link > provided - This is a bizarre claim. The teshuvah "admits" no such thing. First of all, the footnote is obviously not part of the teshuvah, not by its author, and thus completely irrelevant to anything. Second, the footnote does not "admit" such a thing either. It brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 1 21:12:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 06:12:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions, one that basically is an exception that proves the rule and the other is a real exception. 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. 2) Powered chalav nochri. Labels here are supposed to state that a product containts powered chalav nochri (if it does). This was the result of a lawsuit.? I guess that no one wants to start listing every possible kula that goes into a food product. OTOH? if meat isn't halaq, labels generally don't state it. They only state the meat's halaq status if it is halaq. Ben On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: > I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the > lines to fine, or it becomes unusable. Once it's certifying a product > as lacking qitniyos, it might as well stick to avoiding all qitniyos > rather than having a confusing (to some) explanation on each package > which minhagim can or can't use the product. > > The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that > in a number of ways. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 1 18:58:35 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 21:58:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which >is eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give >his full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are >15,000 Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. Have patience and watch developments. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 2 07:10:57 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:10:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 01/04/18 21:58, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >> I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which is >> eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give his >> full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are 15,000 >> Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. > > Have patience and watch developments. Do you claim prophecy, or are you breaking silence on some vast and hereto unsuspected conspiracy? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 3 08:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180403150030.GA23693@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 06:12:23AM +0200, Ben Waxman wrote: : On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: :> I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the :> lines to fine, or it becomes unusable... :> The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that :> in a number of ways. : I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions... I think what I said is really particular to the US, or maybe chu"l as a whole. Where people who keep kosher will suffer with less, and people who don't won't care what has a hekhsher and what doesn't. Few people will make a less observant choice if an Amerucan hekhsher chooses to be more machmir than their own minhagim require. Non-Mehardin rabbanut has a strong motive away from least common denominator. They have a responsibility to a large population that will buy with a hekhsher IFF and only if the sacrifice is not too onerous. : 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that : they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that : proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any : case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically : stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. I recall the marshmallows sold in the US with a long explanation as to why the mei qitniyos they contain are a non-issue. Tha candy with a teshuvah on every wrapper. (Even better than Laffy Taffy or Bazooka Joe!) Unfortunately, they all have the same one. Pretty much the same thing. But didn't work in the US in the long run, as the rightward drift continued. :-)||ii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 3rd day micha at aishdas.org in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Chesed: What is perfectly Fax: (270) 514-1507 balanced Chesed? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 3 21:58:05 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:58:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin Message-ID: One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, he does this privately, since the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was sitting up front without wearing tefillin. When I asked his brother, who does put on tefillin during Chol Moed, about this, he told that the rabbi put on tefillin during Chol Moed until he married. "Our minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed," he said. My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in the ladies section. Thus I do not understand how the rabbi of the shul that I davened in yesterday could sit up front facing everyone without wearing tefillin. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 06:28:11 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:28:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Professor L. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 12:58 AM > My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them > in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put > on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should > not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in > Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in > the ladies section. This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom came from different places with different minhogim. According to halokho, what the acharonim say about wearing t'fillin or not halakhically does not apply here. Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where there was a mnhag hamokom. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 4 07:44:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:44:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin References: Message-ID: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 09:28 AM 4/4/2018, Mandel, Seth wrote: >This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." >But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from >Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom >came from different places with different minhogim.... >Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where >there was a mnhag hamokom. If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 08:07:12 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 15:07:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: , <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: From: Prof. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 10:44 AM > If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section > than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin > can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section Any shul has the right to set up its own rules, and anyone who davens there has to follow its rules. That is also halokho. Even if they were to make a rule, for instance, that one must wear green on Chanukka. Or that the shul must say the prayer for the State of Israel. But to claim that it is halokho that in America people who daven with t'fillin may not daven together with people who do not is wrong. There is no such halokho in America. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 4 20:58:28 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 05:58:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6b0af463-987c-0e3e-d5a2-27cb630b86ba@zahav.net.il> On 4/4/2018 6:58 AM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is > to put on tefillin during Chol Moed,? he does this privately,? since > the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. > > > Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin > during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was > sitting up front without wearing tefillin.? When I asked his brother . > . . . . > Wouldn't the rav in question be the proper person to ask? ?Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at mail.gmail.com Wed Apr 4 23:46:31 2018 From: meirabi at mail.gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: The ShA HaRav does not initiate this ban on Gebrochts as his own, rather he bases himself upon the propositions of Poskim which we are now exploring, and it seems that they actually do not support the proposition to create a ban against Gebrochts. A] The observation made by the ShA HaRav, which is central to his anti-Gebrochts argument - is un-supported. Our Poskim and our personal experience, has verified that there is no such thing as flour being found on the surface of baked Matza. B] The ShA HaRav does not issue his own assessment [other than observing flour on the surface of baked Matza] but relies upon other Poskim to support the proposition that flour remains within the finished Matza. However, no such thing is found in the Poskim, other than in situations where flour is added to a dough which is ALREADY formed. No Posek ever suggested that a normal dough may not be thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product. And the ShA HaRav admits this by saying that nowadays the dough is made very hard, dry, with very little water i.e. it is not surprising that Poskim have not discussed this as it is a concern that is due only to this recent change. But no other Poskim from his time endorsed the reasoning that flour is found on the surface of baked Matza etc. C] it is surprising to hear a devoted Chabadnik suggesting that the footnotes found in the KeHos, the official Chabad publishers' publication - are completely irrelevant to the Teshuvah. There are 2 versions to understanding note 33 on the link provided = here is the gobbledigook version - "it brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions" = here is the plain speak version - "this is the best we can find to support the proposition" which is, however which way you turn it, no support at all for this new concern of flour remaining within the baked Matza. One can hardly but suspect that the footnote was added because the Taz and MaAv that the ShA HaRav next refers to, is no support at all for banning Gebrochts, because their observations are exclusively applicable to thick soft Matzos that were under suspicion of having had flour added to the dough during its kneading - and as we mentioned - this had already been comprehensively stamped out by the times of the ShA HaRav. Remember, they were kneading soft dough for soft Matza and it was quite likely that the dough may have been a little too loose and one would be tempted to add more flour to it. So there we have it - if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not - then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha - then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Apr 7 20:38:51 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 23:38:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Isru Chag Message-ID: <64A81636-64D4-4FF1-B35D-C25381E32A1C@cox.net> The gematria for Isru Chag is 278, the same gematria for l'machar found in Bamidbar, Ch.11, vs.18. This is in the Sidra, Beha'alotch, where God has Moshe establish a Sanhedrin because Moshe complained that he could not carry on alone. God says to Moshe: "To the people you shall say, 'Prepare yourselves for tomorrow and you shall eat meat..." There is an interesting tie here. The day after a festival is the "morrow" and even though the holiday is over, we must always be preparing ourselves. As a matter of fact, in counting the omer, we are preparing ourselves for mattan Torah in 50 days. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Sat Apr 7 21:15:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 14:15:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 "Rabbi Meir G. Rabi" wrote: > So there we have it -- if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your > parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o > Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and > enjoy Pesach Is RMG Rabi's post on Gebrokts consonant with the comment of the Mishna Brura. The Chafetz Chaim stated that even though one may have doubts as to the Halachic imperative of being careful (yes, perhaps needlessly) about Matza Shruya, nevertheless, "one should not be MAZNIACH [translate as you will] those who have this Chumra" In particular, it seems to me that the practice of actually keeping Shruya is very much in line with many other Chumras that people have. Consider Garlic on Pesach, for example. I would posit that today the chance of garlic inducing Chametz is akin to itinerant matza flour being present on a baked Matza. Nonetheless, those who have this Chumra, keep it. They keep it because of the Minhag to be Machmir on Pesach! That Minhag, by its nature is concerned with the infinitessimal. There are many other examples. The Belzer don't eat carrots because of a Chametz incident. They were Machmir from then on. Lubavitchers has an incident with sugar and were Machmir from then on to pre-cook it. Halacha on Pesach does admit the concept of remote Chumras! Yes, for those who look at things from a non Pesach purist halachic view, may well scratch their heads. Nonetheless, the Chafets Chaim taught us that we should not be Mazniach. The idea that Pesach cannot be enjoyed without Kneidlach is fanciful, and not directly born out by plain Halacha. The Halacha specifies Meat and Wine as primary inputs from Gashmiyus food that give rise to happiness. Yes, B'Sar Shlomim (not chicken) and wine (good enough for Nisuch Hamizbeach?) To state "if you are CONCERNED about Halacha... eat Kneidlach" is perhaps a worse actualisation than "Mazniach" as it implies that such people are acting in perhaps some antinomian-like chassidic voodoo practice. [ One can argue quite cogently, for example, that wearing a Gartel today is also "not in line with the Halacha". (We wear underpants!) We do not, however, dismiss such practices. [On Shruya see also Gilyoney Hashas from Rav Yosef Engel Psachim 40b]] The Ari z'l stated that he would never 'talk against' a minhag yisrael/chumra on Pesach. In summary, and I've felt that RMG Rabi, Halacha is not a pure science which leads to a true/false conclusion for every question that is investigated using the rules of the Halacha. Admission: My father a'h had the Minhag from his family (likely via Amshinover fealty) not to eat Gebrokts. This is Toras Imecha for me, especially on Pesach, and whilst I know that in general this practice is unique to families who follow the minhogim of the Talmidei HaBaal Shem, and is most minor, I state quite openly that deciding NOT to follow a family minhag/chumra on Pesach would be FAR more upsetting and disturbing to me than not eating Kneidlach. I'm happy to wait for the last day, and for the record, I am not a fan of them, despite my wife being a superlative cook. Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a "hot dog roll". "It is only the anticipation of redemption that preserves Judaism in Exile, while Judaism in the Land of Israel is the redemption itself." Rabbi A.I. Hacohen Kook From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 8 05:55:41 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 12:55:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent actions of Simcha Felder. >From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv "Using his leverage as the swing vote in the divided State Senate, Sen. Simcha Felder appears to have strong-armed a provision into the budget that significantly changes state oversight of yeshiva curricula, political observers say. " I have talked to some people who live in Willimsburg, and the picture they paint of the level of secular education in Hassidic yeshivas is not a good one. One Satmar woman who lives in Williamsburg told me that her sons received no secular education in the Satmar yeshiva they attended. For the record NYS law requires that all children receive a secular education. What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf R. Barukh Schick of Shklov (d. 1808): When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . . . He urged me to translate into Hebrew as much secular wisdom as possible, so as to cause the nations to disgorge what they have swallowed, making it available to all, thereby increasing knowledge among the Jews. Thus, the nations will no longer be able to lord it over us-and bring about the profaning of God's name-with their taunt: "Where is your wisdom?" R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. I:Iayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, 6 through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash. The Gaon of Vilna's sons: By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... 8 First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): I cannot refrain from repeating a true and astonishing story that I heard from the Gaon's disciple R. Menachem Mendel. . . . 10 It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. This included its inner and outer manifestations. He explained: All secular wisdom is essential for our holy Torah and is included in it. He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. He especially praised music, explaining that most of the Torah accents, the secrets of the Levitical songs, and the secrets of the Tikkunei Zohar could not be comprehended without mastering it. ... He explained the significance of the various secular disciplines, and noted that he had mastered them all. Regarding the discipline of medicine, he stated that he had mastered anatomy, but not pharmacology. Indeed, he had wanted to study pharmacology with practicing physicians, but his father prevented him from undertaking its study ,fearing that upon mastering it he would be forced to curtail his Torah study whenever it would become necessary for him to save a life. . . . He also stated that he had mastered all of philosophy, but that he had derived only two matters of significance from his study of it. . . . The rest of it, he said, should be discarded. To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw for this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 8 05:22:36 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 08:22:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Message-ID: <9ABBE35B-0F5B-4CD1-917D-550FD3E33394@cox.net> 9:1 "Vay'hi bayom hashemini..." The Sages teach that the word "vay'hi" often indicates that trouble or grief is associated with the narrative (Megillah 10b). What trouble or grief could there have been on that joyous first day of Nissan? It presages the tragic deaths of Aaron?s sons, Nadav and Avihu. Another explanation: Even in the midst of our greatest rejoicing, a Jewish wedding, we pause for a moment to recall the destruction of the Temple and the fragility of life through the breaking of the glass. Here, too, we have such a happy occasion, but the "Vay'hi" is to remind us of our fallibility and the frailty of life. There are many commentaries on Aaron?s response when told of his sons' deaths: Vayidom Aharon, ?and Aaron was silent.? It is somewhat coincidental that the third syllable of vayidom sounds a little like the English word ?dumb.? One of the literal meanings of the word ?dumb? is mute and unable to speak. It seems to me that Aaron?s silence was his inability to speak due to shock. Many people would faint dead away if told of such news. So it really isn?t surprising that his reaction was one of a deafening silence. When two egotists meet "It's an I for an I" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 8 12:08:57 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2018 21:08:57 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rabbis Ben Nun, Sherlo, and Rimon have come out strongly against the wheat substitutes and feel that they should be banned. In their opinion, the primary reason for the kitniyot minhag is to prevent mixing up the various grains. Eating these types of products will lead to the same confusion. Ben On 4/8/2018 6:15 AM, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: > Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they > essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and > pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are > quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a > "hot dog roll". From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 07:29:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 10:29:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180409142919.GG25254@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 12:55:41PM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects : in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent : actions of Simcha Felder. : : From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv ... : What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular : studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept : only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time : studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, rather than the one you're critiquing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 07:54:47 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:54:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: Message-ID: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:29 AM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with >the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? > >You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh >in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, >rather than the one you're critiquing. And what do you do with the GRA's statement When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . simply ignore it? This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech cannot go against the facts. Also from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf Friesenhausen's critique, however, was hardly confined to the left; he also had to contend with the right: I appeal especially to all those who fear God and tremble at His word, that they not heed the false claims of those who plot against secular wisdom . . . , unaware that those who make such claims testify against themselves, saying: "We are devoid of Torah, we have chosen folly as our guide." For had the light of Torah ever shone upon them, they would have known the teaching of R. Samuel bar Nachtmeni at Shabbat 75a and the anecdotes about Rabban Gamaliel and R. Joshua at Horayot 10a. Also, they would have been aware of the many talmudic discussions that can be understood only with the aid of secular wisdom. Should you, however, meet a master of the Talmud who insists on denigrating secular wisdom, know full well that he has never understood those talmudic passages whose comprehension is dependent upon knowledge of secular wisdom. . . . He is also unaware that he denigrates the great Jewish sages of the past and their wisdom, as well. Worst of all are those guilty of duplicity. They speak arrogantly in public, either to appease the fools and gain honor in their eyes, or out of envy of the truly wise, disparaging those who appreciate secular wisdom, yet in their hearts they believe otherwise. See in the above link the Chasam Sofer's evaluation of Rabbi Friesenhausen. He was indeed a talmud Chacham. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 08:17:47 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:17:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:54:47AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : And what do you do with the GRA's statement .... : simply ignore it? Yes, that's exactly what the Chassidim who run the mosedos in question do with many of the Gra's statements. Why would it surprise anyone if they ignore this as well? As for me, as in your question, "what do you do", that's an entirely different issue. : This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree : with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech : cannot go against the facts. It may be more productive to ask about 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on and 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. Being surprised when Chassidim don't see the world the way the Gra did isn't really useful or warranted. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 11:28:06 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 14:28:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 1144 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 13:30:59 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:30:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180409203059.GB4975@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is : not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with : what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find : that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Or any of a million other things someone who disagrees with the Gra might suggest. A few years back there was a storm, and my son's grade school rebbe ended up losing a son to a downed power line. The friend who tried saving the son died immediately. The boy lingered for about 2 weeks. We attended the levayah. The father was proud that his young son went to his Maker pure, unsullied even by learning the alphabet. Alef-beis, yes, the child knew; but they hadn't yet begun the English alphabet. Not a sentiment I would share. In fact, hearing it from a rebbe who taught my son in a MO school, I found it kind of startling. But it's a perspective. And if it fosters accepting ol malkhus shamayim and ol mitzvos, raising children who are "ohavei H', yir'sei E-lokim, anshei emes, zera qodesh..." who am I to say it's not the right answer for someone else? :> It may be more productive to ask about :> 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on :> and :> 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. : Rabbi Dr. Shnayer Leiman, who wrote the article from which the : quotes come... I meant in each point something different than what your responses reflect. To spell out further: 1- The reports that lead you to believe the norm for secular education in chassidishe chadorim today is actually as weak as you believe. Rather than the likelihood that the more extreme stories are the ones more often reported. They could all fully be true, and yet not reflect the experiences of a statistically significant number of American students. Or perhaps they do. I would want statistics, not anecdotes, before judging. For example, I did not notice it any easier to teach Sukkah 7b-8a "sukkah ha'asuyah kekivshan" and the diagonal of squares vs circles or their areas to MO Jews who weren't themselves in STEM fields than to American chareidim. And if things were so bad, how do so many end up "in computers", if not in a job that requires as much post-HS education as mine? 2- How do they understand those "facts" about needing limudei chol to succeed in limudei chodesh. Which of the numerous possible responses I refered to in response to the first snippet in this email they actually believe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 15:12:48 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 18:12:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:30 PM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: >: One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is >: not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with >: what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find >: that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... > >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 15:31:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 18:31:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409223134.GD12000@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:48PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's : >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. : : Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" : is learning? I hope not. I am implying that it is valid for the chassidim whose school you are critiquing to believe so. And yes, they probably believe that the Gra's hisnagdus was an error caused by his exposure to the wrong set of ideas. They *certainly* believe that of RYBS. (Or at least did in his lifetime. I see an "acharei mos - qedushim" effect currently going on with RYBS's memory.) As I wrote, I am defending the position in an eilu va'eilu sense. It is not a position to which I personally subscribe, nor could subscribe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com Mon Apr 9 23:17:53 2018 From: rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com (Rabbi Meir Rabi) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:17:53 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Gebrochts - MInhag but absolutely no foundation in Halacha Message-ID: My Gebrochts postings have been to clarify one point - it is wrong to claim that Gebrochts is Halachically mandated or justified and points to anything other than a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition. and I do thank RIB for his query to which the answer is a firm NO - my observation - [if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach] - is in no manner a violation of, "one should not be MAZNIACH [ridicule] those who have this Chumra" IF they do not eat Gebrochts FOR THE RIGHT REASON i.e. a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition BTW - I do not see this in the ChCHayim, pity RIB did not provide sourcing But it is in the ShTeshuvah [460:2] - Nevertheless those who wish to sanctify themselves by refraining from that which is permitted - soaked and cooked Matza, even that which has been [baked hard] and ground [again referring to the corrected practice of making Matza meal from thinner hard baked Matza and NOT from thicker soft Matza which was grated on a Rib Ayzen, and at greater risk of being underbaked and Chametz] - should not be ridiculed. RIB has not suggested any argument to associate not eating garlic during Pesach with Gebrochts, and I have no idea what makes one Chumra IN LINE with other Chumras. Neither do I understand the significance to our discussion/disagreement. We both urge those who do not wish to eat Gebrochts/Garlic etc because their parents etc did not - to keep their tradition. However, the natural corollary is - that IF you DO NOT have such a custom - then eat them and enjoy Pesach because there is no legitimate Halachic imperative. Also, the reference to Keneidelach being an important contribution to Oneg Yom Tov is not of my making - it comes from great and highly respected Poskim. It is also not correct to characterise this Minhag as being concerned with the infinitesimal - because that is the Halacha - a speck of flour can become Chametz and ruin your entire Pesach. Indeed this was the very point I am making - there is no substance in Halacha to support this concern - if there was it would be Halacha. And finally - If anything, the urging that we not be Mazniach, demonstrates that Halacha has no concerns about this issue. We ought to however, nevertheless, not ridicule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 01:37:42 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:37:42 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: " Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge." You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a question of cost/benefit for the masses. Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is greater then benefit. The people you listed were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 02:23:50 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:23:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: At 04:37 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will >affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a >question of cost/benefit for the masses. > >Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be >harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is >greater then benefit. The people you listed > >were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 03:05:03 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:05:03 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular > studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am > paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular > subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not > study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" > > I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from > observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of > Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. > > YL > > And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: "All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are largely Orthoprax." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 02:16:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:16:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: Will those who are against the teaching of secular subjects simply ignore what R. Yhonason Eybeschutz wrote in Yaaros Devash 2:7 (as translated by L. Levi in Torah and Science, pages 24-25)? For all the sciences are ?condiments? and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impureand how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:32:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:32:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:31:27AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: :> Is that a common interperation of minhag hamaqom -- that there be :> a common practice in all things? I understood minhag hamaqom to :> be designated practive by practice. : Otherwise the concept of Minhag Ha Makom is meaningless.... Again, why? It is meaningful to say, "here, the minhag hamaqom is to say "umoried hageshem", not "gashem", without making reference to anything else the qeillah might do. Why do we need a context of a qehillah that has many such rules rather than a few? And how many? : Many people wear tefillin on chol hamoed in Eretz : Yisroel, including some gedolim. However, some do : it betzinoh so it is not so well known. You misspelled, "a tiny percentage". : One such godol is the Erlauer Rebbe. You can go : in his beis medrash and see him with tefillin. He : keeps the minhogim of his zeide, the Chasam : Sofer, to wear tefillin on chol hamoed and daven nusach Ashkenaz. One may argue that the Erlau community has their own minhag, and their beis medrash it's own minhag hamaqom. But that raises questions of how one defines "maqom" that I don't know how to answer. .... : Bekitzur, Al titosh toras imecho, keep on : following your minhog and Al yisbayeish., as the : Rama says in beginning of Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim. Minhag avos is inferior to minhag hamaqom. In fact, we have had a hard time finding its basis. The best I can come up with is that minhag avos means that in the absence of a minhag hamaqom in your current location, you should follow the minhag hamaqom of your prior location even if that means the location of your avos. :> For other things? Give it time. How long did it take Jews from Provence, :> Italy and elsewhere to congeal into a single minhag Ashkenaz? : On the contrary, I doubt that the Chassidim will : ever eat Gebrokts on Pesach, the Sephardim will : stop eating kitnyos, and the non-Chassidic world : will stop eating Gebrokts on Pesach. And yet nowadays Sepharadim make an Ashkenazi qutzo shel yud, to be yotzei lekhos hadei'os. Yekkes and Litvaks eat glatt out of necessity (go find reliable non-glatt), but how many would eat that piece of non-glatt if they found a reliable hekhsher for it? Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. The choilam is far broader in the US than its ancestry; and in other communities, tav-lessness caught on. How many non-Morrocans in Israel celebrate Mimouna nowadays? It seems from the media, this minhag is spreading. (I think it would be a beautiful thing for "misht-night" communities to adopt. After a week of not being guests, make a point of sharing food and showing it had nothing to do with a lack of friendship.) I see lines coalescing. These things take centuries, and accelerate as people who remember pre-migration life pass away. We just begun. I think it is less that a Minhag America can't emerge than the mashiach won't give it the time necesssary to emerge. And Minhag EY may go back to being by sheivet and nachalah, but in any case its evolution will be radically changed by the rapid influx of the rest of Kelal Yisrael. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:03:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:03:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:37:30PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as : a trivia question for now). There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one were considered propitious for a large crop. (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:12:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:12:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101226.GC31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 07:50:13AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat before Biur : Chametz? What makes this mitzva different from so many other mitzvos, where : we cannot eat until doing rhe required act? When the issur de'oraisa begins is a machloqes tannaim (RH 28a-b): Rabbi Yehudah holds starting from chatzos, R Meir - from sheqi'ah. (Does the issur start from when the non-qorban could be shechted, or when it could be eaten?) The Rambam in Chameitz uMatzah 1:8 pasqens chatzos, as do we when we make the zeman 1 hour before chatzos (rather than 1 hour before sheqi'ah). MiDerabbanan, it's pushed earlier, and that's the safety margin. But I don't think that's enough to make it a morning mitzvah that it must be done first thing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:19:33 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:19:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 02:15:47PM +1000, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: : Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they : essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and : pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are : quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a : "hot dog roll". It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. Like not declaring quinoa to be qitniyos. And unlike declating peanuts to be. (Which some of Eastern Europe did, and as RMF attests, some didn't.) For that matter, is there anyone whose ancestors had the minhag of qitniyos but didn't include corn when it was brought over from the New World? Since minhag is by definition informal and mimetic, what happens to catch on or not doesn't trouble me. Boils down to a qasheh oif a masseh. (You can't ask a "question on a story"; how it happened is how it happened, unreasonalbe or not.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From isaac at balb.in Tue Apr 10 03:24:59 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:24:59 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> On Apr 10, 2018 at 8:19 pm, wrote: > It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, > even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. > There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels > would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of another term. From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 02:59:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:59:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] PESACH -- AFTER 400 YEARS GD'S IN A HURRY TO REDEEM US? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410095948.GA31049@aishdas.org> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:28:48PM +1100, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: : We begin the Seder with Matza being a reminder of our suffering -- but we : conclude it with a new perspective -- Matza reminds us of how quickly Gd : took us out of Egypt. Actually, that's the end of Maggid, not the end of the seder. Later than that in the seder, Hillel reminds us of a third aspect of matzah -- al matzos umorerim yokhluhu. Not that of slavery, nor of leaving, but of the midnight in between, and every Pesach thereafter. There is a fourth aspect: Lechom oni -- she'onim alav devarim harbei. Rashi takes this idea so seriously that he holds you're not yotzei the mitzvah with matzah eaten before Maggid. Matzah that didn't have the haggadah is not lechem oni. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:51:53 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:51:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> References: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> Message-ID: <20180410105153.GB23901@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:24:59PM +1000, Isaac Balbin wrote: : It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the : Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of : another term. The only thing we know for sure is that it included some subset of grain-like foods and of legumes. Any reason as to why is a post-facto theory. Multiple exist. In principle, pasqaning one such shitah is right, and therefore the rabbanim who made a din must have intended to include the new case is possible. But not compelled. We often leave a gezeira off where it originally ended because it's not for us to ban more things than Chazal did. All the more so in a case like qitniyos, when it's not a rabbinic issur but a minhag. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 05:14:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 08:14:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10.4C.08474.AFAACCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:05 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies >curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not >higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance >is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study >http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p >which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: >"All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, >when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are >largely Orthoprax." I am not claiming that the study of secular subjects is any sort of guarantee that one will remain religious. The reasons for someone to give up observance or to water down their observance are complex. However, for many reasons it is important to have a basic secular education. One of them is to open up some opportunities to earn a living. And let me be clear, I am not talking about a "Harvard" secular education. But I see no reason why someone born in the US should not be able to speak, read and write English. I have an Op Ed piece that will appear in this week's Jewish Press on the topic of secular subjects in chassidic yeshivas. In part it reads Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. Parents do not have a blanket right to determine the education of their children. Would you say that a parent has a right to send his child to a school that preaches Antisemitism and prejudice? Also, based on my experience as an educator for over 50 years, I have to say that parents do not always know what is best for their children educationally. Choosing to enroll one's sons in a school that does not give a basic secular education is a very poor choice. Also, having a school that does not give a basic secular education is against the law as is clear from my recent Jewish Press article. Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma let alone a Regents diploma? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Tue Apr 10 04:29:37 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:29:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: It's not only the lack of secular education (that R' Yitschok Levine refers to) or knowledge to interact with the secular world (that R. Hirsch z"l is reported to have referred to) that is the problem; it's the abysmal standard of the education they do receive, the overall intellectual integrity, and their attitude to anything scientific. Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. As far as i recall, the Munkatche Rebbe [frequently?] visited the Natural History Museum when he could. There is such a terrific gap in some of our children's education that it's hard to believe it's not going to be detrimental in some way to their development. [I know I'm spouting to the 'converted', but thanks for the opportunity to at least voice my concerns somewhere.] Dovid Rubin From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 06:07:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:07:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. I will just deal with one of the things you raised. If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against the crowd, this practice would end. YL The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of Volumes I-IV. The German custom to bring a young boy to the synagogue with a wirnpel (wrapping for t he Torah scroll) has no connection whatsoever to the practice of the chalaka (the Arabic term for Upsherin) observed by Sepharadirn and later ad opted by many Chasidirn. Th e custom of holding a special celebration marking the boy's first haircut developed among these groups. The celebration takes place at a specific age, usually three. Th e festivity is customarily held near the gravesite of a tzadik or in a synagogue. T his custom was unknown in ancient Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities. The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are found in accounts written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim. Some three centuries later, we find the first indications that the custom had made its way into Chasidic circles. The most important source concerning the chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. The details of this story are somewhat vague, and it is unclear whether the Ari-zal made a chalaka for his son, or whether the account refers to his disciple, Rabbi Yonatan Sagish. There is also some question as to whether the Ari-zal participated in Lag Ba 'omer events in Meron after his kabalistic insights because the custom to conduct a chalaka on Lag Ba 'omer runs in opposition to the Ari-zal' s final ruling that forbade hair cutting during the orner period. Furthermore, the custom of the chalaka has given rise to some questions as to the propriety of hair cutting at a gravesite or synagogue, which might constitute an infringement upon the sanctity of the site. Some have also questioned the permissibility of haircutting on Lag Ba omer, during bein ha-rnetzarirn (the three weeks before Tisha B' A v) or during Chol Ha 'rno 'ed. Yet another concern was the immodest behavior that occasionally accompanied this event. :Most Sephardic and Chasidic rabbis applauded, or at least defended the practices observed in their circles, though there were those who forbade The custom in this manner. Rabbi Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik of Brisk (1889-1960) disapproved of bringing children to rabbis on their third birthday for the chalaka, claiming that this practice "has no reason or basis." He noted that there are sources indicating that one should introduce the child to matters of Torah at the age of three, but none that involve haircutting. Rabbi Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky [the "Steipler Ga'on," (1899-1985)] also opposed this practice, and would send away parents who brought their children to him for the chalaka haircut. The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. Some, however, dismissed this argument, claiming that to the contrary, the chalaka perhaps began as an ancient Jewish practice which was later adopted by the gentiles. There are some older customs, originating in the times of Chazal and the Ge'onim, such as fasting on Erev Rosh Hashana and the ceremony of Kapaprot on Erev Yom Kippur which were opposed by some rabbis since they feared that their origins could be found in pagan rites. In any event, although some communities accepted this custom, Ashkenazi communities \yere never aware of such a practice. They did not receive this tradition from their forebears, and they found no mention of it in the writings of the Rishonim. The ancient tradition among Ashkenazi communities was to cut a boy's hair at a very young age. In fact, during the times of Chazal, parents would cut an infant's hair not long after birth, and they even permitted cutting a baby's overgrown hair on Chol Ha 'mo' ed. In the times of the Rishonim, too, boys' hair in Ashkenaz was cut already within the first several months after birth. The phenomenon of children with overgrown hair simply did not exist in Germany, and a boy with overgrown hair would have been mistaken for a girl. The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no special affair was held to celebrate the event. .. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:21:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:21:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 09:07:38AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for : >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. : : I will just deal with one of the things you raised. I only raised one thing. You are discussing an example, and not the point. : If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go : against the crowd, this practice would end. Which has nothing to do with the general principle of whether the resettlement of Jewry post-war should or shouldn't evolve into new minhagei hamaqom, nor the topic I raised -- the claim they actually are. Nor the reason why I raised the topic: the idea that minhag avos is only a stop-gap, a way to manage when in a maqom that has no minhag. Nor the reason for my post: Your claim that minhag hamaqom only has meaning if the maqom has loits of minhagim. That it can't be applied one-off to whatever practice is under discussion. And if you are correct, what's the threshold of minhagim that unify a community sufficiently to qualify. Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line accordingly. : The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: : Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of : Volumes I-IV. WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. : The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are : found in accounts : written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... It has to be earlier. Originally, chalaqah was held at the qever of Shemuel haNav on the 43rd of the omer, his yahrzeit. See teshuvos haRadvaz 2:608. (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get associated with a haircut at age 3. The move to Meron and Lag baOmer happened when the Ottomans restricted access to the qever in the 1500s. But that has little to do with upsherin in general, eg on a birthday.) The Radvaz, R' David b Shelomo ibn Zimra, was among the gerushei Sefarad, who ended up in Tzefas in 1513 and eventually end up in Egypt where he was RY (he taught the Shitah Mequbetzes, R' Betzalel Ashkenazi) and ABD. So, upsherin was already a practice old enough to get recorded as minhag by someone who lived through the transition from rishonim to achronim. : The most important source concerning the : chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. What makes this "post important source" if the practice predated the Ari by generations? Raising questions about a tradition that the Ari practiced it is a distraction if he isn't the basis of the minhag. AND, the problems with the story isaren't around upsherin, but around making a celebration the night of Lag baOmer, again nothing to do with making one on the child's 3rd birthday. (Unless it too is in the wrong part of the omer or during the 3 weeks. Issues we already navigate for bar mitzvah parties that aren't on Shabbos.) .... : The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice : stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka : transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's : hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in : ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation : of pagan ritual... All I know is that people invoke a similar Hindu practice. And while Hindus may wait to age 3 before making a celebratory first haircut, waiting until 5 or 7 are more common, and not making any ceremony at all is most common. (Although a girls' only haircut being at 11 months is most common.) Observant Sikh men never get a haircut. In Mongolia, between 2-5, girls get their first haricut when they are 3 or 5, boys when they are 2 or 4. No match. China - 1 month. (They wait until after the bulk of infant mortality; lehavdil but yet similar to our considering a child who dies in their first month a neifel.) Poles: a pre-Xian tradition that survived into the 1700s was 7-10. Ukraininans, 1st birthday. Polenesians, teens. Yazidi, originally 40 days, now, 7-11 mo. Interestingly, Moslem boys get their first haircut at 1 week old -- in other words, on the 8th day. In short -- no culture that wikipedia or google found for me has a special haircut for 3 yr old boys ceremony. And yet, I turned up much else. We've seen similar attacks on shlissel challah ('tis the week for that perrennial) based on a difficult to assert connection to key-with-cross breads in Xian communities that were nowhere near the areas where shlissel challah originated -- in either time or space. And yet, the same people continue dressing up their children in Purim costumes, despite the similarity to Carnivale -- and both being local to Italy in origin. Or milchigs on Shevu'os starting in the same region that already had Wittesmontag on the Monday before the Xian Pentacost. For that matter, both of those customs are first originated LATER than chalakah! ... : The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or : other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic : communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern : Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. : Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no : special affair was held to celebrate the event. Is using the haricut to tell the boy "You're not a baby now, time to start chinukh in earnest with alef-beis" really so terrible? Nothing will make that point as deeply as weeks of build up, followed by changing the look in the mirror. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From sholom at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:09:18 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:09:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> References: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <22b69f274e57a0d24c6dcbc45c456a93@aishdas.org> > : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? > : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as > : a trivia question for now). > > There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one > were considered propitious for a large crop. > > (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) REMT wrote me off line and noted: "I don't know its source, but I first heard it when I was a young child." He also answered my trivial question, writing: "In a leap year, the parsha read eight times will always be Acharei Mos. I know of no one commenting on its significance." It just occurs to me that the main event in parshas Acharei Mos occurred on the same day as the events in parshas Shemini. Kol tuv! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 09:30:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:30:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 11:21 AM 4/10/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line >accordingly. > >: The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: >: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of >: Volumes I-IV. > >WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. It was not RSRH who wrote this, but Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger who has spent much time investigating minhagim. >: The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are >: found in accounts >: written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... > >It has to be earlier. Again you are questioning Rabbi Hamburger. I suggest you contact him about this and the rest of your post. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:31:21 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:31:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 09:07, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >> Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >> children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. > > I will just deal with one of the things you raised. > > If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against > the crowd,? this practice would end. YL That is simply not true. The Baal Shem Tov and his talmidim practised it, and that is more than enough for most people. That not everyone did it is irrelevant; very few practices had unanimous support. The BeShT was far greater than the sources you cite, and many more people follow him today than follow those people, so they would have no reason to change. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:35:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:35:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, > and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get > associated with a haircut at age 3. Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From seinfeld at jsli.org Tue Apr 10 10:08:53 2018 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:08:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Playing devil?s advocate here. For the record, I have college and graduate degrees, my children all read and write well etc. However, in response to Prof. Levine. If the cost of that exposure to American secular culture (language, history, values, etc.) is that a certain percentage of children may be enticed by it and go OTD - more than would have otherwise - then, yes, it makes sense. That?s an unacceptable cost. I?m not saying that that is a real cost, but that is the perception. If you want to change the practice, you have to change that perception (which may have some truth to it, I don?t know). >Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America >cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade >science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he >has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the >history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what >happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the >mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic >knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the >digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of >HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has >no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. > From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 10:29:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180410172934.GA1877@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:35:39AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : >(This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, : >and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get : >associated with a haircut at age 3. : Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. As per the same discussion in previous years.... That's what the rishonim run with -- see Rashi and Radaq on the pasuq. Although Rashi says 22 mo in our girsa, I think the other girsa of 24 mo is more likely, because... As the Radaq points out, this fits halakhah, that the time a woman is mish'ubedes to nurse is 24 months. But while elegent, it is not mukhrach that Chanah kept to the minimum. (Thinking out loud: The exchange in 1:22-23 fits better if it was about Chanah not attending an aliyah laregel that was after Shem'el was 2. After all, why would Elqanah have pushed her to bring ShMemu'el to the mishkan before it was safe?) More to the point (and back to repeating myself), there is a machloqes in the medrash whether Shemu'el lived 52 or 53 years. And since that's 50 years after he was weaned and brought to the Mishkan, it implies a machloqes about when he moved into the Mishkan. The minhag was apparently based on the position that he was niftar at 52, and thus moved into the Mishkan at 3. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:06:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:06:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? Message-ID: One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has no inherent "Jewish" quality.) However, there are opinions that say that the Jews spoke Egyptian while in Egypt. I have posted some selections from the Sefer Lashon HaKodesh, History, Holiness, & Hebrew by Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/jews_egypt_hebrew.pdf While it is true that according to one Medrash the Jews did speak Hebrew while in Egypt, there is another Medrash that contradicts this. >From the above reference: GOD SPEAKS TO THE JEWS IN EGYPTIAN While the above sources point to the notion that the Jews in Egypt did not speak Egyptian, there is another Midrash that implies otherwise. This Midrash likens the Jews in Egypt to a prince who was kidnapped for an extended period of time. Finally, his father the king decided to exact his revenge on the kidnappers and release his son. Upon saving his son, the king conversed with the child in the language spoken to him by the kidnappers. Similarly, explains the Midrash, after God redeemed the Jews from exile in Egypt, He spoke to them in Egyptian.221 The Midrash explains that the Jews had been in Egypt for many years, where they had learned the Egyptian language.222 Therefore, when God wanted to give them the Torah, He began to speak with them in the Egyptian language with which they were already familiar. He began by proclaiming, "I (anochi, ) am Hashem, your God ... !"223 According to this Midrash, the word "anochi" in this context does not denote the Hebrew word for "I"; rather, it refers to the Egyptian224 word anoch (11:ix), which means "love" and "endearment."225 One Midrashic source even explains that the Jews forgot Lashon HaKodesh, which is why God had to speak to them in Egyptian. >From page 99 THEY SPOKE LASHON HAKODESH, BUT TOOK ORDERS IN EGYPTIAN Similarly, we can posit that even when exiled to Egypt, the Jews indeed continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, they were not accustomed to accepting orders in Lashon HaKodesh; their Egyptian taskmasters spoke to them only in Egyptian. Therefore, at Mount Sinai, when God was giving the Jews the Decalogue, He spoke to them in Egyptian, the language in which they were accustomed to "taking orders." THEY MAINTAINED THE ESSENCE OF LASHON HAKODESH, IF NOT THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE Even if we assume that the Jews completely forgot Lashon HaKodesh, we can still reconcile the contradiction based on a previously mentioned concept set forth by Rambam. Rambam, as we already mentioned, writes that Lashon HaKodesh is called so because it lacks the explicitness found in other languages, making it a chaste and holy language. Therefore, one can explain that although the Jews in Egypt spoke the Egyptian language, they did not deviate from the moral standards manifested by Lashon HaKodesh. God had to speak to them in Egyptian since that was the only language with which they were familiar. However, they did not change their manner of speaking; that is, they internalized the refined and moral linguistic style of Lashon HaKodesh, which they maintained even when speaking Egyptian. And from the Chapter Summary After discussing Joseph's personal exile to Egypt, we segued into discussing the Jews' collective exile to Egypt. A well-known Midrash states that the Jews in Egypt did not change their language, meaning that they continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, another Midrash states that God began presenting the Torah to them in Egyptian, because that was the language that they spoke in Egypt. While these two Midrashim seem at odds with each other, we presented several approaches to reconcile them and give a more concrete answer as to whether the Jews in Egypt spoke Lashon HaKodesh or Egyptian: ? Radak explains that there were some Jews who were not enslaved, and they spoke Lashon HaKodesh exclusively. Their not-so-fortunate brethren spoke Lashon HaKodesh between themselves, and Egyptian with their Egyptian overlords. ? Alternatively, it is possible that all the Jews spoke Lashon HaKodesh, yet God presented them the Torah in Egyptian because they were acclimated to accepting orders in that language. ? A third possibility is that since the hallmark of Lashon HaKodesh is its embodiment of holiness and purity, even if the Jews forgot the literal language, they could still be said to speak Lashon HaKodesh- The Holy Language-if their manner of speech remained holy. After the Jews exited Egypt and eventually arrived in the Land of Israel, establishing their own rule, it is clear that Lashon HaKodesh alone served as their spoken language. This arrangement lasted for several centuries until the language began receding under Babylonian influence, toward the end of the First Temple period. Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may not be true. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:22:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:22:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Legendary Chassidic Rebbe Admits: The Noda BiYehudah Was Correct In His Opposition to Lisheim Yichud Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/QEUCPq However, what is less well known, is that the Divrei Chaim, despite being a great Chasidic leader, actually said that the Noda BiYehuda was correct in the matter, and, based on that, his followers do not say lisheim yichud before sefira. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:39:28 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:39:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:06 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews > from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. > Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their > children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far > as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has > no inherent "Jewish" quality.) > > > ... > Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may > not be true. > > YL > > > May not be true is the operative word, there is no disputing that there is an opinion in Chazal that it is true and that the Jews spoke only Hebrew in Egypt. This is the opinion that the Chasidim follow and therefore they are against speaking English. I don't see how you can find fault with them when they are following a valid opinion in Chazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:10:49 2018 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Yehuda Gluck) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 04:10:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Wed Apr 11 02:59:49 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: R? Moshe Yehudah, Thank you for taking notice of my post! ?Only a narrow band of Torah studies are benefited by a narrow band of secular studies? - I agree with you - but only in part. 1. If I may add the word ?directly? to your statement (- ?only a narrow band of Torah studies are *directly* benefited?), as, arguably, the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education [though admittedly, this was not the thrust of my original statement]. 2. Re the case in point, Chullin and biology. Though, in general, the biology syllabus does not necessarily help in learning Chulin, biology could be taught in a manner that would: i.e. a teacher familiar with the various sugyos, could give a thorough grounding in anatomy, etc. This would be better than relying on Temunei Chol [or similar compilations], which (might) stifle critical thinking. Furthermore, an appreciable amount of Torah literature is based upon a medieval understanding of chemistry and anatomy. A fuller understanding of those thinking processes, coupled with a comparative study of [human] biology and the basics of modern chemistry, could conceivably open the door to a much fuller Torah experience. Indeed, a syllabus could conceivably be drawn up that would both benefit the Ben Torah and satisfy the requirements of an Examinatory Board. 3. Re maths; again, you are right, so far as a basic understanding of the sugyos are concerned. But to appreciate maths as a backbone of the world?s structure and thus marvel at the???? ????? , to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory to deeper areas of the Torah [which surely some of them will want to learn], requires a fundamental grounding in the subject. Dovid Rubin Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ________________________________ From: Moshe Yehuda Gluck Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 9:10:49 AM To: 'The Avodah Torah Discussion Group' Cc: 'D Rubin' Subject: RE: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:23:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:23:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Lets take a step back for a second. There has been a machlokes for thousands of years (see the Gemara in Berachos 35) whether the ideal is torah only or for lack of a better phrase torah im derech eretz. There is no disputing that in the last 200 years the overwhelming majority of Gedolim have been in the Torah only camp and in the 20th century the Torah im derech eretz is pretty much RYBS and the followers of R' Hirsch. I can provide an almost endless list of Gedolim who had zero secular education and knew kol hatorah kula while on the other hand the list of Gedolim who had a secular education is much much much smaller. Your position regarding secular studies while certainly a valid one is unquestionably the minority opinion and therefore it is ridiculous for you to simply dismiss the other opinion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 03:23:23 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 10:23:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <79615f4629784da49fb5941943399ebd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. ----------------------------- Bingo-and probably true on a micro level but not, I fear, on a macro level. I used to tell my boys that 80% (not based on a study but the handy 80/20) rule)of what they learned would not be used later, the problem is you don't know which 20% will be. Look here for the background of the inventor of the m-16 and you'll see what he brought together https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Stoner Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 04:40:52 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 07:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote, and I quote his closing last paragraph in full: > Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them > to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend > a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma > let alone a Regents diploma? The first and second sentences don't have any logical connection that I can see. There are plenty of boys who attended a Hassidic yeshiva, who now earn enough to support a family. Diplomas are not guarantees, and I'm don't know how much they help. They certainly don't help as much as drive and persistence and elbow grease. My boss, for example, asks me for help occasionally with English spelling and grammar, but that doesn't seem to have hampered his ability to own his business at half my age. (His mathematics abilities are a good example. He understands enough of the concepts that he can figure out anything on his calculator without my help. But he avoids doing even simple arithmetic in his head. And because he refuses to do the arithmetic in his head, I make more mistakes than he does.) Akiva Miller From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 11 06:22:58 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:22:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <1F.0A.18065.33C0ECA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:10 AM 4/11/2018, Moshe Yehuda Gluck wrote: >I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that >a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. >What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion >sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some >secular knowledge in order to understand them. Please read RSRH's essay The Relevance of Secular Studies to Jewish Education (Collected Writings VII) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 06:50:01 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:50:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption Message-ID: Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:20:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:20:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org> I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:45:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:45:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:50:01PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may : be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? All I have is the reverse. R' Gedalia Felder (Yesodei Yeshurun 2 pp 188-191) holds that an adopted child can be called up "ben Micha Shemuel", but that this shouldn't be done when the adopting father or the son is a kohein. In order to avoid confusion about the child's kehunah. (Or that of a future descendent, when people vaguely remember his name years later). I assume leviim too, but that's not in my notes. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 12:08:20 2018 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:08:20 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> References: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Tangentially, there is a convention to write the name of a chalal in official documents as Ploni ben Ploni Vehu Kohein, to signify the difference in status between father and son. I'm not sure that this would be recommended (or desirable) in the case of an adopted child. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 11 23:46:36 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 01:46:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: I suspect that some will feel that my position on the issue "secular" studies comes from the left of center. First off, we need to delineate what we mean by "secular" studies. This word as we use it today is far different from the science the GRA or the many achronim, rishonim and of course Chazal learned in the sense of math, astronomy and biology. Today that word would also include many areas such as social studies, psychology, philosophy, evolutionary biology, cosmology, comparative religion, black studies, sexual awareness, cultural studies etc, etc, that could lead a young untrained mind into problematic areas that could raise many question they are not prepared to deal with. The scientific study required by the various sugios in shas and halacha really require a minimal study of some elementary math such as some trig and geometry, some values such as that of Pi, square root of 2 etc and Pythagoras theorem, astronomy (mainly lunar orbit, seasonal and diurnal calculation), anatomy and some other limited areas of biology plus a handful of other concepts. By this logic much of what we call science today would be excluded from being necessary for learning Torah. Mi'sevoras libi, I would say that the study of much of what we think of in modern parlance of the many new fields of mathematics and the physical sciences such as the many branches of modern physics both classical and relativistic and quantum mechanics, the many branches of chemistry, biology and medicine and of course modern astronomy including much more than just solar system dynamics (mainly lunar & seasonal) and positions of a handful of stars are mandated for a very simple reason -- an understanding (the deeper the better) in these fields makes one truly understand that the world is so highly complex and functions so beautifully that this it can not be a random happening and that there must be a borei olam. A havana into the very ultra small as we find through quantum mechanics and particle physics, or into the wonders of the atom and chemistry and how things combine, or into the wonders of dynamics, optics, elec & magnetism, or the modern fields of solar and stellar astronomy and spectrographic analysis and through the beauty and understanding exposed through the many modern branches of modern math including advanced algebraic theory, statistical analysis, advanced calculus and vector and tensor analysis and the many other fields to numerous to mention here that are so useful throughout all of modern science.. These literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam. The understanding of biology from its lowest levels of its physics and chemistry to the molecular with the tremendous complexities at its molecular and cellular levels and onto its study at the organic and systemic levels, through developmental biology of the miraculous changes from conception through the fetus to birth, infancy and childhood to the adult and ultimately death. Many of these may not help much with the simple peshat of any particular sugio in shas, but they surely create emuna and tremendous yiras haromeimus. No one who has even the smallest inkling of any of this knowledge could believe that existence as we now can begin to perceive it is a bunch of random events. Just the mind boggling complexity of the functioning of a single cell is awe inspiring. With so many thousands of things happening in each cell with perfect timing, with everything just in the right place at the right time in each of the billions of cells in our bodies. Worst of all, leaving a young mind unexposed to many of these areas and without proper training in them leaves him vulnerable to the many questions he will eventually encounter as he goes through modern life. He will not be prepared to deal with evolution, cosmology, philpsophy etc that he will surely encounter no matter how well shielded he may be. In addition to the above, in our modern society some of the above may be needed merely to functional and earn a living in todays highly technical society and he will be severely limited in the types of parnasa available to him. I am sure that many will differ substantially from my position above. Please excuse my rambling and repetition at times and run on sentences in the above. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 12 10:20:51 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 17:20:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not utter the phrase with the congregation? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Apr 12 12:42:50 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:42:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "There is no way that a "Rabbinical committee (namely the Rabbanim/Poskim/Rebbeim of the respective chassidishe Yeshivos whom Simcha Felder is representing) decided that systematic secular education is forbidden by Orthodox Jewish law. The reason is that the Torah requires one to study secular subjects. I have posted part of an article by Dr. Yehudah Levi from his book Torah Study. " Of course there is. Dr. Yehuda Levi is coming from a Torah Im Derech Eretz point of view however, Chasidim and most Charedim have a different viewpoint, namely Torah only. You seem to be a classic case of someone living in an echo chamber. The only opinion/derech that you recognize as legitimate is Torah Im Derech Eretz. As I stated many times, Torah Im Derech Eretz is a small minority, the overwhelming majority of gedolim rejected it. So much so that Gedolim like R' Baruch Ber could not believe that R' Hirsch thought that it was lechatchila. R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch wrote a teshuva (end of Bircas Shmuel Kiddushin) where he explicitly forbid a secular curriculum: ?What emerges is (a) that according to the Torah the obligation of Banim Ubeni Banim means you must make your children into Geonei and Chachmei Torah ? and not merely to prepare them for life as a Jew. But rather, you must teach them and get them to learn the entire Torah, and if chas v?sholom you do not, you violate the entire Mitzvah of learning Torah as per Banim Ubnei Banim. ... (c) To learn secular studies on a regular basis is prohibited as per the Rama 246:4 ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 12 12:34:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:34:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu In-Reply-To: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180412193406.GA7972@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:20:51PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to : bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "barchu : hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in : order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait : and not utter the phrase with the congregation? See the Agur, Hil' Berakhos 98, which can be found at . The Maharam miRothenburg held the sha"tz needn't say it at all. R' Yehudah al-Barceloni says he should say. The Agur adds: and we are noheig to say it. The next source, the Avudraham (or to be accurate: Abu-Dirham), says that the sha"tz says it to be among the community of mevorkhim. He cites the Y-mi (Berakhos 7:3). And he adds that R' Yehudah b"r Barzili Barceloni (I assume the same source as the Seifer haAgur) writes in the name of R' Saadia that even though the sha"tz said "haMvorakh", and therefore didn't remove himself from the klal, he needs to return himself to the klal "legamrei" and day "Barukh H' Hamvorkh". Like in bentching, where the leader says "nevareikh" and yet repeats the responses of the rest of the zimun. No answer there. However, note that the assumption is that Borkhu doesn't need the sha"tz or the oleh to repeat it. The sha"tz needs to repeat it for his own sake, so as not to exclude himself from the kelal of mevorkhim. (Except according to the MmR, who doesn't believe the sha"tz has such a need.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 12th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Gevurah: What aspect of judgment Fax: (270) 514-1507 forces the "judge" into submission? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 01:31:53 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:31:53 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am surprised that you even bothered to quote him." And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his teshuva. There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 02:10:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 05:10:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: >"In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz >wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am >surprised that you even bothered to quote him." > >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with >his teshuva. If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in EY are pursuing higher secular education. >There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' >Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and >Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through >this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not >with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to >learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a >book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the >Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of >issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even >happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas >and poskim. Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat and Yom Tov (holy days) - and furthermore, it is better to occupy oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). >And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but >Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after >them." as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as >the Mishna Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of >people are capable of studying Torah all day. Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? The following is taken from Rav Schwab on Chumash, Parshas Acharei Mos. "At all times the Torah's unchanging teachings must be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, attitudes, relationships to man and beast, and positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and evaluation of the Torah. "What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the 'ways of the Earth.' The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world that surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities that confront him. "What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more crucial it is that this wisdom be conveyed to the Jewish contemporary world. It must be transmitted in a language that our generation understands and that will attract the searching youth, the ignorant, the estranged and the potential ba 1al teshuvah to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah leader must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. "There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose life task is to enlighten and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those 'messengers of G-d' the highest respect and a loyal following. These are the kohanim and levi'im of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. "Yet education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore it becomes mandatory for the present day 'Tribe of Levi' to initiate and encourage an educational system that can serve the other "eleven tribes who comprise the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meets its challenges, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head-on the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. "The Divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Sun Apr 15 05:53:59 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:53:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Micha Berger) In-Reply-To: References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com>, <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org>, Message-ID: This reply was sent earlier to R' Michah and is still valid: I agree. With respect, I did allude to ?learning skills and a mode of thinking? in both of my previous posts: ?the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education?, ? to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory?, and my reference to ?the [lack of] overall intellectual integrity?. Related to this: Is it incorrect to posit that a lot of ma?amorei Chazal was formulated in accordance to their understanding and cultural absorption of sciences of their day? Can we not further Torah with our understanding of modern science, both peripheral and integral ? even though clearly lacking their sya?ato dishmayo and Ru?ach HaKodesh? Is that not the derech taught both by the Ba?al Shem and his disciples, and the GRA and his school [to use the chochmoh of the world..]? Another q: Do we view Torah SheBa?al Peh on a par with Torah SheBiKsav, in the sense that it must be learnt ?as is?, without consideration of the worldview that shaped those comments? [I rather think we can see two views in the Rishoinim.] Dovid Rubin ________________________________ From: Micha Berger Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 5:20:06 PM To: Moshe Yehuda Gluck via Avodah Cc: Moshe Yehuda Gluck; 'D Rubin' Subject: Re: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:39:19 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:39:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:45:43 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:45:43 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 3:01 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a > regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance > secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > > > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > > The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he > already knew shas and poskim.? > > > Can you verify this assertion? > Not really but given that the Gra was a super genius and the stories that abound about how much he knew as a child it is certainly plausible to believe so. The fact is that no one really knows how old the Gra was when he learned these things so your assertion that he learned mathematics as a youth is unprovable as well. > > > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > > Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in > 1518? > > > Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there > would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. > > > And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple according to the Rama, the study of Torah is what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get us into the world to come and the study of secular studies will not. That fact remains the same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 03:39:38 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:39:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >> And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his >> teshuva. > If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who > attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend > the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in > Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today > offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. Touro College was established against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim see http://haemtza.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/yosefs-folly.html for example for details. > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in > EY are pursuing higher secular education. Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a pig with a streimel (see http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html ). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: " *Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the other nations, she didn't want to burn them, rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need any outside wisdom and therefore she was priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the world with his wisdom which was solely torah based. * *We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt."* >> There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch >> Ber. The Rama writes: >> "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >> and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will >> acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other >> wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all >> other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called >> by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the >> Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he >> knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >> regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance >> secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles > Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also > learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He > taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning > of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is > permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this > excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible > and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh > De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his > decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy > only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat > and Yom Tov (holy days) -- and furthermore, it is better to occupy > oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). Not sure what you point is here, the Rama is quoted exactly as I wrote, you cal leanr secular studies only now and then and only after you know shas and poskim. > And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but > Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them." > as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as the Mishna > Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of people are > capable of studying Torah all day. > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in 1518? From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 05:01:14 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:01:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:39 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. >R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a >pig with a streimel (see? >http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html >). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak >Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: > >" Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn >them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the >other nations, she didn't want to burn them, >rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need >any outside wisdom and therefore she was >priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the >world with his wisdom which was solely torah based.? > >We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish >home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish >wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt." Too bad this statement does not differentiate between un-Jewish and non-Jewish. as RSRH did. I agree that we do not want un-Jewish influences in the Orthodox world. However, there is no problem with non-Jewish influences. I wonder if they are against the use of, for example, modern medicine or electricity or running water, and countless other things that are "non-Jewish wisdom and come into Chareidi homes. >>There is no question that the simple reading of >>the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: >> >>"But it is not for a person to learn anything >>but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >>decisors that come after them and through this >>they will acquire this world and the world to >>come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >>In any case, it is permitted to learn through >>happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >>isn't a book of heresy.? This is what called >>by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person >>should not take a trip in the Pardes until he >>has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] >>and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> >>The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >>cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >>only that, but he writes that even happenstance >>secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > >Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > >The Gra was sui generis, when he studied >mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim.? Can you verify this assertion? >>And how many people are capable of capable of >>learning "anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >>and the halachic decisors that come after >>them."? ? as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah >>in Koheles as well as the Mishna Brurah make it >>clear that only a very small percentage of >>people are capable of studying Torah all day. > >Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > >Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah >less in 2018 then it was in 1518? Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 09:44:37 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:44:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:45 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not >for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna >and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come >after them and through this they will acquire >this world and the world to come. But not with >learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple >according to the Rama, the study of Torah is >what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get >us into the world to come and the study of >secular studies will not. That fact remains the >same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person >should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. The facts do not remain the same in 2018 as in 1518. The day school movement in the US as well as all of the Orthodox schools throughout the world where secular studies are routinely taught from kindergarten on show that things have changed. Please spend the time to read "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 ? 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 The Jewish Press, July 6, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916)" "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1786-1879)" "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1654 ? 1785) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 08:07:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:07:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi >world agrees with his teshuva. > >There is no question that the simple reading of >the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything >but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >decisors that come after them and through this >they will acquire this world and the world to >come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >In any case, it is permitted to learn through >happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by >the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should >not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and >he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >only that, but he writes that even happenstance >secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. I must admit that I do not understand your assertion against secular studies in conjunction with Torah studies even for boys at a young age.. The day school movement in the US was founded on the principle of a dual curriculum. The model was RJJ. Today in the US the vast majority of yeshivas follow this model save for some of the Chassidic yeshivas. Gedolim like Rav Yitzchok Hutner (Chaim Berlin), (Mr.) Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz (Torah Vodaath), Rav Avraham Kalmanovitz and Rav Shmuel Birenbaum (Mir), Rav Dr. Yosef Breuer and Rav Shimon Schwab (Yeshiva RSRH) , to name just a few, headed yeshivas in which boys were taught Torah and secular studies in elementary and high school grades. I am sure they were well aware of what the RAMA wrote and paskened that it did not apply today. Even in Europe in the 19th century there were some places where secular and Torah studies were taught along side each other. The Kelm Talmud Torah was one. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelm_Talmud_Torah "In addition to Jewish subjects, students studied general subjects such as geography, mathematics, and Russian language and literature for three hours a day. The Kelm Talmud Torah was the first traditional yeshiva in the Russian empire to give such a focus to general studies. " There was the L?mel-School in Jerusalem where both Torah and secular subjects were taught. So I really do not understand why you focus on the RAMA when it is clear that yeshiva education in many places, since the 19th century and throughout the 20th century involved a combination of Torah and secular studies. What are you arguing about? YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 11:16:15 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:16:15 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> On 4/15/2018 11:10 AM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, > in EY are pursuing higher secular education. I just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different story entirely). From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 10:14:25 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:14:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916) ... There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in have secular studies: 1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would have had no students 2. The law mandated secular studies Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a bdieved. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:22:23 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:22:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:14 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in >have secular studies: >1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send >their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would >have had no students >2. The law mandated secular studies When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young people. >Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but >as a bdieved. Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! YL From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:29:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:29:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <4C.65.18065.A7C83DA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:16 PM 4/15/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I Just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went >through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these >colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or >should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different >story entirely). And many of those who attend these institutions find their secular knowledge woefully inadequate and probably wish they had a stronger secular education when they were younger. Look at the first part of the video at https://goo.gl/WKrKyT and see what he says about his own yeshiva education. At about 2 minutes in he says he discovered that he didn't know anything when it came to being prepared to work. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 15 05:48:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:48:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria Message-ID: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> The leprosy mentioned here was special kind of leprosy which only the Jewish people suffered from only in Israel. It never occurred outside of Israel, even in a Jewish home. The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical but rather a spiritual disease. The Rabbis comment: b?sorah tovah hee l?Yisroel ? "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and mortar to act as if it were alive. It would be most unusual for a house to become sick just like a human being. Such an illness borders on the miraculous. Why does the Torah say that a house may be afflicted with leprosy? It means that a Jewish home is different from other homes; it has life and spirit attached to it. When the people who live in these homes are sinful, the very bricks of the home reflect that sinfulness. The Rabbis tell us that leprosy is a sign of evil and sin; therefore, it is natural that house would manifest leprosy as a sign of its inhabitants evil. Now we can understand why the rabbis say it is good news when a house is stricken with leprosy. If one can notice the disease before it spreads, he has a chance to cure it. When the disease goes unnoticed, the real trouble ensues. Since in today?s world we don?t have the warning of leprosy attached to our houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. The Bible will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible Dwight L Moody -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 11:02:08 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:02:08 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sunday, April 15, 2018, Prof. Levine wrote: > When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 > there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young > people. > Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a > bdieved. > Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 15 12:45:46 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 19:45:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. _______________________________________________ Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 13:08:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 16:08:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <13.9E.29097.691B3DA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:02 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >This is not something to be happy about. This is >more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu >torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very >difficult decision to violate the Halacha in >order to save the next generation. This was not >uncommon in America of that time. Young >Israel???s sponsored mixed dances for the same >reasons. However, now that the Torah community >is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. ? On the contrary, this is something that is appropriate for our time and the future. Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? See my article "Frum or Ehrliche?" The Jewish Press, October 20, 2006, page 1. This article is also available at "Frum or Ehrlich". Letters to Editor Also see "The Obligation to Support a Family" The Jewish Press, February 18, 2015, front page. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 15:35:12 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 18:35:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the > community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the > congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l?olam vaed" > and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included > with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not > utter the phrase with the congregation? Incidentally, the same situation and question applies by the Borchu prior to Birchos Krias Shema, as per S"A 57:1. I can't bring any source, but in my mind, the simple answer is that if the oleh would say it together with the congragation, he might not be heard. The delay is to insure that no one mistakenly thinks that the oleh is excluding himself. I was going to ask a related question about Kaddish that has bothered me for some time. Namely: When the Kaddish-sayer says "Yhei Shmei Raba" himself, why does Mishne Brurah 56:2 tell him to say it *quietly*? But I am *not* going to ask that question, because RJR's post has forced me to compare these tefilos carefully, and I have found a difference that might help to answer his question. RJR was very correct when he used the word "command" to describe what the oleh is saying. The word "Borchu" is indeed the tzivui/imperative form of the verb. But no comparable command exists in Kaddish. Yes, the Kaddish-leader does command them "v'imru", but he even specifies what it is that he wants them to say. Namely, a simple "amen". And so they do. May I suggest that the "Yhei Shmei Raba" is an impromptu addition, that the tzibur adds of their own accord, NOT commanded to do so by the Kaddish-leader. Thus, there is no fear of causing any illusions that he is somehow excluding himself. Indeed, he himself added to the praise by saying "Yisborach v'yishtabach", which (one might say) is simply an expanded version of "Yhei Shmei Raba". So I guess the real question on MB 56:2 is not why the leader says Yhei quietly instead of loudly, but perhaps we could ask whether the leader really needs to say Yhei at all. Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 20:59:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:59:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <54519ad6-5f2a-1c69-4e5f-2d8f0fa2f2a5@zahav.net.il> 1) Is the community as strong as it was back when Torah was transmitted orally? 2) Who is the rabbi who is going to overturn decisions made by the Ta'naim (as opposed to overturning decisions made by school administrators in the 50s)? On 4/15/2018 9:45 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es > laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. > KT From hankman at bell.net Sun Apr 15 18:13:32 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:13:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> R? Marty Bluke wrote: ?R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah.? My response to R? Marty makes a number of assumptions that may not be universally accepted but that I firmly believe. The times are different, the level of knowledge is different both in the physical sciences and in Torah hakedosha. Dare I say that these as a function of time seem to be moving on trajectories that are unfortunately inverse to each other ? particularly in the latter time frame that we live in ? most intensely over the last 10 to 12 decades but can already be clearly seen over the last 4 centuries. With each dor we can see an ongoing diminution in the level of our Torah havanah while a commensurate level of greater scientific understanding has come about (with perhaps the exception of a very few yechidei de?ah such as the Gra and a few others who may have achieved levels more common in much earlier times before them). While Chazal tell us ?haphoch v?haphoch d?kol bah? and that certainly for those who are capable of a great level of Torah understanding such as those of Chazal who were doresh all the essin or all the taggin in the Torah probably could have been able to find quantum mechanics or tensor analysis or molecular biology in the Torah if they so chose. Certainly if the scientists of our day were able to discover these facts, Chazal certainly were able to as well. But I would point out that there is no maimre in Chazal that relates to having discovered any of this knowledge through their pilpul and passing this on to us. Perhaps they did not feel it important enough to report. But this level of understanding in Torah in our times is sadly not available in our times. Given the level of limud for the average person (unlike for some of the gedolim of our times) in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics. The average person (maybe I am just giving away my matsav) will not find much yira or emuna from learning that which is typical of our yeshivos (say a sugia in shas say ?succa govoah m?esrim ama or a sugia on movuy or on tumas negaim ? of hilchos melicha or muktsa in shulchan aruch etc). For the average person these are not awe inspiring subjects and unfortunately only a true godol or great talmid chochom could extract yira and emunah from these cut and dry subjects. Such inspiration for the average yid are fewer and much further in between from most of his limud of Torah. This as a result of our sad diminution in our Torah learning ability. Today, given our greater abilities in understanding the Borei?s briah it is much easier for us to find yira and emuna from our hisbonenus in them. So ?of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none? is Torah, but a very solid adjunct in our times for a vehicle to further inspire yira and emunah would very effectively be math and scientific knowledge. Part of the mitsva of emuna, is not simply belief, but to go out and prove to your satisfaction (to be doresh v?choker) the truth of the Borei and his achdus and that he is the Borei olam and revealed Himself to us at matan Torah and so on. To the extent that science facilitates this search it is a MITSVA and not just mere secular studies at the cost of Torah studies. Clearly the experience our ancestors experienced at yetsias Mitzrayim, al hayam (ma sheroaso shifcha al hayam etc) and revelation on sinai etc was more than enough to inspire tremendous yira, awe and emunah without the need for any help from science (which was not great in their period in any case) and on through the period of the nevi?im and the batei mikadash and later Chazal inspiration was possible through there havana of Torah alone. But I do not see that to be the case in our generation and times. ?So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah?? Because in our day it may be another additional (I hesitate to say ?more? effective way b?avonoseinu harabim for most people) very effective way for most average people.? So today, for the yechidei olom the tried and true method of attaining great yira and emunah through limud Torah may be the best way to go as we have witnessed these great traits in our great gedolim, but that recipe may not work so well in our times for everybody else without additional help. I am also not comfortable with the notion that there are certain areas of knowledge that are off limits to even our gedolim. I feel quite confident to assert that in our time, non of even our gedolim come to discover the great advances in science through there limud hatorah. If they know these subjects it came from sources outside of their linudei kodesh. But Chazal was not constrained in their knowledge. They were required to know shivim loshonos, they studied kishuv and astrolgy and the chukos hagoyim and certainly the science of their day (sometimes even quoting chachmei ha?umos and cf the Rambam quoting Aristo often etc [I also imagine the Rambam learned his medicine in the conventional way mostly including sources outside of Torah]). I feel sad for many talmidei chachamim in our day who lack the background in (sometimes in even minimal) math and science to grasp that they are saying a peshat in a sugia that could not be, and to seek out another peshat therein or to at least realize there is a problem they need to deal with to get a proper havana. Also the chiyuv to teach a son an umnus, obviously means, other than the chiyuv to teach one?s son Torah. We do not assume that his limud haTorah will suffice to teach him an umnus as well. The conventional ?secular? methods of teaching an umnus are to be followed. If you want your son to be a carpenter, send him to carpentry school ? do not expect him to come from yeshiva a talmid chochom AND a carpenter just from his limud haTorah. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 16:30:43 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:30:43 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: Is it not likely that the prohibition is against non-Torah learning which serves no purpose other than engaging in those studies for their own interest and excitement? There is no prohibition against learning any skills for earning a livelihood. Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and research. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 18:06:13 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:06:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. It seems to me that there is indeed one very obvious exception, namely, the chometz which the Rav has not yet sold to the non-Jew. (I suppose that one could avoid this situation by delaying the bittul until the very end of the fifth hour, but the danger of missing that deadline scares me.) I have not seen any sifrei halacha, nor any pamphlets or bulletins or websites, that mention this point. Perhaps everyone just presumes that people have this exception in mind when they say the bittul? Here's a better way to phrase my question: Would a mental reservation be valid in this case? Perhaps halacha ignores the mental reservation, and only cares about the actual words of the bittul - which explicitly refers to ALL the chometz. If halacha does allow this exception - and people do have this exception in mind either explicitly or implicitly - then there is no problem. But I would like to hear that this is confirmed by the poskim. Some might say, "What's the problem? There is chometz in his house, but he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" No, I can see two very serious problems. But before I go further, I must reiterate that these problems would only arise in the case where one does his Bitul Chometz BEFORE the Rav transfers ownership to the non-Jew. (If the ownership transfer occurs first, then at the time of the Bitul, there is no problem, because the only chometz still in his possession is really and truly nothing more than the chometz that he is unaware of.) 1) If there is still chometz in his home, and he is expecting for it to be sold to a non-Jew several minutes or hours later, but the words of the bittul - "All the chometz in my possession, whether I know about it or not" - are to be taken a face value, doesn't this case aspersion on the sincerity/validity of the bittul? 2) Perhaps even worse: After Pesach, when it is time to re-acquire the chometz, he can no longer rely on "he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" Rather, a determination must be made. If he got rid of it via mechira (despite happening after the bittul), then the chometz may be eaten. But if, in the final analysis, he got rid of it via bitul, then it is assur b'hanaah (Mechaber 448:5, MB 448:25). So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? Akiva Miller From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Apr 16 06:35:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 23:35:36 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: I enjoy reading smatterings from the philosophical musings of the great scientists. But I suspect, that is the very reason they are banned. It is because they are NOT boring. And I suspect that unless it may assist me in my Parnassah even reading about new tech developments etc, is likely to be prohibited, not as a corrosive Hashkafa but simply as a time waster. But as the saying goes, Nobody's Perfect [which is sometimes followed by - I am a Nobody] Furthermore, the loud protests that I can already hear, are voiced by those who live in this world which is influenced by non-Torah energies. If we experience boredom when learning Torah - then is it not true that we are still far from the truth of Torah? Reb Avigdor M said - ever noticed how people yawn during Bentching? And would then wryly observe, They were not yawning a minute earlier during the ice cream. I have a friend, a Sefaradi Satmar Chossid, V Frum V Ehrlich, who asked R A Miller if he should learn ShaAr HaBechicnah in the ChHalevovos, R A asked him if he reads the newspapers, to which he replied, No - to which Reb Avigdor responded You need to learn it anyway because the streets are infiltrated with the HashpaAh of the newspapers. I apologise if I seemed to be dismissive of the scientists and their philosophical musings - and the truths that they may discuss Sure, I agree, truth is truth no matter the source. I was merely reflecting upon the reason for the ban on Alternative Wisdoms A] they are unnecessary - they are not required for Parnassah B] they waste time from Torah C] they may well harbour and cultivate life-concepts that are alien and contrary to Torah, amongst the granules of truth Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 06:51:02 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:51:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: <20EAE8A6498E468ABF14517EBCFFBC8A@hankPC> R' Meir G. Rabi wrote: > Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to > various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. > Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote > extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and > research. Do not ignore the truth of the message because you (and we all) do not like the like the lifestyle of the messenger. Pythagoras' theorem is a central truth to much of mathematics and science, and the truth of Einstein's science has withstood the test of time and been subject to much experimental verification. So what exactly is your point -- ignore the truth because you do not like its source? Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Apr 16 11:33:13 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:33:13 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <100f9bef-3e84-6df0-e91d-87b4c01ee3c7@zahav.net.il> Last year I read the document that one signs with the Rabbinate about the mechira. It was quite clear - you sell everything.? Everything includes things that you may have forgotten about? and even things that you have no idea if you own, like stocks in some company that deals in chameitz (even if your ownership is via your pension fund). Everything? means everything. I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". On 4/16/2018 3:06 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the > chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. > > > > So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? > > Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 16 11:07:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:07:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria In-Reply-To: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> References: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180416180705.GG23200@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:48:58AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical : but rather a spiritual disease. I like calling it spirito-somatic, coining a term to parallel "psychosomatic". Just as it stress can turn the presence of Helicobacter pulori in the stomach into having an ulcer. : The Rabbis comment: b'sorah tovah hee l'Yisroel -- : "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." : Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and : mortar to act as if it were alive... But they also say it's purely theoretical (Sanhedrin 71a). Although that's tied to R' Elazar b"R Shimon's side of a machloqes in the mishnah (Nega'im 12:3). R' Yishmael and R' Aqiva (the other two opinions in the mishnah) would apparently disagree. In any case, as with the rest of the cases in the gemara of laws that exist only for learning (ben soreir umoreh and ir hanidachas) it continues with tannaim saying they saw something local tradition said was evidence of one. Nowadays, house mold is known to be all too common. The actual physical side of tzara'as habayis needn't be miraculous. However, unlike tzara'as of the body, one can't invoke a soul - mind - brain causality. It would be pretty direct evidence of Divine Providence if tzra'as of the sort that would cause tum'ah struck only appropriate homes. Which is how I saw the quote. It requires people living on a level where blatant hashgachah peratis is approrpriate. As opposed to an era where even tzara'as of the body requires far more spirituality than people achieve. : Since in today's world we don't have the warning of leprosy attached to our : houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be : able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. There is a discussion of the role of learning Torah, and whether studying Torah that is non-applicabile is of value. Because of ideas like this one, it is hard to believe there can be Torah that is non-applicable. Even if the case isn't, "derosh vekabel sekhar" could refer to taking home lessons for the general principle. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 16th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Tifferes: What type of discipline Fax: (270) 514-1507 does harmony promote? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Apr 16 06:55:47 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:55:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzorah Message-ID: <672ECAA3-45E8-4B5C-A040-0A47C6B91FE2@cox.net> The second verse of this portion (14:2) states: "This shall be the law of the metzora on the day of his purification..." Since the Torah mentions that his purification takes place during the day, the Sages expound that the Kohen's declaration, which alone permits the metzora to begin his purification ritual, may be made only during the day (Rashi; Sifra). The observance of Taharat Hamishpacha has been a central feature of Jewish life for millennia. One finds Mikvehs in medieval Spain, in ancient Italy and in the famed desert outpost of Masada. This is consonant with Halacha which mandates that even before the town synagogue is built, a Mikveh must first be established. The source of the laws of Mikveh and family purity is found in this week's Torah portion. The Torah commands that when a woman has a menstrual flow, she and her husband must stay apart from one another. During this period she is "tameh," a Hebrew term that has been incorrectly translated as "unclean." In point of fact, the word tameh has nothing to do with uncleanness. When one is tameh it means that a person has had some contact with death. In the instance of a menstruating woman, it is the death of the ovum. Similarly, when a man has had physical relations (which inevitably involve the death of millions of sperm), he too is tameh. Implicit in this Biblical tradition is a great sensitivity and awareness of the natural life cycle. After a week has passed since the cessation of the woman's menstrual flow, the woman goes to the Mikveh where she undergoes a "spiritual rebirth." Various aspects of the Mikveh experience reinforce this notion of rebirth. The Mikveh itself must have 40 seah of water, the number 40 alluding to the 40th day after conception when the soul of a child enters the embryo. The woman must have no ornaments or barriers between herself and the water, for her emerging from the Mikveh is like that of the newborn leaving the waters of the womb with no ornaments or barriers. A child is the mirror of the family, he reflects the moral purity of his parents. Anonymous From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 16 08:34:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:34:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Kriyas HaTorah, Aseres Ha'dibros Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Rambam (Teshuvos HaRambam 60) writes that one who is seated should not stand up for the reading of the Aseres Ha'dibros (Ten Commandments). However, the general custom today is that the entire congregation does stand during this reading. Why is it that this ruling of the Rambam is not followed? A. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt"l pointed out that there are two versions of cantillation for the Aseres Ha'dibros. The first is called ta'am ha'tachton (lower cantillation) which punctuates the Aseres Ha'dibros into sentences in the same manner as the rest of the Torah. The second is called ta'am ha'elyon (higher cantillation), which punctuates following the order of the commandments, reconstructing the manner in which the Ten Commandments were received during matan Torah. There are two reasons why someone would wish to stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros. If one's intent is to show extra honor to this portion of the Torah, this is inappropriate. The entire Torah was given to Moshe on Har Sinai, and therefore all of Torah is equally precious. Standing for the Aseres Ha'dibros might lead some to the erroneous conclusion that only the Ten Commandments were received directly from Hashem. However, there is a second reason why one would stand during the Aseres Ha'dibros and that is to recreate the assembly at Har Sinai. We stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros in the same fashion that all of Israel stood during the original acceptance of the Torah. Today, the general custom is to always read the portion of the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'elyon. This indicates that this is not merely a reading of the Torah, but a recreation of matan Torah. Therefore, it is appropriate to stand. Rav Soloveitchik posits that the Rambam read the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'tachton, equating it to every other Torah reading, in which case, it would indeed be inappropriate to stand. The custom of Rav Chaim Soloveitchik, zt"l was to read the Aseres Ha'dibros both on Shavuos and during the weekly portion with ta'am ha'tachton, following the practice of the Rambam. Some, however, have the custom to read the Aseres Ha'dibros on Shavuos with ta'am ha'elyon, since this reading is a recreation of Sinai, but when parshas Yisro and parshas Va'eschanan are read on a regular Shabbos, the Aseres Ha'dibros are read with ta'am ha'tachton. In such a shul it would be best to stand from the beginning of the aliyah so as not to show more honor to one part of the Torah than another. From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 17:58:57 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 19:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: In my previous post responding R? Marty Bluke I wrote: ?in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics.? Upon reflection I wish to add to my previous thought about ?the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly? can lead to great awe and yiras harommeimus and emuna. I have no doubt that the pasuk jn Iyov (19:26) ?umibesori echezeh eloka? is a direct expression in Nach of this idea that my very tissues (biological systems) are great evidence and testimony to the the existence of the Borei Olam and His careful and intricate design and continuing hashgacha of the very smallest and finest, myriad intricate details of every living thing. It basically is the old argument that the existence of a complex system such as a clock implies that there must be a clock maker ? but ever so much in spades. Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 17 10:59:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:59:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> Message-ID: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a : bdieved. Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. The wave of rabbis coming in when the big drive for day school education started were predominantly a particular kind of Litvak. Look who the big voices were in the Agudas haRabbanim of the first half of the 20th century. RARakeffetR makes a strong case that one of the differences between RSRH and RYBS was just how lekhat-chilah secular studies are. RSRH held that our insulation from general culture and general knowledge was a tragic consequence of ghettoization. And that we never chose that life, it was forced upon us. The Emancipation was seen as a boon, allow the full expression of Judaism again. RYBS, in RARR's opionion (and of course, others vehemently disagree) only saw secular studies as the ideal way to live in a suboptimal situation. Secular knowledge in-and-of-itself as well as its ability to help one live in dignity is lekhat-chilah only within this bedi'eved world. But had we all been able to move back to Brisk, it would be all the better. Which gets us to the eis la'asos discussion. Shas too is lekhat-chilah and a great thing. What is bedi'eved is the reality that forced Rebbe, Rav Ashi, Ravinah to canonize official texts and (according to Tosafos) the geonim to write it down. But since we are still in that reality, we still publish TSBP -- lekhat-chilah. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? : Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, : "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of secular studies. Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. I would stick to discussing financial crimes: Yafeh Talmud Torah im Derekh Eretz sheyegi'as sheneihem mishkachas avon. VeKhol Torah she'ein imahh melakhah, sofahh beteilah vegoreres avon. - R' Gamliel beno shel R' Yehudah haNasi (Avos 2:2) But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the am hanivchar means. I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does not produce people less prone to these things. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 17th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Tifferes: What is the ultimate Fax: (270) 514-1507 state of harmony? From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 17 17:25:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 20:25:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz Message-ID: . I had asked: > On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat > before Biur Chametz? I thank those who responded. I still haven't found any poskim who deal with this exact question, but the Magen Avraham does mention something very close: "All melachos are assur once the time for burning has come, until he burns the chometz, just like above in Siman 431." - Magen Avraham 445:2, at the very end Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Apr 17 22:27:14 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 07:27:14 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Omer and Koolulam Message-ID: A Post by Rabbi Alex Israel. In this essay (originally posted on Facebook for public consumption), Rav Israel talks about his feelings about participating in a Koolulam sing along. If you don't know, Koolulam is an organization which gets hundreds, even thousands of people together to teach to sing one song in unison. They took this idea from the US with the twist of having regular folks and not just stars singing. For an example of what Koolulam does, here is their Yom Atzmaut video (described by many as a tefilla b'tzibbur): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxzR9Z-kG6Q (Al Kol Aleh by Naomi Shemer). Rav Israel's post is an excellent example about how people are dealing with inner conflicts of the Omer (and Three Weeks) mourning period and living in modern Israel. Note: There are rabbanim who wouldn't have allowed participation, during the Omer time or any other time. You can read the comments and discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/alexisrael1/posts/10157199448378942 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ If you have been following me on FB, you will know my obsession with Koolulam, especially their ??70th Yom Haatzmaut event. Prior to the event I was asked by 7 or 8 people, friends or talmidot/im, ?whether they could attend during the Omer. (If you watched the video, about half the participants ?were religious-looking.) ? I am generally halakhically conservative (small "c"!) and I try to keep halakha even if it disrupts my lifestyle. I ?am committed to halakhic practice and I don't knowingly contravene the law. So was it forbidden?? On the one hand this was a live event. So is it a problem? The Shulchan Arukh restricts weddings ?and haircuts as modes of marking the death of Rabbi Akiva?s 24,000 talmidim. Magen Avraham ?adds dancing and revelry to the list and I grew up not even going to movies in the Omer. Koolulam ?isn?t a wedding and did not include dancing, but was very much a public celebratory event. Could I ?go and allow others to go? I went to consult. One authoritative Posek said to me "It's not really assur (not dancing); it's not really muttar (public mass event). Go if it is ?important to you." ... But is that satisfactory?? The fundamental issue is deeper than the technical definition of ?music?, dancing? etc. In truth, ?I was going as part of my Yom Haatzmaut experience, as a celebration of life in Israel, of a people ?revived. This was not simple entertainment. Having participated in Koolulam, it was incredibly ?uplifting. My wife has described the evening as ?tefilla betzibur,? as the song?s words are essentially ?a prayer! - Just watch the "kavanna" in the video of the event! This was not merely a fun night out, although it was great fun. It was for us a Zionist ?expression, it touched a far deeper chord; it reflected faith, national unity, pride, hope, and so much ?more.? On the one hand, I see Halakha as embodying values which we aspire to imbibe. As such, I fully identify with the mourning of the ?Omer. It recalls Rabbi Akiva?s students who did not regard or interact with one another respectfully. In Israel ?today, we desperately need to be reminded annually about the need for a sensitive and respectful ?social environment and public discourse. The Omer contains a critical message. We wouldn't want to be without it. The mourning of the Omer, especially for Askenazi kehillot, also marks ?massacres and Crusades throughout the ages; another important feature, (although they may have tragically been eclipsed by the Shoah.?) But here is the problem. These practices totally fail to absorb the huge historic shift that is Medinat ?Yisrael. There is a gaping dissonance between the traditional Omer rhythm and our Israel lives. The ?traditional Omer rubric doesn't match the modern days of commemoration. For example, one ?does not recite Tachanun on Yom Hashoah because it falls in Nissan. If there is one day to say ?Tachanun, it is Yom Hashoah (I wrote about my struggle with this here ?http://thinkingtorah.blogspot.co.il/?/davening-on-yom-hasho?). And is Yom ?Haatzmaut merely a hiatus in a wider period of mourning? Moreover, in general, on a daily basis, ?as I read the Siddur, I wonder how we can ignore the huge chessed of HKBH in our generation of ?Jewish independence and the restoration of land and nationhood. How can my Siddur be the same ??(excluding the prayer for the State) as my great-grandfather? ? In this period of the year, we should be thanking God, celebrating our good fortune, revelling in ?the gifts that we feel as we move from Yom Haatzmaut to Yom Yerushalayim. Fundamentally, the ?Omer is a happy time; Ramban perceives it as a ?chol hamoed? of sorts between Pesach and ?Shavuot where we mark ?the love of our youth, our marriage with God, how we followed God ?through the wilderness? (Jeremiah 2) as we followed God from Egypt to Matan Torah at Mount ?Sinai. Where is the joy? ? So, I felt that this was a sort of Yom Haatzmaut event which yes, contravened the traditional Omer, ?but in some way lived up to our new reality. I keep the Omer - not shaving; watching how I speak ?to others and how I interact in a positive and respectful way - but we are not in the terrible era of ?Bar Kochba when the Romans massacred Rabbi Akiva's talmidim, and we are not in the period of ?the Crusades. We are in Medinat Yisrael, our thriving sovereign State, and I want to praise Hashem and celebrate my people for ?the ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ????, ?? ???????? ????? ?????? ??????? - and so I went to Kululam. ? I don't know how to square the two systems.? Later I saw a post by an amazing Rav, Rabbi David Menachem, whose post reflected similar sentiments, going even further than my thoughts. See his post here: ?https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=963243270498844&id=276752372481274 ?(h/t Yael Unterman) I?m sharing these thoughts without the ability to articulate a solution. Maybe time will change ?things. Maybe we need to push these questions to halakhic authorities and thinkers greater than ?myself.? From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 17 12:56:42 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 19:56:42 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> There have been many many posting recently about the desirability of secular education, but no one has, so far, mentioned an exceedingly important point. Bammaqom sh'eyn anashim hishtaddel lihyoth ish, so I have to step in and point it out. We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have. `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater". This is preposterous; someone who knows xokhma yvanith knows that "epi" means "above" and "tropos" means to move, or to act. An epitropos is someone who acts above someone else, i.e., a guardian, who acts above, and on behalf of, his ward. `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Posqim, especially, need to have a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages. Any poseq who is not willing to be `oqer a din in the Shulxan `Arukh is no poseq (you may attribute this quote to me). But ordinary Jews also need to know this. It is always dangerous to believe things that are untrue. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 17 15:00:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 18:00:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >: Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a >: bdieved. > >Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up by Shearith Israel in the 18th century taught secular as well as Torah subjects. The day school set up by Rabbi Avraham Rice did the same. While it is true that the level of Torah subjects taught was low, still there were secular subjects almost from the beginning. Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects and so did RJJ that was founded around1902. The high school that Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started in the second decade of the 20th century taught secular subjects as well as Torah subjects. The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. Please see my articles "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 "Bringing Torah Education to Baltimore" The Jewish Press, October 3, 2008, pages 57 & 75. >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? >: Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, >: "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." > >So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of >secular studies. The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. >Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of >secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. He knew in detail how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, he did value mathematics. Once he moved to NY he enrolled his children in yeshivas that gave its students a secular education. He received special permission not to send his eldest son to public school in Chelsea, MA, since there was no other alternative at the time. (His eldest daughter did attend public school in Chelsea, MA.) Lazar Miller, his eldest son, told me when he was sitting shiva for his mother that his mother used to help him with his math. However, she used Hebrew terminology for fraction, numerator, and denominator, since she had studied at two Yavneh schools in Lithuania where everything was learned in Ivrit. >: How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? > >Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat >haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. > >I would stick to discussing financial crimes: ... >But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding >of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the >am hanivchar means. What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal. I will take Erlichkeit with aberrance to mitzva practice over Frumkeit any time. >I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, >have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does >not produce people less prone to these things. I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to those who possess it. Originally, higher education in America was tied to religious education, and there was an attempt to instill morality in the students. Today, there is no such attempt. Indeed, if anything, higher education is in many cases anti-morality from a Torah standpoint. Parents contemplating sending their children to a secular collage should keep this in mind. YL From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 18 13:05:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:05:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:00:38PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: :> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a :> : bdieved. :> Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. : This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up : by Shearith Israel in the 18th century ... : Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects ... : The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. None of which led to the dayschool movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? .... :> So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of :> secular studies. : The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member : behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. But you haven't shown a connection between the lack of limudei chol and the extent by which people are not living according to some derekh's understanding of "true Torah values". :> Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of :> secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how : science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. ... And yet would have felt a student who studied science as a full time endevor to be a cause fo a cheshbon hanefesh. And consequently, due to his own lack of formal study, much of the science he uses in his examples is just plain wrong. (And similarly, someone who knew the then-latest theories of cosmogony, geology and evolution would not have found is arguments for Creationism very convincing. If you don't know what the other side of the debate believes, you end up knocking down strawmen.) : how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is : true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, : he did value mathematics. Leshitakha-- Why aren't you asking how R' Miller could ignore RSRH's paean to Schiller? :> But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding :> of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the :> am hanivchar means. : What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on : externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal... Frumkeit is about ritual and a drive to satisfy one's need to be holy. Ehlichkeit is about wanting to do G-d's Will. A frum "baal chessed" wants his gemach to be the biggest in town. An ehrlicher one is happy those in his town in need have so many sources of help. See Alei Shur vol II pp 152-155 A translation of an excetp by R' Ezra Goldschmiedt My blog post on the topic . And if that's not your definition, it's the one I intended when I said that the main cause of the chilulei hasheim you raised (and the mindset that least to them which is in-and-of-itself un-Jewish) is frumeit. :> I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, :> have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does :> not produce people less prone to these things. : I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to : those who possess it... So then why bring up immoral behavior as proof that there are problems with a lack of secular education? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 18th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 balance? From driceman at optimum.net Wed Apr 18 13:30:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:30:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > RAM: >> On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat >> before Biur Chametz? > Burning hametz is a b?dieved. In an ideal world we would eat all of our hametz before zman issuro. So Hazal gave us time to eat hametz in the morning, and instituted biur hametz soon enough before noon that we wouldn?t violate any issurim, but not much before that. Otherwise why not do the biur right after bedika? David Riceman From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 18 16:25:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:25:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95.6C.08474.004D7DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: None of which led to the day school movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Etz Cahim had secular studies in the late 1880s. see below. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started a high school with secular studies around 1915. . R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? This is not true. > From my article "The Founding of Yeshiva Etz Chaim" The Jewish Press, May 2, 2008, pages 48 - 49. From the amount of time allocated to secular subjects, it is clear that the directors of the yeshiva considered these far less important than the students? limudei kodesh studies. Abraham Cahan, who would eventually become the editor of the Jewish Daily Forward and a prominent figure in the Socialist movement in America, became one of the first teachers in the English department in 1887. Cahan records that the curriculum was loosely drawn to provide for the study of grammar, arithmetic, reading, and spelling ? all within the ?English Department.? But because the directors of the school had no clear idea of what should be taught, the English Department functioned haphazardly, more out of a perfunctory acknowledgement for these subjects than a sincere desire to ?provide the children with a modern education.? The English Department was divided into two classes. The first was taught by a boy about fourteen, who had just graduated from public school and the second was taught by Cahan, who was a little less than twenty-eight years old. The students ranged from the ages of nine or ten to fifteen and many were exposed to the formal study of secular subjects for the first time. One of the native students received his first lessons in the English language when he entered the Yeshiva after passing his thirteenth birthday. The young immigrants presented an immense challenge to their devoted teachers. The students drank up the instruction with a thirst centuries old. Cahan frequently remained long after the prescribed teaching hours to tutor his pupils, who were uniformly poor in reading and mathematics and who regarded grammar as an exquisite form of torture. On these occasions, the directors would ask Cahan why he ?worked so hard,? saying that the students ?already knew enough English.? And from my article "The Founding of the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School" The Jewish Press, September 5, 2008, pages 26 & 66. Setting The Pattern For Future Yeshivas The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was unique in that it was the first elementary parochial school that taught basic Jewish studies as well as Talmud. Yeshiva Etz Chaim, founded in 1886, was an intermediate school that enrolled boys at least nine years old who already were somewhat proficient in Chumash and Rashi. Yeshiva Etz Chaim?s goal was to give its students a thorough grounding in Gemara and Shulchan Aruch. In addition, it provided some limited secular studies in the late afternoon. The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was different in that in addition to providing a first rate religious education, it sought to provide its students with an excellent secular education at least equivalent to that offered by the public schools of the time. Nonetheless, limudei chol (secular or ?English? studies) was considered much less important than limudei kodesh (religious studies), and this attitude was clearly displayed in the constitution of the school. It required that there be two principals, one for each department. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 18 17:35:48 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:35:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> R? Jay F, Shachter wrote: ?We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have.? To this I respond: First, I certainly would not wish to set myself up as one who is capable ?to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us,? despite having some modern math and scientific knowledge. I think such a broad statement goes much too far. Not having any significant knowledge of Greek, I will refrain from commenting on your second example. However the first example you cite regarding Pi and the Rambam is one that I am willing to challenge. You are of course correct about the dating of the formal proof[s] (there are more than one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_%CF%80_is_irrational), date to modern, post Rambam times. However, it is very possible and probably likely that the Rambam intuited this on his own, even if without the benefit of a formal proof, that Pi had to be or was most likely to be irrational. I know I did so and probably most reasonably good students of math do so as well, long before they are aware of any formal proof for that fact. One reason for this is the well known method to approximate the value of Pi to any precision desired (even if very slow to converge) that requires little more than the knowledge of how to analyze a triangle. Simply inscribe a polygon of N equal isosceles triangles in a circle and calculate its perimeter and then divide by twice the length of the long side (= diameter of the circle). then do the same for N+1, and N+2 etc. a process in theory you could do infinitely many times for greater precision. So to intuit irrationality is very plausible even if not proven in our modern sense. Practically, note, that no matter how far you carry this exercise you will not get a repeating decimal that is the mark of the rational number. So I think you are far from ?judging the credibility? of the Rambam based on this example you cited. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 18 15:33:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:33:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . R' Ben Waxman wrote: > I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth > of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real > need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know > about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." > > The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika > anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant was that once you sell your chameitz there is no *d'Oraisa* need to do a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, and that's why we say the bracha. This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the only reason. Mishneh Brurah 431:2 writes: "Also: Because people are used to chometz all year long, if there is still some in his house and his possession, they made a gezera because he might forget and eat it." Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of the chometz that we found. But this is an error, in my opinion, because the concern raised by the MB was that one might happen to come across some chometz, and thoughtlessly eat it. Mechira will NOT prevent this. Mechira will ONLY remove the chometz from one's ownership, but it will not help against forgetfullness. I would like to close by showing that Bedikah and Mechira BOTH have strengths that the other lacks, and that is why people should do both: Mechira removes all chometz from ownership, regardless of where it might be, and (I think) regardless of my sincerity, but if I didn't clean the house well enough I may have left some around. Bedika removes (or greatly reduces) the chance that I might come across some chometz accidentally, but the chometz that I didn't find is still in my ownership. A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had intended to type!) Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 00:09:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 03:09:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> Message-ID: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day. In his day it was considered acceptable to say "Look, pi is obviously an irrational number", and nobody would lift an eyebrow, because it *is* obvious. Only later did mathematicians start to say, well, yes, it is obvious, but let's see if we can actually prove it. And eventually they did so, and guess what, they confirmed what everyone including the Rambam already knew. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 18 23:13:45 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 08:13:45 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Ben On 4/19/2018 12:33 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant > was that once you sell your chameitz there is no*d'Oraisa* need to do > a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, > and that's why we say the bracha. > > This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do > Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 03:27:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:27:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam and Pi In-Reply-To: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180419102714.GA11722@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:09:29AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a : rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state : it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day... I fully agree. But there is an irony here. When it comes to theolgy, the Rambam holds the chiyuv is to know, ie to believe because they had proof -- not tradition, not pur faith, etc... I think the Rambam believed he had a proof that pi was irrational. However, he had a differnt definition of the word proof. Continuing on this tangent... I think the definition of "proof" and therefore of "Rationalism" changed so much since the Rambam's day, the Rambam really wouldn't qualify as a "Rationalist" in our sense of the word. For example, science wasn't invented yet. The things the Rambam believed about Natural Philosophy were not backed by anything comparable to the rigor of scientific process. (Which itself is only rigorous at narrowing down the search space. Actual theories are constructed inductively, patterns found from a number of examples, and only have Bayesian levels of certainty. There can always be a black swan out there that, once found, requires replacing the theory with a new one. But *disproving* theories? That black swan does with certainty. Jumping back to before this parenthetic digression...) Similarly in math. The Rambam didn't have a modern mathemetician's definition of proof in mind. Even though he knew Euclid. But he did and always expected knowledge to be backed by some kind of proof. Archimedes spent a lot of time trying to "square the circle", i.e. come up with a geometric way of constructing a square with the same area as a circle. Numerous people tried since. This is the same thing as failing to find the rational number that is pi. Say the square they were looking for had sides of length s. So, the are of the square would be s^2. To "square the circle" would mean to find a square whose sides, s, are such that the ratio between s^2 and r^2 is pi, so that the areas s^2 (the square) and pi * r^2 (the circle) are equal. Repeatedly failing to find s by geometric construction eventually led people to conclude it was a fool's errand. By the Rambam's day, it was taken as a given that geometric construction could not find an s, and therefore that the ratio between them, pi, was irrational. (Weirdly, there still could have been a "black swan", the geometric construction that hadn't yet been found. The level of confidence the Rambam had would parellel that of a scientist believing the results of repeated experiment, but not that of a modern methematician.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Apr 19 08:04:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:04:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day >schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a >post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied >began, but initially, it didn't have to. I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was never separate from the study of Torah. He emphasized the importance of unifying Judaism and secular studies. Often speaking of the, "harmonious union of culture and spirituality," he believed that knowledge of the liberal arts would broaden one's understanding of Torah. However, Revel's dedication to Orthodox Jewry was undisputed. For instance, he forbade the use of a female vocalist in the 1926 Music Festival, as a female singer is a violation of Orthodox Jewish law. He did not allow Reform Jews to serve on Yeshiva College's national board of directors. He was also staunchly opposed to mixed seating in synagogues. "He wrote: 'Yeshiva aims at unity, at the creation of a synthesis between the Jewish conception of life, our spiritual and moral teaching and ideals, and the present-day humanities, the scientific conscience and spirit to help develop the complete harmonious Jewish personality, once again to enrich and bless our lives, to revitalize the true spirit and genius of historic Judaism.'" From https://goo.gl/hbRw8S "Rabbi Revel's first step as the new head of RIETS was the creation of an affi liated high school. The high school, Talmudical Academy, had its fi rst entering class in September 1916." Regarding Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin please see "Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin, Torah Education Pioneer in America" The Jewish Press, April 4, 2008, pages 42 & 91. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 03:19:45 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:19:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> References: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <81715a05-f9f9-f57e-95b1-03dc5240cb96@sero.name> On 19/04/18 02:13, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there > is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Nor is there an issur in having hefker chametz sitting in your property, but you have to search for it and put it away or get rid of it, for fear that if you come across it during Pesach you may absentmindedly eat it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Apr 19 07:45:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:45:48 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . I just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this permission? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:33:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:33:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180419153325.GA3724@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:04:09AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. : : From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b : : "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was ... Before the wave in question, but not the cause of the day school explosion. I do not know why this is so hard of a point to get across. Being around first but not starting a trend does not make something the source of the eventual trend. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is flawed reasoning. In fact, he didn't run a day school. And for that matter TA wasn't fully seperate from REITS. It wasn't a HS model that caught on anywhere. The model of day school and HS that actually catches on across American O through the middle of the 20th cent was the product of compromises between R ("Mr") SF Mendolovitch and his parent body. When TA evolved into MTA and BTA, it was because other schools have already created different expectations of what a HS was. Being in the same track as the eventual college degree, so that going from TA to any other college but YC was more like a transfer, was not sellable. (Although it did make AP courses moot; just take a college course in your 3rd year, if you were ready to.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Apr 19 04:25:17 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:25:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach Message-ID: The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately precedes the Amidah. I gave the following response: Soncino gives a very poignant explantion. ?O Lord, open Thou my lips; and my mouth shall declare Thy praise.? David?s lips had been sealed by wrongdoing, because praise of God would then have been blasphemy. If, then, God opened his lips and he was again enabled to offer Him praise, it was a sign that he had been granted pardon. What a profound thought before one of the most prominent and central prayers of our entire liturgy. We are all sinners and hope for the same pardon that King David was granted. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:59:45 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:59:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180419155945.GA30717@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:25:17AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately : precedes the Amidah. Technically, it is part of the Amidah. That's why we say it between ge'ulah and tefillah in Shacharis and Maariv. Unlike "Ki sheim H' eqra", which is only said before the Amidah of Minchah and Mussaf, because there is no Birkhas Ge'ulah, and therefore no problem of interruption. This is particularly relevant to a Chazan, as Chazaras haShatz should begin with "H' Sefasai Tiftach", not Birkhas Avos. Tangent, since we're looking at what the pasuq is about. Safah is at the edge. The word is not only used for a lip, but also for the seashore (sefas hayam). The peh is what stands behind the sefasayim. So, when I say this pasuq, and when I have the time and yishuv hadaas to think about what I am saying, my thoughts are about Hashem removing the externalities that block me from expressing my real inner self. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 09:23:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20180419162328.GB30717@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:56:42PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: : We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct : judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. : ... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. : He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although : he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater"... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge to that we know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon am? Mind you, I believe in the value of secular knowledge in-and-of-itself. Not just what you need to increase the likelihood of paying the bills. But I just don't see this particular argument. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 09:25:22 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> On 19/04/18 10:45, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I? just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, > then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no > longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). > > But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I > MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is > no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not > destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this > permission? It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 11:55:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahMusings] The Best Charity Message-ID: <20180419185537.GA11736@aishdas.org> People who both know my own proclivities and read this to the end will understand why I just HAD to share this post by RGS. >From https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/04/the-best-charity/ Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings The Best Charity Apr 19, 18 by R. Gil Student My friend, Rav Shlomo Einhorn, is once again attempting a superhuman feat of Torah teaching. A little over two years ago, he taught Torah for 18 live-streamed hours to raise money for the yeshiva he heads. This year, on Lag Ba-Omer, he will be attempting to break that record by teaching for 19 straight hours. This is a cause worth supporting -- or is it? I. Which Charity? Many people in the Jewish community have achieved varieties of financial success, allowing them the privilege of supporting many charities. This raises questions of communal and philanthropic priorities. Others have limited charity funds but still want to allocate them effectively. The issue is a blessing but also a complex problem, with multiple angles. Rav Hershel Schachter discussed this with me a few years ago in [48]Jewish Action. I would like to explore a specific subject that I have seen discussed in the responsa literature -- what is the best charity if you have to choose only one? In mid-sixteenth century Turkey, a wealthy man passed away without leaving instructions for the disposal of his charity funds. The local rabbis decided that some of that charity money should be given to the deceased's poor brother but the sons of the deceased objected that they should inherit the money and decide what to do with it. The question was brought to the Maharshdam, Rav Shmuel Di Medina of Salonica (Responsa Maharshdam, Yoreh De'ah 158). Maharshdam says that we have to try to determine the deceased's desires for the charity fund. Since in this case we do not know his intentions, we should give the money to the highest level of charity. The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 259) quotes his father, the Rosh, as saying that a town may reallocate to a study hall money that was donated to a synagogue or cemetery. Maharshdam argues that if in a case in which we know with certainty that the donor intended for the money to go to a synagogue we can use it for a study hall, then certainly when we do not know the donor's intention we can use the money to support Torah study. If we give the money to a lesser charity, we risk misusing the donation. II. Higher Torah The question then becomes which Torah study organization receives higher priority. Maharshdam quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 119b) that the world survives because of the Torah study of children, who due to their age are free of responsibility from sin. Additionally, more people doing a mitzvah together has greater merit than fewer people. Therefore, concludes Maharshdam, the money should be given to ththe highest charity -- a large elementary school. Similarly, Rav Ephraim Navon in early eighteenth century Turkey addresses a related question (Machaneh Ephraim (Hilkhos Tzedakah 11). A man donated money to establish in a small town a part-time kollel of ten men studying Torah. However, the town could not find ten men willing to enroll. The donor wished to change the endowment from a kollel to a full-time elementary school teacher. Rav Navon permitted this reallocation for technical reasons but adds that this new purpose is higher than the original because the Torah study of children sustains the world. III. God's Place However, Rav Yosef Eliyahu Chazzan challenges this argument (Ma'arkhei Lev vol. 1 no. 25). He quotes the Gemara (Berakhos 8a) which states that nowadays God only has the four cubits of halakhah. Therefore, He loves the distinguished gates of halakhah more than all the synagogues and other study halls. According to this passage, high-level Torah study merits higher priority than any other study. This seems to contradict the earlier passage, which gives priority to children's Torah study. This question gains greater strength when we note that the priority of high-level Torah has practical implications. Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Tefillah 8:3) rules, based on the above Gemara, that it is better to pray in a study hall than a synagogue. Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 90:18) rules likewise. Since the two passages seem to contradict and the latter is quoted authoritatively, it would seem that an elementary school should not be given priority over adult Torah study. Rav Chaim Palaggi (Chaim Be-Yad nos. 64-65) favors the interpretation of Rav Chazzan. However, he struggles with the many authorities who side with the Maharshdam. Rather than taking a minority view against the majority, in an impressive act of intellectual humility Rav Palaggi adopts a middle position that gives due weight to the majority with which he disagrees. IV. Jewish Behavior Perhaps a reconciliation of the two passages lies in the Rambam's interpretation. Rav Chazzan and Rav Palaggi follow Maharsha's interpretation that the Gemara is praising high-level study of halakhah. In the introduction to his commentary to the Mishnah (ed. Kafach, vol. 1, p. 21), Rambam sees the passage about the four cubits of halakhah as a general declaration about the uniqueness of true loyalty to the letter and spirit of halakhah. Synagogues and study halls may be full of people studying Torah but not enough of those students apply these teachings properly to develop a faithful Torah personality. Only someone who internalizes the messages of halakhah can reach out fully to God. If so, the distinguished gates of halakhah may overlap with elementary schools. Schools that teach proper character traits seem to qualify as remaining within the four cubits of halakhah, whether for adults or children. An elementary school that trains its students to follow the law, to embrace and internalize the messages of Judaism regarding behavior and thought, serves in the same capacity as a high-level kollel. Both types of institutions are distinguished gates of halakhah. Elementary schools have the additional benefit of purity, discussed above. If this is correct, the highest charity would be an elementary school that emphasizes proper behavior and attitudes, a mussar-focused cheder that directs pure children on the proper path. About Gil Student Rabbi Gil Student is the founder, publisher and editor-in-chief of Torah Musings. From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Thu Apr 19 18:08:35 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 01:08:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> ?When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah?? One thing I learned in my years as an attorney is that a rhetorical question is not an argument. I, of course, do not know what Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue to be observant in a work environment. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Fri Apr 20 11:40:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:40:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> References: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20180420184026.GA7707@aishdas.org> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 01:08:35AM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : I, of course, do not know what : Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very : proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates : and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue : to be observant in a work environment. Historical (and hagiographical) accounts portray the request for secular education that would make college and professions possible options came from the target audience, a majority of the parents of Brooklyn, not R "Mr." Mendlowitz. His launching of the HS was by convincing 8th grade parents to keep their sons in TvD "just one more year", as the parents wanted their boys to go to Public HS. That was the importance of getting a real American education had to his customer base. Then, it was another "just one more year" into 10th grade, until he had his first graduating class. There wasn't an issue for him of getting secular education into TvD, it was an issue of getting parents to agree to commit time to limudei qodesh! So of course TvD made a big deal about the quality of their secular studies. The whole point their marketing had to make was that the son can learn Torah without parents feeling afraid their boys would be held back. Getting back to the main conversation: What R-"Mr"-SFM thought is more of a historical issue. My point was that the push for limudei chol in day schools at the time the movement (not the first day school!) was getting started came from the parents, not the idealogues. There is no indication the decision was lechat-khilah, as this wasn't a lechat-khilah situation. Limudei qodesh without a guarantee of pre-college quality education wasn't a vaiable option in most communities, not a choice on the table. Meanwhile, the big voice in American O Rabbinate of the time was the East European Rabbi, and not an ideological immigrant who had a pull to America, but someone who came fleeing either progroms or Nazism. We know the majority of them considered limudei chol an assimilationist force. Or is that too under question? (I used the name "R 'Mr.' SF Mendlowitz" [or misspelled as per the usual pronounciation "-olovitch"] because he asked people to call him "Mr." and therefore I thought it respectful to acknowledge it. Even though here, "R" is the default title for men. Then I was afraid people who didn't know the history would think insult was intended, so I am adding this parenthetic explanation.) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 20th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Tifferes: What role does harmony Fax: (270) 514-1507 play in maintaining relationships? From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:54:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:54:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Some thoughts on the passing of a teacher and friend Message-ID: <5f552137ab7f4015af43f057f925c5ae@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> With the greatest trepidation I will share a few thoughts. I knew (to the extent one can know someone) R'Ozer Yeshaya Glickman Hacohain Z"L for 40 years. In the early years we learned together. He certainly was far more able than I but we did discuss many tum issues over the years. I don't think he would be happy being held up as a unicorn even though his blending of both worlds was the reason he felt he was asked by the Yeshiva to be "on the road" so much. I believe he felt that anyone could do what he did at their own level. When the hurley burleys done the question the yeshiva needs to ask itself imho is have they encouraged (or perhaps should they-my uninformed sense is that RIETS looks at the separate mountain approach as a vision -a la r'ybs) broad lives( a la r'hutner) in any of their best and brightest? do they seek out role models of that nature or only exceptional examples in specific accomplishments (e.g big TC or big $ but not a balancer)? Balancing priorities is a big challenge in life, if one wants to honor R'OYG Z"L imho one might start with some cheshbon hanefesh looking at his balance and its message for us (no two of us will likely reach the same conclusions but that's what is to be expected-it's the process not the results) yhi zichro baruch KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:53:20 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:53:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?R=92YBS-Feminist/Talit_Story?= Message-ID: <9fc9dd88e16649d48fc183b298bbfe74@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I believe this version of the story told by R? S Mandel in Jewish Action-not the ?gotcha? version I?ve heard. When a group of feminists visited him and demanded that he permit them to wear tallitot, he listened to them, showed he understood their reasoning, and proposed that there first be a trial period during which they would wear colored cloaks as tallitot, but without tzitzit and without reciting a berachah. He asked them to note how they feel wearing them and to come back after two weeks and confer with them again. After two weeks, they reconvened, and when the Rav asked these women how they felt, they told him how inspired they felt when wearing the cloaks. The Rav replied that that was excellent, that they should definitely continue wearing the cloaks and praying with kavannah, and that there was no need to wear the tallitot with tzitzit that men wore. Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 22 11:27:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:27:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah is Not Religion Message-ID: We are counting towards Shevuous which commemorates the giving of the Torah. The question is "What is Torah?' The following is from RSRH's essay Sivan I that I have posted at Sivan I (Collected Writings I) The Torah, however, did not spring from the breast of mortal man; it is the message of the God of Heaven and Earth to Man; and it was from the very beginning so high above the cultural level of the people to which it was given, that during the three thousand years of its existence there was never a time yet during which Israel was quite abreast of the Torah, when the Torah could be said to have been completely translated into practice. The Torah is rather the highest aim, the ultimate goal towards which the Jewish nation was to be guided through all its fated wanderings among the nations of the world. This imperfection of the Jewish people and its need of education is presupposed and clearly expressed in the Torah from the very beginning. There is, therefore, no stronger evidence for the Divine origin and uniqueness of the Torah than the continuous backsliding, the continuous rebellion against it on the part of the Jewish people, whose first generation perished because of this very rebellion. But the Torah has outlived all the generations of Israel and is still awaiting that coming age which "at the end of days" will be fully ripe for it. Thus, the Torah manifests from the very beginning its superhuman origin. It has no development and no history; it is rather the people of the Torah which has a history. And this history is nothing else but its continuous training and striving to rise to the unchangeable, eternal height on which the Torah is set, this Torah that has nothing in common with what is commonly called "religion." How hopelessly false is it, therefore, to call this Torah "religion," and thus drag it by this name into the circle of other phenomena in the history of human civilization, to which it does not belong. This is a fundamentally wrong starting point, and it is small wonder that it gives rise to questions such as the following, which have no meaning so far as the Torah is concerned: "You want Judaism to remain the same for ever?" "All religions rejuvenate themselves and advance with the progress of the nations, and only the Jewish 'Religion' wants to remain rigid, always the same, and refuses to yield to the views of an enlightened age?" See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 22 04:12:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 07:12:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav Message-ID: . Tumas meis and sheretz, for example, are supernatural phenomena. If someone has been in contact with tumah, and is infected with that tumah, there is no physical evidence of this infection. We are aware of the tumah if and only if we know about the events that took place, and the status of the things in those events. Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses. But they are spiritual illnesses, not medical ones. And in fact, Torah Sheb'al Peh is chock full of spiritual reasons why a person would become a metzora - Lashon Hara being the most famous of these, miserliness and others being mentioned less frequently. My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve myself in general." (Please note: This post is NOT an attempt to categorize all the many kinds of tumah. The first two paragraphs are designed only to show a similarity between tzaraas and zav, and then to highlight a difference.) Akiva Miller From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:02:03 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:02:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Re: R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 RYL quoted R? Yonasan Eybeshutz: --quote-- For all the sciences are condiments and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impure and how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. ?end quote-- >>>>> ? Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual, or even for every member of the Sanhedrin, to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry.? It is not necessary for all these subjects to be part of the standard yeshiva high school curriculum.? It is only necessary that there be in the world mathematicians, zoologists, chemists, doctors, astronomers and so on.? It is not even necessary that they be Jewish.? It is only necessary that their expertise be accessible when needed.? It is not uncommon that poskim confer with physicians, for example, when they need certain medical information in order to posken shailos in specific situations.? The poskim don?t first have to go to medical school.? ? Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. ?It is necessary that they exist in the world. ?It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies. ? If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:55:19 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:55:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> ? In a message dated 4/9/2018 RYL wrote: ? >> ?There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf --quote-- R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. Hayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, ?through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash?. By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy?. R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): ?. It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. ?.He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. ?. ? --end quote-- To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw from this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL ? >>>>? ? ? To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn: ? [1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ? [2] If you can master the ?seven branches of secular wisdom? before your bar mitzvah, that?s fabulous!? Because after your bar mitzvah you have to be mindful of ?vehagisa bo yomam velayla.???But before your bar mitzvah, you can play ball, roller-skate, and memorize the encyclopedia to your heart?s content. ? [3] Funny you should quote R? Chaim of Volozhin.? The famous Yeshiva of Volozhin did not include any of these seven branches of wisdom in its curriculum.? Anyone happen to remember why and when the Yeshiva of Volozhin closed its doors? ? Let me add a passage written by Rabbi Dr. David Berger (who, BTW, was my Jewish history professor for four wonderful semesters in Brooklyn College): ? --quote? ? Although various Geonim were favorably inclined toward the study of philosophy, it is clear that the curriculum of the advanced yeshivot was devoted to the study of Torah alone?.The private nature of philosophical instruction in the society at large [early medieval intellectual Islamic society] made it perfectly natural for Jews to follow the same course; more important, the curriculum of these venerable institutions [the yeshivot] went back to pre-Islamic days, and any effort to introduce? a curricular revolution into their hallowed halls would surely have elicited vigorous opposition.? ? --end quote? ? [Above is from R? Berger?s essay ?Judaism and General Culture in Medieval Times,? in the book *Judaism?s Encounter with Other Cultures* edited by Jacob J. Schachter.] ? Please note these words:? ?the private nature of philosophical instruction.?? The Vilna Gaon studied secular subjects on his own, as many yeshiva students have done over the years. ? Elsewhere RYL has indicated his desire that the NY govt require chassidishe schools to provide a good secular education to their students. ? You don?t have to impose your preferences on others, or get the government involved to force changes in school curricula. ? I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 01:06:16 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:06:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <6b2084c852a745458c68c6f7836e4477@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn:[1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ================================== IIUC, the Gaon?s theory of limud torah was that there was no such thing as spare time (any time one does not have to be doing something else must be spent learning) Thus assumedly he felt time spent on secular studies was required. Unless one posits that he had a need for ?recreation? which was study of secular studies or that he really only studied them when Torah learning of any sort was forbidden. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 23 05:39:50 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:39:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halacha Yomis - Hafrashas Challah, At Large Factories Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. How does the OU separate Challah at Jewish owned factories that manufacture bread and related items that require Challah separation? Is there a mashgiach separating a piece of dough from every batch? Isn?t that impractical? A. For OU-certified restaurants and caterers, the mashgiach separates Challah from every batch of dough. However, in factories it is not practical to have a mashgiach present each time a batch of dough is made. Instead the OU uses what we call the ?Tevel Matzah system.? Open boxes of matzah that did not have Challah separated from them (i.e. tevel) are placed in these factories next to the mixers. The mashgiach declares that each time a batch of dough is made, a designated piece of the matzah should become Challah and exempt that batch of dough. Even though the matzos have already been baked and the mixer contains unbaked dough, we have already seen that one can separate from baked matzah on raw dough when both are obligated in Challah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Mon Apr 23 06:34:22 2018 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 13:34:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. On Sunday, April 22, 2018, 11:29:56 PM CDT, Toby Katz wrote: > Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. It is necessary that they > exist in the world. It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student > take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. > I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female > physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. How > fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn > Torah day and night that men have! ... > If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") > are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and > potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. Not that this is optimal, Those that have the ability, and desire should spend as much time as they want/need to achieve the Torah knowledge we all rely on to live our lives. We all need Gedolim that these kinds of people become to naser the difficult Shaylos that constantly arise as we progress through time. For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah. This that misdirect those strengths - being urged to use their strengths to learn Torah are in my view shortchanging them. They are discouraging Jews from serving God and his people in the best way they can. Where their strengths where they really lie. More to say - no time. HM Want Emes and Emunah in your life? Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/ From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Mon Apr 23 01:26:05 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:26:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 From: Micha Berger > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us > they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon > am? What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, and what they are teaching us, whilst simultaneously utilising our understanding of the era's terms and sciences to better probe the intentions of the original statements. Dovid Rubin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 08:15:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 11:15:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423151544.GD1065@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 08:26:05AM +0000, D Rubin wrote: : > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, ... : > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon : > am? : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) ... Just to clear up the word, I meant non-posqim. I needed something that meant someone who wasn't "from LOR on up", and therefore shouldn't be pasqening for themselves. : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper : understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, : and what they are teaching us... Yes, as I said, I too believe in a role for limudei chol beyond the utilitarian study of things that will eventually help you pay the bills. I was addressing what I thought was a flaw in a particular argument. There is enough Torah to keep one busy for a lifetime without topics that require a formal secular education. The question is what to do when "Mah shelibo chafeitz" is something like hil' qidush hachodesh. Which brings me to a totally new aspect of this discussion: formal vs informal education. Secular study in one's spare time was the norm in places like Volozhin and Slabodka. (Although Slabodka students were more likely to be reading Freud...) To the extent that RSRH thought Volozhin were "fellow travelers on the path of Torah im Derekh Eretz" and described them as such to his followers when fundraisers for the yeshiva approched Frankfurt aM. And yet the same Litvisher rabbanim and RY would campaign against university and formal education. Perhaps their primary concern was leaving the bubble prematurely leading to assimilation, rather than expecting their talmidim to define away the concept of "free time" or afraid of which ideas their students might be exposed to. Although the Alter of Slabodka would make a case-by-case diagnosis and give each student different guidelines, at least we could say there were stduents for whom he thought secular study on one's own was appropriate. And apparently the norm. Remember, these are the same bachurim for whom the leading pass-time when not learnig was chess. Yeshiva wasn't for everyone; the guys who went were a bunch of intellecturals. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From t613k at aol.com Mon Apr 23 09:33:07 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:33:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <162f35a0504-c8b-11ca6@webjas-vab001.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Mon Apr 23 12:43:36 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:43:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: << I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies.>> And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of science the women should pasken the question -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:00:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:00:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423210037.GA8959@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:43:36PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of : science the women should pasken the question Except that it's arguable that pro forma women can't pasqen. It means a poseiq needs to know enough to ask intelligent questions of the expert. Even if the experts would end up being women, BTs who studied the subject before accepting ol mitzvos, unobservant Jews or non-Jews. Which is a good deal of knowledge, but doesn't require years of formal education. When I brought this thread over from Areivim to Avodah, my intent was not to have a bunch of pro-secular education posts. Rather, my focus was on the eilu va'eilu of saying that even though I believe in the value of secular education, I cannot say it's the One True Derekh. For example, the gemara only says that many tried to follow Rashbi's Torah-only derekh and failed. Not that R Yishmael was right. But that pragmatically, one worked for the masses and the didn't. And if the context changes, so that the welfare state makes it possible for more to succeed toing things Rashbi's way? The gemara says nothing against it. Assuming they don't bankrupt the state that way or other Modern Israeli political, governmental and economic issues, but again, that's the balebatishe problem of the system failing. Even if it were chilul hasheim issues (just to pre-empt that line of reasoning), that's not about eschewing secular studies. I would say the gemara leaves both options open. And for today... For every kid who leaves chareidi life going OTD because they feel hobbled by the lack of secular education, or the lack of worldliness in general, or just plain constricted by the paucity of their choices of how to live as adults there is a Mod-O kid who leaves because of too much opennees, a lack of structure, an attraction to the other lifestyles they're exposed to, a feeling that their parents are fooling themselves with compromise... To survive, we need all our options. That said, I find it interesting that none of the arguments in favor of limudei chol actually involved what I consider their real value: There is too much we can't learn from Torah. Not that it's not there, just that we don't know how to extract it. Like when RALichtenstein saw the Chevra Qadisha try to rush the aveilim at one levayah through so that they could begin another, he commented that had they read Hamlet they never could have acted that way. Not that such middos aren't in Torah sources, but they're more accessible sometimes in literature. And for all the awe one may get from the Wisdom of the Author when learning Torah, it hits harder when you see Chokhmas haBorei in the physical world, outside the context of "religious studies". Also, by studying other topics one learns other modes of thought, and becomes more able to think in other ways, reach other conclusions. Mathemeticians, programmers and lawyers all learn a precision of thought and attention to detail that helps in real-life problem solving as well as learning. Vekhulu for other displines. In short... The value I find in limudei chol only starts with knowing more and having more data to put into the Torah and the parnasah mills. They change how one thinks in ways that improve both Torah and life skills. Simply by having more tools in the toolbox. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 11:08:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. When I was a kid, it was a big deal that we couldn't buy chameitz from Walbaum's, including the supermarket whose parking lot was directly across the street. It means that for a couple of months, I couldn't be sent to the store on Fri for many of those last-minute purchases. I presume (given who my parents would have asked in that era) that was R' Fabian Schoenfeld's pesaq. But as the broohaha over beer this year indicates, there is a machloqes. We could view the sale as valid, and the Jew wrongfully selling merchandise that belongs to someone else. Theft, rather than chameitz she'avar alav es haPesach. Which would imply that in our case, where bi'ur chameitz is done later than the rav's mechirah, we would view it as wrongfully destroying someone else's chameitz. Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? I would think the latter. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 14:07:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:07:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> On 23/04/18 14:08, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. > > With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim > who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) > that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to > treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But here your actions show that you were completely serious about the mechira, but you didn't intend this to be included in it. The shtar you signed doesn't specifically say this *is* included. Its description of what's included very much depends on your intentions as revealed by your actions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend to include ANY item? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 23 14:51:13 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:51:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <07.CD.29097.DC55EDA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:31 AM 4/23/2018, RN Toby Katz wrote: >I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a >reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I >never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would >never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the >option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? >? >? >? >--Toby Katz I find your terminology "normal Orthodox schools" somewhat surprising in the context of Chassidic yeshivas. What exactly do you mean by this terminology when contrasted with Chassidic schools? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 21:57:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:57:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/04/18 17:49, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be > : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from > : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a > : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. > > But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when > the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions > showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or > burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend > to include ANY item? Again, you are conflating two questions, one of which depends on your intentions and one which does not: 1) Is the mechira valid? Yes, regardless of your intentions. 2) What is included in the mechira. Certainly anything explicitly included in the shtar. But the shtar's language is vague; does it apply to *this* piece of bread? Only if you meant it to. That which you've set aside for breakfast is clearly not included, even if the mechira happened early in the morning. Ditto for that which you set aside to burn. Did it include an item on your store shelves, which you ended up selling just 20 minutes later? We can approach this two ways: a) It did, because you intended it to. Your intention was that your inventory should not become treif; this is inventory, you don't want it to be treif, therefore it's included. b) I bo'is eima, fine, let it be as you say, and the act of selling an item -- whether 20 minutes after the zman or 20 minutes before the end of Achron Shel Pesach -- shows that it was not included. Even if we were to accept this proposition (which I do not), whatever remains on the shelves that you did *not* sell remains included. Not only did you do nothing to indicate an intention to exclude it, you clearly did intend to include it, since your whole purpose was that it should not become treif. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 22:18:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:18:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name>, <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore > guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is > still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between > chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or > moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? > > I would think the latter. > ?????- Iiuc they sold the whole business, not just the stock Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 24 04:53:01 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 07:53:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira. There have been conjectures that the person's actions might reveal his intentions, or maybe not. But it seems to me that the starting point should be that which has been mentioned in writing. And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser degree of detail. In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this thread. But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other details. It seems to me that the "stam daas" of this person would be that he is selling only what is on the list, and the bittul is on everything else. Akiva Miller From hankman at bell.net Tue Apr 24 06:15:47 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:15:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: <0401042908D24434A2102FDD03A26A7A@hankPC> R?n T. Katz wrote: In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz I would go well beyond that and possibly suggest that when done ?the right way? that certain limudei chol? (read math and natural sciences) could be a better and more efficient way of attaining emunah including drosh vachakor and yiras harommeimus and the goal of understanding ?beHai? boro osom, or the gevuros of masseh bereishis, the intricacies of the olam koton and the actual vast olom not to mention the numerous sugios in shas and halacha that require knowledge of the real world and it science (its understanding). I propose a thought for consideration, that while for some yechidim their level of Torah learning is sufficiently high that Torah is the best and most efficient path to attain these goals. Unfortunately for many (most) of us, our level of Torah havanah is not even close to that level and as a practical fact a more direct path to getting a start on these Torah goals is through studying the briah and its science put there by G-d in the maseh beraishis. Someone like the GRA whose level of Torah study most of us can not even begin to imagine would relegate his study of science to only when it was not in opposition to his limud of Torah (such as the B?HK etc) as the best manner (for him) of achieving this goal was through his limud of Torah. But for most of us to take this as also applying to our situation is wishful thinking. As many times as I learn parshs Bereishis, my havana of ?beHai? boro osom has not really grown very much nor my level derosh vachakor. For us it may be a lekatchila outside the B?HK to set times for scientific study if done with the appropriate approach in support of our Torah understanding and growth in yira and emunah even when not just for parnasa. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 24 08:12:26 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:12:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Some_FAQs_about_the_OU=92s_=93Tevel_Mat?= =?windows-1252?q?zah_system=94?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Here are some FAQs about the OU?s ?Tevel Matzah system? that were described in yesterday?s Halacha Yomis. Q1. What would happen if the box of tevel matzos that was left in the factory was accidentally discarded? A1. If the matzo is discarded, the Tevel Matzah system becomes in-operative. Because of the concern that the tevel matzos might be lost, the OU also arranges a backup Hafrashas Challah each day in the OU offices to cover any factory that did not have a proper Hafrashas Challah done on premises. Q2. Is there any special reason that the OU chooses to use matzos for their tevel system? Couldn?t plain dough or bread be used instead for this purpose? A2. The main advantage of using matzos for Hafrashas Challah is that they have a very long shelf-life. A matzah can easily last from one year to the next and still be edible. Another obvious advantage of using matzah is that it can remain in the factories on Pesach. Q3. From how many batches of dough can one separate Challah using one box of tevel matzos? A3. When the mashgiach places the box of matzos in the factory, he declares that 1/5 of a gram of matzah should become Challah for each subsequent batter that will be produced. Considering that a box of matzos contains approximately one pound of matzos (454 grams), this means that a box of matzos will cover the Challah for more than 2,200 batches of dough. Even if a factory makes ten batches a day, a single box of matzos will last for over 6 months! Q4. Given that a box of matzah can be used to separate Challah for over 2,000 batches of dough, if a factory only makes one or two batches of dough a day, could a single box of matzos be used for several years? A4. No. One cannot take Challah from dough made from wheat that grew in one year on a batch of dough made from wheat that grew in a different year. The cutoff for determining which year the wheat grew is Rosh Hashanah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 24 08:24:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:33pm EDT, R Akiva Miller wrote: : This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do : Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer : to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the : only reason. I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? The MB's other reason (gezeira) and discussion thereof, elided. : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of : the chometz that we found... "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? ... : A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my : chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already : removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for : me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had : intended to type!) Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? A shade over 6 days later, on Tue, Apr 24 at 7:53am EDT, RAM wrote: : I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone : referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira... : And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two : major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person : who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller : must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser : degree of detail. I thought there are so many versions, referencing "the text" or even "a text" is meaningless. I therefore viewed the issue when you raised it last week (?) morein terms of: Does your LOR address this issue, and if so, how? : In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, : I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must : take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual : intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this : thread. Bitul and "all my chameitz" are mutually exclusive sets. It it's hefqeir, it's not mine. (BTW, in Israeli Aramaic the word was "hevqer", which I kept on reading as though it was "the cattle.") Espectially is we allow later actions as evidence of what was intent at the time of the sale. : But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that : he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", : and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other : details... Without "and any other chameitz which may be"? That version would solve all your problems, but affords less protection against issur. Since all the mechirah is belt-n-suspenders with bitul anyway, no big deal. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony? From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 24 09:03:23 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:03:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> References: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1df6ecc6-8417-7966-0620-412e6633fa66@sero.name> On 24/04/18 11:24, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of > hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? Yes, I think it is. Hefker, especially when the item is still in your property, depends on your willing renunciation. If you still regard it as yours then it's not hefker, regardless of your declaration. Either because the insincere declaration is defective, or because the moment you think of it as yours you regain it through kinyan chatzer. > : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point > : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) > : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of > : the chometz that we found... > > "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? Bedika != Bittul. By definition Bedika cannot get rid of what is not found. > Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? I don't see why not. If you inherited an unspecified estate you can surely sell it as a lot, sight unseen, and leave it to the buyer to discover what exactly is included in it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Tue Apr 24 23:26:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 06:26:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hand washing Message-ID: The gemara (Shabbat 62b) states that being derogatory (mzalzel) concerning ntilat yadaim(hand washing) causes poverty. Rava then clarifies that this is only talking about the case where one doesn't wash at all. The gemara then rejects Rava's interpretation based on R' Chisda saying that he had washed his hands with a lot of water and got a lot of good (in return?). As part of a broader shiur, I was wondering : 1. Is it possible that water was not as readily available then and so this focus on the amount of water might not be applicable today? 2. Why would the gemara accept a rejection of Rava without a more specific refutation source? 3. How is R' Chisda's statement a source of rejection? (Rava could well agree that using more than the minimum is praiseworthy but still hold poverty only comes for those who don't wash at all) That's enough to start :) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Tue Apr 24 10:57:13 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:57:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed during the Rav?s lifetime. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 24 05:30:39 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Apr 22, 2018 09:28:10 pm Message-ID: <15245910390.9bBE36.37982@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge [s]o that we > know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto > explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we > question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with > emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? > > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the > metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) > that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such > things. But the hamon am? > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- correction. At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that requires supernatural explanation. Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass them. There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 06:05:39 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:05:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <23688d43-325f-1109-9d85-fcb94a75b7e7@aishdas.org> On 4/24/2018 1:57 PM, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit > and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav's talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav's lifetime. The one that Rabbi Mayer Twersky quotes is in the name of an impeccable source, Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, who was personally involved. KT, YGB From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 07:25:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:25:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425142550.GB15047@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:57:13PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit : and others tell a different version. He believes one... Actually, you can go see RSM's version for yourself. No need to mix RJR into this. From the current Jewish Action: https://jewishaction.com/the-rav/observing-the-rav > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav?s lifetime. Actually, the "a woman" version was. I remember the discussion in shul, because I thought that the story as told belittled the woman too much. (Unlike RSM's impression, "Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances.") Tamar Ross (2004) records R' Meiselman and the Frimer Brothers telling the story https://books.google.com/books?id=vkvNNioH--4C&lpg=PA91&pg=PA91#v=onepage I found R' Meiselman (published Fall 1998) here (near the bottom of pg 9 [5th page of the PDF]): http://bit.ly/2HQBwHm And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 They say they were told the story by Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, former rabbi of the YI of Brokline, and that it happened in the mid-70s. Remember (unlike RSM) your "several of the Rav's talmidim knew the NY RY, not the Rabbi of Boston. There is really enough detail in R' Meiselman and R's Frimer version to rule out the story being legend. I would attribute RSM's version to memory drift; it has been some 40 years since the events, after all. 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? From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Apr 25 07:37:22 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:37:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Translation of Makkos / Binfol oyivcha al tismach In-Reply-To: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> References: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> Message-ID: Revisiting an issue that comes up repeatedly--do classical sources support the approach that we should feel sorrow for / not rejoice over, the suffering of our persecuting enemies. Yeshayahu (15:5) declares, ?My heart cries out? over the destruction of Israel?s wicked enemy, Moab. TargumYonason (and Radak and Metsudos) take this as the prophet quoting the enemy. But Rashi takes it as the prophet expressing his own heart?s thoughts, and he writes, ?The prophets of Israel are unlike the prophets of the umos ha-olom. Bilaam sought to uproot Israel for no reason. But the prophets of Israel [who had good cause to wish for their persecutors? destruction, nevertheless] mourn over the punishments coming upon the nations (miss-o-ninnim al pur-annos ha-ba-ah al ha-umos).?? (Artscroll cites both explanations, but adds a commentary by ''Sod Yesharim (I could not find it on HebrewBooks.org) who, like Rashi, takes the prophet to be referring to his own grief, but contra Rashi declares, ''The prophet had no cause to grieve over the downfall of the wicked nation of Moab, or of other unworthy nations. However, every nation had its own type of impurity that tempted the righteous and was a challenge that they had to overcome. When they did so successfully, they grew in stature. Now, with the demise of Moab, that particular challenge disappeared, and with it the potential for growth.) Also, I did have occasion to directly ask Rav Dovid Feinstein what he meant in the Kol Dodi Hagadah by ''shofchim l'eebud ha-makos and we don't drink them.'' Did he mean we pour out the wine out of sympathy for the Egyptians' suffering the makkos (as I had translated it), or did he mean that after taking the drops of wine out of the cups, we throw them (the drops of wine representing the makkos) out as waste, rather than drinking them (as R. Zev Sero insisted). And how that relates to the issue of ''al tismach.'' Sorry, but he did not commit to either way, comfortable with both approaches towards rejoicing over the downfall of Israel's enemies. Nevertheless, by my request, the next printing of the Kol Dodi Haggadah should have the translation changed to R. Zev's. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 08:32:13 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:32:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". Does _anybody_ here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? Perhaps a bar mitzvah boy the first time his tefillin "counts", or, perhaps the first time one dons a tallis at shul after marriage, or the first time one does birchas hachama? (As a baal teshuva, I have had a plethora of opportunities to do a mitzvah for the first time, and sometimes I get a spiritual high. And it's quite possible that I didn't do all of them correctly the first time, and that sometimes I wasn't even yotzie b'deived. No, I don't check my tzitzis every time I put on my tallis). Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce inappropriate? The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an inappropriate thought? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 25 13:03:11 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 16:03:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages Message-ID: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:26 AM 4/25/2018, Jay F. Shachter wrote: Let me begin with Daas Torah. Some years ago Rav Zelig Epstein, ZT"L was describing how the Mir Yeshiva left Vilna and got to Japan. He pointed out that almost all of the yeshivas were at this time located in Vilna and that almost all of the hanhalla of the yeshivas were opposed to leaving Vilna, because they feared that the Russians would arrest the yeshiva boys for trying to leave the "Communist paradise." However, several yeshivas boys were strongly in favor of leaving. The following is from my article Rabbi Aryeh Leib Malin And The Mir Yeshiva Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 154 The Jewish Press, February 2, 2018. "Rabbi Malin [a top Mir student] felt it was a matter of life and death that the Mir Yeshiva students leave Vilna. He is reported to have said, "I will get a gun and shoot anybody who tries to stop us from leaving!" (This was verified for me by Reb Zalman Alpert, who served as a librarian at Yeshiva University for many years and told me he heard it from two former Mir Yeshiva students.) " When one of the boys heard that the yeshiva students went against what the hanhalla said, he asked, "But what about Daas Torah?" Reb Zelig replied (and I do not know if he was serious or kidding), "This was before Daas Torah was invented." I was told that Reb Chaim Shmuelevitz, who was against the yeshiva leaving, later apologized to Reb Leib with tears in his eyes. The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. Regarding asking and following what a rov tells you, I am convinced that when they ask in the World to Come "Why did you do this or that?" and someone replies, "I asked a Rov and he told me to do this." the response will be, "You were given free will and expected to exercise it." Certainly one needs to ask a rov difficult halachic questions, but need one ask about most things in daily life? A friend of mine who is a therapist told me that some of his patients are afraid to do almost anything on their own. How sad. Even the Avos were not perfect and RSRH points this out. See his essay Lessons From Jacob and Esau (Collected Writings VII) where he points out that Yitzchok and Rivka made errors in educating Eisav. See also his commentary on what Avraham did when he said that Sarah was his sister. He follows the RAMBAN who says Avraham made a "big" mistake when he did this. Sadly there are some who do believe that whatever scientific assertions Chazal made must be valid. Rabbi Moshe Meiselman is one such person. His book Torah, Chazal and Science takes this position. It is hard for me to understand how a nephew of RYBS can hold this view. Regarding believing things that are not true, see my article "My Mind Is Made Up. Do Not Confuse Me With The Facts!" The Jewish Press, August 25, 2004 pages 7 & 77. YL >It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > >Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what >you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when >you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages >have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same >moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- >correction. > >At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the >moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the >dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on >yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, >the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and >advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly >caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). > >Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this >mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still >we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on >our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in >matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, >even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in >Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit >when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must >rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. >If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will >increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where >the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same >reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. > >That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know >already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, >and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, >and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take >literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and >you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that >requires supernatural explanation. > >Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, >and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes >you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like >them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a >Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your >abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is >a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some >of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. > >You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different >species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that >every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid >Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all >scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a >vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us >closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different >species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you >will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are >different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do >is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass >them. > >There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original >topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than >bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, >that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education >inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for >all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and >progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some >people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the >Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded >innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There >is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he >is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will >never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that >he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. > > > Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter > 6424 N Whipple St > Chicago IL 60645-4111 > (1-773)7613784 landline > (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice > jay at m5.chicago.il.us -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 14:03:32 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish Message-ID: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> >From The Jewish Press , by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev [literally, "the fish of the sword"] is kasher. Why is it widely considered to be not kosher, then? Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different consistency - or something like that - from those of other fish. So he decided it was a treife fish. But that's absolutely not correct. The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag hacherev is kasher. Professor [Shlomo] Sternberg, a big genius in learning and math, published an essay maybe 20 years ago in which he writes that Rabbi Soloveitchik asked him to conduct research on the status of swordfish. He did. He showed Rabbi Soloveitchik the scales of a swordfish and Rav Soloveitchik said, "It's a kashere fish!" Professsor Sternberg writes that he still has the envelope with the scales he showed Rav Soloveitchik in his Gemara Chullin. If the commentaries on the Shuchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev is kosher, how can Rabbi Tendler claim it isn't? Rabbi Tendler claims "dag hacherev" is a different fish. It's not true. But Rabbi Tendler did a service to the Orthodox Jewish community because at the time there were Conservative rabbis who were giving hashgachas, so he laughed them out of existence and said they don't know what they're talking because [they were giving swordfish a hechsher when] swordfish is really treif. So the Orthodox realized you can't rely on the Conservatives. L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue, but Rabbi Tendler accomplished his goal. Well, that's a lot of egg (roe?) on my face after what I said repeatedly in the 1990s in soc.culture.jewish[.moderated] O/C/R Wars... But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. "L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! There is a tie in here to what R JFSchachter posted here yesterday (? no time zone) at 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) under the subject line "Judging The Credibility Of The Sages": > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what > you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when > you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages > have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same > moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- > correction. I was okay attributing ignorance to Chazal, but not violating epstemic virtue like "making up an answer". I would think that by the end of the period, subconsious biases wouldn't have made it into the final result. > At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the > moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the > dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah... Except that daas Torah only requires belief that one is obligated to listen to halachic leadership on social and personal issues where the unknowns are not halachic (or even aggadic). Not that they are necessarily right, nor even that they are more likely to be right. (Infallibility was never Agudah doctrine; but you do find it among the population.) And I am not sure that when it comes to halakhah Chazal *can* be wrong. It's like saying that the house john built is inconsistent with the house John built. Pesaq is constitutive, not truth finding; expecially when you are the nation's authoritative halachic source (eg the Sanhedrin or shas as keSanhedrin, depending on when you think the Sanhedrin actually closed its doors). A pesaq made by CHazal based on incorrect science may still be correct halakhah because they define correctness. We would need to revisit our recurring tereifos discussion. But in any case: 1- I refuse to believe Chazal "made up answers" of had other epistemic moral failings (as a group, including peer review, what made it into shas, etc...) And I wonder how emunas chakhamim would work without that kind of assertion. 2- And yet, that may have happened here, among our contemporary posqim. No one is interested in fixing the science error (among those who believe it is in error) because C loses this way. 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? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 12:49:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 15:49:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425194944.GC6722@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:32:13AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 : > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 : : Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav : concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of : 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" : and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". ... : The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is : *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is : doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an : inappropriate thought? I think it's more that the high isn't from the halachic aspect of what they're doing. Rather than it having to be halkhah qua halakhah. I am not sure that "one is doing ratzon H'" is different than "being mequyam a mitzvah" anyway. As for "getting closer to H'", Litvaks would talk more about sheleimus than deveiqus. IMHO this is part of RYBS being, fundamentally, a Brisker. Here's a quote I feel is on a similar theme, from "The Rav: The World of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik", starting on pg 54: Judaism must be explained and expounded on a proper level. I have read many pamphlets that have been published in the United States with the purpose of bringing people closer to Judaism. There is much foolishness and narrishkeit in some of these publications. For instance, a recent booklet on the Sabbath stressed the importance of a white tablecloth. A woman recently told me that the Sabbath is wonderful, and that it enhances her spiritual joy when she places a snow-white tablecloth on her table. Such pamphlets also speak about a sparkling candelabra. Is this true Judaism? You cannot imbue real and basic Judaism by utilizing cheap sentimentalism and stressing empty ceremonies. Whoever attempts such an approach underestimates the intelligence of the American Jew. If you reduce Judaism to religious sentiments and ceremonies, then there is no role for rabbis to discharge. Religious sentiments and ceremonies are not solely posessed by Orthodox Jewry. All the branches of Judaism have ceremonies and rituals. This is not the only reason why we must negate such a superficial approach. Today in the United States, American Jewish laymen are achieving intellectual and metaphysical maturity. They wish to discover their roots in depth. We will soon reach a point in time where the majority of our congregants will have academic degrees. Through the mediums of white tablecloths and polished candelabras, you will not bring these people back to Judaism. It is forbidden to publish pamphlets of this nature, which emphasize the emotional and ceremonial approaches. There is another reason why ceremony will not influence the American Jew. In the Unitesd States today, the greatest master of ceremony is Hollywood. If a Jew wants ceremony, all he has to do is turn on the television set. If our approach stresses the ceremonial side of Judaism rather than its moral, ethical, and religious teachings, then our viewpoint will soon become bankrupt. The only proper course is that of Ezekiel's program for the priests: "And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and the common, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean" [Ezekiel 44:23] The rabbi must teach his congregants. He must deepen their appreciation of Judaism and not water it down. If we neutralize and compromise our teachings, then we are no different than the other branches of Judaism. By RYBS's standards, being moved by music at a kumzitz is "ceremony". Meanwhile, Chassidus, Mussar, RSRH, Qabbalah-influenced Sepharadim (following the Chida and Ben Ish Hai) and numerous other derakhim have no problem with ceremony. For that matter, before it became minhag, specifying specific patterns of hand washing (RLRLRL or RRLL) was also ritual once. And many of those Academics that RYBS foresaw want their Nesivos Shalom, Tish, kumzitz.... Neochassidus is a big thing in YU. This idea that ceremonies that aren't defined by halakhah are inherently empty and its sentimentalism is cheap rather than reinforcing the cognitive and halachic, is, as I said, only something a Brisker would write. Even within Brisk... RYBS went further in this direction than did the Brisker Rav (R Velvel, his uncle). The BR holds that one makes berakhos on minhagim that have a cheftzah shel mitzvah (eg lighting a Chanukah menorah in shul), and that the Rambam and Rabbeinu Tam don't argue about that. What they do argue about is whether Chatzi Hallel is close enough to Hallel to qualify for a berakhah. This is a non-started for RYBS, who requires minhagim have a cheftzah shel mitzvah or else they're ceremoial. RYBS even fit the minhagim of the 3 Weeks and 9 Days to fit this shitah by insisting they must follow what was already established aveilus and sheloshim, respectively. Oops. I just notied I'm repeating something I worte a decade ago. See . At least the berkhah-in-minhag part was posted in 2011, so that this post had the value of combining the two earlier ones. Beqitzur, I don't know of two many people (aside from our mutual rebbe-chaver) who would agree with RYBS on this one. 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? From zev at sero.name Wed Apr 25 14:37:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:37:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish In-Reply-To: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 25/04/18 17:03, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish > because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with > scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is > young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are > elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) > So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question > seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify > as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. There can be no question that a fish does *not* have to keep its scales to remain kosher. The posuk says fish only have to have their scales in the water, not when they leave the water. A fish that sheds its scales when caught is kosher, and no rabbi has the right to say otherwise. And I don't see a difference between shedding when caught and shedding on reaching adulthood. As I understand R Tendler's claim, it was that swordfish never have true scales, that even the ones they have as juveniles are not kaskasim. And this seems not to be true. BTW R Ari G and R Ari Z dispute the claim that adults swordfish (or landed swordfish) lose all their scales. They claim that this is the result of not examining adult landed fish closely enough, and that if one does one finds kosher scales still attached to the skin. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Apr 25 16:33:33 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 23:33:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: <06705270-E689-4937-BAAF-0C7AE035E469@tenzerlunin.com> I simply note that (a) all the stories were published after the Rav died and (b) all appear to be least first degree if not more hearsay. (It?s unclear how R. Mandel knows the story. His article doesn?t say if he saw it, heard it from the Rav, or heard it from someone else.) But the difference between the two ways the story is told is striking and, I believe, calls it into question. But I guess we?ll never know. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 26 05:25:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:25:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sifrei torah Message-ID: <6fef9ae673744a11a2ede85a210fb782@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Can anyone point me to information concerning the history of the difference between the physical element of Ashkenazi (atzei chaim) and Eidot Hamizrach (containers) Sifrei Torah? The differences in the timing and physics of hagba and glila ? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Apr 26 10:06:01 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 17:06:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Unknown Days of the Jewish Calender Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NZ9BN1 This coming week, an unsuspecting person wishing to catch a minyan, who walks into a random shul in many places around the world, might be in for a surprise. After the Shemoneh Esrei prayer on Sunday there will be no Tachanun. On Monday there will be Selichos; and on Thursday there again won?t be Tachanun! Why would this be? No Tachanun generally signifies that it is a festive day[1]; yet, no other observances are readily noticeable. As for the reciting of Selichos on Monday, they are usually reserved for a fast day; yet no one seems to be fasting! What is going on? See the above URL for more about this. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 19:43:43 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 22:43:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> On 4/25/2018 11:32 AM, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: >> And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at >> (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav > concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense > of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something > else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". > Does anybody here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? ... > Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah > was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce > inappropriate? > The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he > is thinking that he is being mekayum a mitzvah?... For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a problem. KT, YGB From meirabi at gmail.com Thu Apr 26 15:58:32 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 08:58:32 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach Message-ID: Yeshayahu (15:5) My heart cries out over the destruction of Israels wicked enemy, Moab. Rashi understands, the prophet is expressing his own agony - The prophets of Israel, unlike the prophets of the world, like Bilaam, seek to destroy us without provocation. Our prophets however, mourn for our persecutors when they suffer Divine punishments. As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness, that is certainly more of an intense and personal loss than the millions of Egyptians who perished - but we mourn them all from the perspective of lost potential, lost opportunity to be loyal to HKBH, and HKBH's failure to successfully persuade them to open their eyes and do what is right. That is why we spill wine from the cup we use for Hallel - HKBH's praise is incomplete, He was not fully successful - the gift He gave humanity, free choice, can, and was, used against Him. Obviously the cup should not be topped up. Each plague was a lesson and a plea from HKBH to all who witnessed these astonishing events - do the right thing, reconise that I am the King of all kings, The Master of the universe. Every Yid deserves 600,000 to attend his funeral. The Gemara explains - As it was given So it is taken away. Every Y, even the most Poshut or unlearned, is a potential recipient of the entire Torah and we must visualise their departure as the loss of that tremendous potential. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 26 18:35:26 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:35:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2499630f-df1d-04ef-9897-ef18103da093@sero.name> On 26/04/18 18:58, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of > descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness Where is this written? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri Apr 27 01:04:10 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 10:04:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> References: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> Message-ID: When I was in yeshiva, one of my rabbanim told us that we should dance when we "get" a Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Ben On 4/26/2018 4:43 AM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: > For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a > problem. > > KT, > YGB From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 29 07:49:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 17:49:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: A while ago we had a discussion about farfetched ukimtas. In yesterday's daf (Zevachim 15) the Gemara made a very startling statement about farfetched ukimtas. The Gemara has a question about whether Holachah without walking is Pasul or not. The Gemara brought a proof from a braisa If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher (even though when it spills, some if it spreads out towards the Mizbeach, i.e. Holachah without walking). The Gemara answered that none of the blood spread towards the Mizbeach.The Gemara then asked, surely, it spreads in all directions! The Gemara gave 3 answers 1: It fell on an incline. 2: It fell in a crevice. 3: The blood was very thick, and almost congealed. It did not spread at all. Then the Gemara made the following startling statement to reject these answers: It is UNREASONABLE to say that the Tana taught about such unusual cases The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? I brought an example from Bava Basra 19-20 which had at least as farfetched ukimtas and yet the Gemara didn't think they were unreasonable. Here is the example that I quoted from Bava Basra A Baraisa states that the following block Tumah, grass that was detached and placed in a window, or grew there by itself; rags smaller than three fingers by three fingers; a dangling limb or flesh of an animal; a bird that rested there; a Nochri who sat there, a (i.e. stillborn) baby born in the eighth month; salt; earthenware Kelim; and a Sefer Torah. The Gemara then proceeds to ask questions on each one that it is only there temporarily and the Gemara gives ukimtas, qualifications, for each thing to explain why it is not there temporarily. 1. Grass The grass is poisonous. The wall is ruined (so the grass will not destory it) The grass is 3 tefachim from the wall and does not harm the wall but bends into the window 2. Rags The material is too thick to be used for a patch It's sackcloth which is rough and would scratch the skin. It's not sackcloth, it's just rough like sacklocth 3. Dangling limb of an animal The animal is tied up and can't move. It's a non-kosher animal. It's a weak animal. 3. Bird The bird is tied down. It's a non-kosher bird. It's a Kalanisa (a very lean bird). It's not really a kalanisa, it's just lean like a kalanisa. 4. A non-Jew He is tied up. He is a ?????. He is a prisoner of the king 5. Salt The salt is bitter. There are thorns in it. It's resting on earthernware so it does not harm the wall. 5. Sefer Torah It's worn out. It's burial will be in the window. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 29 22:24:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 05:24:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? -/////---- One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the already known outcome. Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon Apr 30 01:22:56 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:22:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched >> ukimtas? ...` > One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition > as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the > already known outcome. It doesn't sound that way from the Gemara, The Gemara goes as follows: 1. Ula makes a statement that Holachah without walking is Pasul. 2. The Gemara brings a proof against him from a Mishna (where the blood spills, etc.) 3. The Gemara answers for Ula with an ukimta for the Mishna which doesn't contradict his din 4. The gemara says the ukimta is unreasonable Nowehere does it sound like we are reconciling sources with a known outcome. It sounds like a typical give and take found all over shas where ukimtas are simply accepted. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 29 18:59:29 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 21:59:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Question from the Book of Yechezqeil Message-ID: In Yechezqeil, 44:31, he writes that a Kohen shall not eat nevayla (or T?refah). Nobody can eat it so why is there a prohibition for just the Kohen? I?m aware of what Kimchi and Rashi say, but it seems to be a weak explanation. To say the Kohen needed a special warning is stretching it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:55:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:55:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:24:19AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition : as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with : the already known outcome. I don't know if that works here. I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and there are no counterveiling issues involved. Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish case. Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the floor of the azarah and not spread. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:51:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:51:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215105.GB12997@aishdas.org> My first thought was somewhat off topic but feel like it should be related... R' Yirmiyah's banishment from Bavel was over his habit of checking shiurim by posing implausible edge cases. He ends up in EY, and succeeds in the Y-mi. The final question (BB 23b) before his expulsion was whether we assume owned a bird that had one leg within 50 amos of the dovecote (ie within the shiur for the chazaqah for assuming that's its origin) and one leg outside? But there is also when he questions tevu'ah growing at least 1/3 before RH if harvested on Sukkos. Veqim lehu lerabbanan? How can you measure such a thing? (RH 13a) And his question on hashavas aveidah of 1/2 qav in 2 amos, or 2 qav in 8 amos? We assume yi'ush if we find less than 1 qas scattered across 3 amos. Is that a ratio? (BM 2a) How can you say that a revi'is is the amount of mayim chayim that the blood of a metzorah's birds would be niqar within? Wouldn't it depend on the size of the bird? (Sotah 16b) What if a kohein becomes a baal mum while the dam is in the air between his hazayah and it landing on the mizveiach? (Zevachim 15a) According to R' Meir, a miscarriage that was developed enough to have the shape of a beheimah causes tum'as leidah. (As opposed to saying it must be human shaped.) So, R Yirmiyah asked R Zeira, according to R Meir, what if a woman gives birth to such a baby, a girl and the father was meqadeish her to a man? R' Zeira points out that the child wouldn't live 3 years anyway, so bi'ah isn't an issue. R Meir asks: but what about marrying her sister? This one may or may not count, as R' Acha bar Yaaqov says that R Yirmiyah's point was to get R Zeira to laugh. (Niddar 23a) But it does reflect what kind of thing would come to his mind. (Tangent: There are a number of stories that indicate R Zeira needed chearing up. Like the golam Rava sent him. RMMS tied this to "Rav shachat lei leR Zeira".) But when he gets to EY, the Y-mi accepts his question. (Not that the Y-mi ever answers questions that involve guessing what the tanna / amora would have said...) A picker can eat a snack (quantity discussed) before tu"m was taken from the crop. As long as he is holing them. R Yirmiyah asked whether a picker can eat an olive he was juggling -- and thus didn't put down but also isn't just picked. (Maaseros 3:4, vilna daf 17b) Maybe the issue in the OP is about this time rejecting an absurd -- R Yirmiyahu-like -- oqimta is just the difference in styles in different batei medrash? Too haskala-ish to be satisfying? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Mon Apr 30 20:47:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:47:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tuesday, May 1, 2018, Micha Berger wrote: > > > I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is > the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and > there are no counterveiling issues involved. > > Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish > cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish > case. > > Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's > that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the > floor of the azarah and not spread. And it?s easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn?t seem more unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 06:47:36AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is :> the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and :> there are no counterveiling issues involved. :> Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish :> cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish :> case. : And it's easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a : prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn't seem more : unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. I suggest exploring if the distinction is between a din that could only apply in the farfetched case and dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from the distcussion. This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See . (He offered to send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. In a different post, I suggested another line to explore, if you prefer it. Diffierent batei medrash had different tolerances for R Yirmiyahu's questions, and those too also used farfetched cases. And if so, maybe there was one beis medrash during the course of the ccenturies of amoraim that simply had no patience for odd oqimtos; even though they were atypical that way. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 31st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Hod: What level of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 results in harmony and balance? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 1 03:34:33 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 13:34:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > > But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. > > I suggest exploring if the distinction is between > a din that could only apply in the farfetched case > and > dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated > in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from > the distcussion. > > This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought > in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See > . (He offered to > send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta > serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in > this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. > The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without walking from the equation. It would seem to be a perfect example to apply R' Michel Avraham's thesis and yet the Gemara rejects the ukimta as being unreasonable -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue May 1 04:40:42 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 11:40:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: Please see https://goo.gl/ESJERH for two links to a talk given by Rabbi Dr. Shnyer Leiman titled The Strange History of Lag B'Omer. Please see https://goo.gl/s2KHAVfor [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] The Spreading Fires Of Lag Baomer: Tempting Quick & Easy ?Spirituality? vs. Enduring Ruchnius goo.gl In the past we have discussed at length (5771, 5772, 5773A, 5773B, and 5773C) how Lag Baomer is marked in minhag Ashkenaz, and contrasted it with other, more recent customs, that have become popula? See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) No less an authority than Chasam Sofer was strongly opposed to Lag B'Omer celebrations. He argued that one should not make a new Yom Tov that is not based on a miraculous event, that has no basis in Shas and Poskim, and that is based on the death of someone. (See here for links.) See https://goo.gl/Zma8pS [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] No ? No ? No ? No ? No ? Minhag Ashkenaz & Recent Lag Ba?omer Innovations ? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ?????, ??? ?????, ??????, ?????, ??? ???? goo.gl Yes, it is that time of the year again. Lag ba?omer is almost here. And with it, all the hype and solicitations for trips to Meron, Chai Rotel Mashkeh donations, upsherin, bonfires, and the l? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:54:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:54:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:34:33PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter : (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that : blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The : ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without : walking from the equation... I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Tue May 1 04:25:47 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 14:25:47 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the > stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. > And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's > not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. The Gemara starts with Ula stating a din that holacha without walikng is pasul. The Gemara then brings down the following statment from a Mishna If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher. The Gemara then asks on Ula from this Mishna, namely that the blood must have moved towards the Mizbeach, e.g. holacha without walking and it is kosher. The Gemara then answers with the implausible ukimtos to explain the Mishna. In other words, it seems that the ukimtos are there to explain the Mishna namely that the Mishna provides a principle that blood that falls on the floor is kosher and the ukimtas are there to remove any extraneous factors such as holacha without walking. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 1 15:57:50 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 18:57:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ahava Eternal Message-ID: <2060439B-6A01-4D14-AC06-6D6675AC6381@cox.net> I heard a beautiful d?rash by Rabbi Yosef Shusterman (Chabad of Beverly Hills). He said the following: If you ask 20 people the definition of ?LOVE,? you will get 20 different responses. However, the best definition of love is the Jewish definition. He uses gematria. The gematria of Ahava is 13 and the gematria of Echod is 13. ?Love" is when you are at ?one? with whomever or whatever. Theologically, the love of God is when you are at one with God. Sometimes it takes an entire lifetime to reach that madreiga. I am in you and you in me, mutual in divine love. William Blake (18th c. poet, painter and printmaker) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 2 01:33:44 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 08:33:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of?= =?windows-1252?q?_Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/W49XHX Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. See the above URL for more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 07:10:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 10:10:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <64a22eb4-af1e-fab5-373f-889b1083cd08@sero.name> On 02/05/18 04:33, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From https://goo.gl/W49XHX > > > Toras Aba ?just put up an interesting post > discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to > similarity with ancient practice of idolators. > > See the above URL for more. And yet your precious Minhag Ashkenaz was to (have a nochri) make a bonfire and dance before it (or around it) on Simchas Torah. R Wosner was asked about doing so in camp, stam on a Wednesday, not on Lag Bo'omer when it is, at least in Meron, Chevron, and a few other places in Eretz Yisroel, a long-established minhog practiced by tzadikim and chachomim who were much greater than R Wosner or anyone else you can cite. I don't believe it occurred to him that someone might apply this teshuvah to those fires, and it's dishonest to do so. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 09:04:58 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:04:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:33:44AM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : From https://goo.gl/W49XHX : Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. Most of us have little problem with Israel's Moment of Silence on Yom haZikaron and Yom haSho'ah, at least not Derekh Emori problems. And we wear ties. There are limits to invoking Derekh Emori. To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last days too. And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah kekhol hayom". At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled later than the norm, this evening.) I don't know the origin. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 09:45:50 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:45:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> On 02/05/18 12:04, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag > baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) > and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas > simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo > velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than > waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the > Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last > days too. > > And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo > you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I > have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah > kekhol hayom". > > At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I > know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled > later than the norm, this evening.) > > I don't know the origin. The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. A cessation of mourning, such as the last day of shiva, obviously begins in the morning. Nor is it an occasion for joy; when one gets up from shiva one doesn't go dancing and singing. Thus the restrictions are lifted only after daybreak, and tachanun is said at mincha on the previous day, just as it is on the other three days whose observance begins in the morning, viz Pesach Sheni, Erev Rosh Hashana, and Erev Yom Kippur. But the celebration of Rashbi is a positively happy occasion, so it starts immediately at nightfall, and no tachanun is said at the previous mincha. The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and relies heavily on the Magen Avraham. (He later expressed regret over his over-reliance on the MA, which is one reason why he wrote a second edition, only a few chapters of which are extant.) So it's not surprising that this is the psak found there, however it is not the psak that was followed in Chabad, which means in practice he paskened differently. (Sometimes it means he changed his mind, but sometimes he never paskened in practice as he wrote in the SA, for the reasons I mentioned above.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 10:53:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 13:53:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : >I don't know the origin. : : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain how or when the older minhag was changed. And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. ... : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 11:25:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 14:25:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> On 02/05/18 13:53, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : >I don't know the origin. > : > : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the > : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of > : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the > : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. > > That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain > how or when the older minhag was changed. It follows that the minhag changed when the significance of the day changed. In other words, the minhogim of the day when R Akiva's talmidim stopped dying did not change, but on top of them came a whole new layer of minhogim for the new holiday that occupies the same day on the calendar. For a similar example, the significance of 3 Tammuz in Lubavitch changed dramatically in 5754. The earlier significance of that day and whatever practices it had did not go away, e.g. those who did not say tachanun on 3 Tammuz before 5754 still don't say it, while those who did still do, but the new significance, and the host of practices that came with it, overwhelmed the earlier significance and observance. > And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" > is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. Doesn't the Idra Zuta say that Rashbi asked for his hilula to be celebrated rather than mourned? > You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, > after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, > in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) > that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, > Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. Whether it's the correct explanation of the Pri Etz Chaim or not, it is the one held by the people actually doing the celebrating, and thus fully explains their practices. > ... > : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which > : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and > : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... > > I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to suppose they didn't exist in his day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 15:57:53 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 18:57:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> Message-ID: <4b464085-efab-7164-2d33-7726eba6a069@sero.name> On 02/05/18 14:25, Zev Sero wrote: >> >> : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which >> : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and >> : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... >> I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. > They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to > suppose they didn't exist in his day. PS: Indirect evidence that in the AR's day the night of Lag Baomer was already considered part of the simcha is that in his siddur (as opposed to his SA) he wrote that tachanun is not said at mincha of erev Lag Baomer. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 3 07:01:56 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 03 May 2018 10:01:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?iso-8859-1?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= References: Message-ID: At 12:04 PM 5/2/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag >baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) >and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas >simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo >velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than >waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the >Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last >days too. > >And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo >you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I >have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah >kekhol hayom". > >At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of Aveilus on the 34th day? If so, how can Sefardim go to Meron on the night of the 33rd? I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at Tzeis and who started it. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 3 06:04:34 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:04:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tzedaka priorities Message-ID: The S"A in O"C 152:1 codifies a prohibition against tearing down a synagogue before building a new one (one must build the new one first). The M"B (4) gives the reason for this prohibition as a concern that if one had not built the new one first, a case of pidyon shvuyim(captive's redemption) might arise requiring funds to be diverted from the new construction. 1. Why couldn't the chachamim make a takana in that case? 2. Why would the chachamim work around required priorities? 3. Doesn't 152:6 says you would sell a synagogue anyway in a case of pidyon shvuyim? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 09:03:10 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 12:03:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on the > night of the 33rd? The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve either of those things. (There is no issur on music during sefirah; that seems to be a modern invention, presumably because in modern times we've become lenient on the prohibition against music at any time, so we need to impose a restriction during sefirah, whereas earlier generations who were strict with the general prohibition didn't feel a need to strengthen it now.) > I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at > Tzeis and who started it. As I wrote earlier, it seems associated with the adoption of the Rashbi's celebration on top of the earlier marking of the end of the plague among R Akiva's students. Thus it would probably have started in Tzfas in the late 16th century and spread into Europe in the 18th century together with the AriZal's kabbalah. (Note that according to the AriZal, not cutting hair is not connected to avelus, and applies on Lag Ba`omer as well, except for upsherenishen. But not having weddings is because of avelus, so if we're celebrating Yom Simchas Rashbi they should be permitted.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 10:13:07 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:13:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on : >the night of the 33rd? : : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve : either of those things... An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 10:17:41 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:17:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> On 03/05/18 13:13, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on > : >the night of the 33rd? > : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are > : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve > : either of those things... > An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. For children, who are not obligated in aveilus anyway. But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and the answer is the same way they go by day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 11:56:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 14:56:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and : the answer is the same way they go by day. The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both Ashk and Seph? Yes, if the party happened to be during the day, I would have the same question WRT Sepharadim (only). So how does pointing out that fact help me any in answering it? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 33rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total Fax: (270) 514-1507 submission to truth, and what results? From simon.montagu at gmail.com Thu May 3 16:36:11 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 02:36:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 > > > Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is > > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did that before the 16th century. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 12:08:37 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 15:08:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> On 03/05/18 14:56, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and > : the answer is the same way they go by day. > > The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > Ashk and Seph? And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do so from nightfall. (b) The Meron celebrations, which the question was about, don't violate the sefira observances anyway. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 05:04:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 08:04:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer Message-ID: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:24 AM 5/4/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > > > >I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings >Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did >that before the 16th century. In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to show that it was not really part of the davening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 05:14:32 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:14:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Bow_and_Arrow_on_Lag_B=92Omer?= Message-ID: >From http://www.collive.com/show_news.rtx?id=50532 A 4-year-old son of a Shliach in Florida was hit in his eye by an arrow on Lag BaOmer. Please pray for Baruch Shmuel ben Chana. I do hope he has a refuah shleima. This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. >From https://goo.gl/kumYeX One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn?t even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a break from their Torah studies. It is also surprising that they should pass the time with such a martial activity, seemingly out of character with the day devoted to the man of peace. Rav Menachem Mendel of Rimanov, one of the early Hasidic Rebbes, explained that the custom is based on the Midrash which states that all the days of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, the rainbow didn?t appear in the sky. (Ketubot 77b the same is said there of Rebbe Yehoshua ben Levi.) Rashi explains that the rainbow is the sign of the covenant that the world will not be destroyed, and if there is a perfect tzaddik in the world there is no need of such a sign. (Cited by B?nei Yissachar on Lag BaOmer.) See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 07:58:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:58:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both :> Ashk and Seph? : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do : so from nightfall... You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something aggadic. But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from what I was raised to believe on that. I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and rishonim couldn't have known about? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 07:05:58 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:05:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Mysterious Origin of Lag Ba-Omer Message-ID: Please see http://www.hakirah.org/Vol20First.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 4 09:57:47 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 18:57:47 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Bottom line: They do it or they don't? Ben On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time,? and I > was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to > show that it was not really part of the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:41:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:41:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Let me begin with Daas Torah. ... : The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a : result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this : was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. So what are those formulations? Here are 3 I know of: 1- Given how the gadol's mind is shapeds by his learning, he is a useful resource for advice. He could be wrong, but aren't your odds better by asking? 2- Asking a gadol will get you the answer Hashem wants you to act on, whether it is the truth or not. E.g. the error of advising agaisnt fleeing the Nazis was because that was what Hashem wanted of us. But it was still pragmatically in error. I also see hints of this model in RALichtenstein's "Im Ein Daas, Manhigut Minayin?" but with the added caveat that RAL didn't expect to find daas Torah in practice. (Not since RSZA.) Again, just implications; I could be reading too much into the essay. 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, they are supposed to lead. RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like the same model. Notice that all advocate listening to gedolim even on non-halachic matters, but not because of any guarantees about accuracy. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:52:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:52:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180504165212.GC13247@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 07:12:36AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They : have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye : (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so : much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses.... The relationship to a kohein is trickier than that, as their is no tum'ah until after the declaration. He is more parallel to an eid qiyum than an eid birur. For example, Vayiqra 14:36 tells a person to remove all the items from his home before the kohein comes to inspect a potential nega in it. Even even if the kohein sees the same unchanged splotch and declares it a nega, those itsems are not tamei. It wasn't a nega until the declaration. ... : My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would : become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate : some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just : another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve : myself in general." Tum'as leidah isn't because something is spiritually awry with the mother. So I am not sure we have to assume that zivah is like tzara'as. Lefi RSRH, tum'ah comes from things that could make us overly identify with our bodies -- death, birth, the kinds of sheratzim that share our homes (in EY), niddah... Zivah and leidah would fit that pattern. So would tzara'as, because it too feels like the body is rebelling against the will. The difference is that chazal is saying the body really is rebelling (or made to show rebellion) against a tainted will. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From zev at sero.name Fri May 4 11:15:17 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:15:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 04/05/18 10:58, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > :> Ashk and Seph? > > : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in > : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus > : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't > : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do > : so from nightfall... > > You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, > nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new > information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. Nothing is being uprooted. Something new has come. Just as when a local "Purim" or lehavdil a fast is declared. > If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a > comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something > aggadic. > > But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind > the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous > revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from > what I was raised to believe on that. > > I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence > of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation > anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take > over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in > this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and > rishonim couldn't have known about? They didn't know about the Zohar, let alone the Idra Zuta and R Shimon's request that people rejoice at his "hilula". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 11:51:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 14:51:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:57 PM 5/4/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >Bottom line: They do it or they don't? > >Ben >On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >>Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and >>I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it >>to show that it was not really part of the davening. > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the beginning are said responsively. The Shatz stands at the table where leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 12:06:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 15:06:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <7E.8C.04381.0DFACEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:41 PM 5/4/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Let me begin with Daas Torah. >... >: The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a >: result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this >: was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. > >It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the >popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues >speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are >infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. Please see the article To Flee Or To Stay? at http://www.hakirah.org/vol%209%20bobker.pdf At the end of the article it says, "This article is excerpted from Joe Bobker's "The Rabbis and the Holocaust," to be published by Geffen Books in the summer of 2010." However, to the best of my knowledge this book was never published, and I have always wondered why. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 5 11:45:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 05 May 2018 20:45:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1ed3f3d3-7cb6-927c-da0f-e22d19aa3a4e@zahav.net.il> Bseder. We are all agreed that even Frankfurt changed their seider Tefilla sometime in the last few hundred years. Many shuls have someone, even a child, say (sing) the tehillim from the bimah. Ben On 5/4/2018 8:51 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the > beginning are said responsively.? The Shatz stands at the table where > leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over > he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun May 6 01:53:37 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 11:53:37 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: Yesterday's daf (Zevachim 22) has another wild ukimta that seems to just be there to answer a question on an amora and not provide a sterile environment to learn out a new principle. Here is the gist of the Gemara: R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina states if the Kiyor does not contain enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim, it is invalid - "v'Rachatzu Mimenu Moshe v'Aharon u'Vanav." The Gemara asks a question from the following Baraisa: One may be Mekadesh from any Keli Shares, whether or not it contains a Revi'is of water (this is much less then the water needed for 4 people) Rav Ada bar Acha answers: The case is, the Keli Shares was carved into the Kiyor (so the water comes from the Kiyor, which contains enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim). I don't see any way that you can say here that the ukimta is to remove extraneous dinim etc. The ukimta here seems to serve one and only one purpose, explain the Barisa that it is not a question on an Amora. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From saul.mashbaum at gmail.com Sun May 6 06:41:09 2018 From: saul.mashbaum at gmail.com (Saul Mashbaum) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 16:41:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: RYL >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. Saul Mashbaum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 05:28:41 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 15:28:41 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire Message-ID: << And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. >> Fore details about the printing error to give rise to the idead that Lag Baomer is Rashbi's yahrzeit see http://seforim.blogspot.co.il/2011/05/ changing subjects one of the weirdest experiences I had was a bunch of black coated Chevra kadisha dancing about a grave in Bet Shemesh at 12 midnight with just a flashlight for light -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 07:21:11 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 17:21:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: <> OTOH there is the gemara that when there was the dispute in Yavneh between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. This story took place many years before talmidim of R. Akiva (who was junior at that time) died. If so Rashbi was a known talmid many years before R. Akiva revived Torah . As an aside other taananim survived the bar kochba wars including talmidim of R, Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at mail.aol.com Sun May 6 11:22:13 2018 From: t613k at mail.aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 14:22:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bow and Arrow on Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16336b09884-c88-1c19@webjas-vaa039.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 5/6/2018 7:51:35 AM EST, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org writes: From: "Professor L. Levine" > This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. > From https://goo.gl/kumYeX >> One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is >> less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows >> and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe >> Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn't >> even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a >> break from their Torah studies..... Torah sages and their students learned Torah secretly in the woods, hiding from the Roman soldiers. They took bows and arrows with them and if they were found in the woods, they would say they were out hunting. That's what I was told when I was a little girl. I don't know if this is associated with R' Akiva and his talmidim, or with R' ShBY. As a child I thought the story was about young children and didn't realize until later that it must have been adult students with bows and arrows in the woods. (Yes I know Jews don't hunt for food or for sport, but maybe the Romans didn't know that. Or the Jews could plausibly say they hunted for hides and fur.) PS All my Areivims and Avodahs lately are deformed by great quantities of question marks. If anyone knows how to stop this from happening, please let me know. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com -- From driceman at optimum.net Sun May 6 17:58:21 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 19:58:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> RMB: > 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus > stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the > Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act > as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make > gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on > personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, > they are supposed to lead. > > RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before > RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who > carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the > names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked > questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like > the same model. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? David Riceman From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sat May 5 12:17:25 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 5 May 2018 22:17:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Sacrificies Message-ID: Question: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat had to bring the animal to as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result in hundreds -- Eli Turkel From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 7 04:19:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 14:19:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices Message-ID: R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he was permanently a Kohen; From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:37:00 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:37:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 06/05/18 10:21, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > This story took place many years before talmidim?of R. Akiva (who was > junior at that time) died. On the contrary, R Akiva was very senior at the time of these disputes. In the mishna in Rosh Hashana he was one of the two who counseled R Yehoshua to obey R Gamliel's order, and in Berachos when R Gamliel was deposed he was one of only three candidates considered to replace him. > If so Rashbi was a known talmid?many years before R. Akiva revived Torah > .?As an aside other taananim?survived the bar kochba?wars including > talmidim?of R, Yishmael What have Bar Kochva or his wars got to do with any of this? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:45:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:45:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> References: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> Message-ID: <44c411ba-2fee-9ae7-82d6-de3850c6417a@sero.name> On 06/05/18 20:58, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus >> stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the >> Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act >> as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make >> gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on >> personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, >> they are supposed to lead. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim who are to guide them. There need to be askanim because the chachamim have no time for klal work; they're busy learning and will neglect it. So those who lack either the head or the bottom for full-time learning can be the administrators, and when they need guidance they will consult the chachamim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Wed Apr 25 14:17:16 2018 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:17:16 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5AEFEEE1.1030601@biu.ac.il> Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: >>From The Jewish Press >, >by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): ... > Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if > he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi > Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called > up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different... ... >"L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! The attached has lots of relevant information. [Attachment stored at -micha] From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 08:00:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 11:00:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 07/05/18 07:19, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen > even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes > in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was > considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen > only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); > others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he > was permanently a Kohen; Thank you. Note the context: Rav stated outright that Moshe was a cohen gadol, and the gemara cites this braisa to show his source, that he was ruling like the Yesh Omrim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 8 12:40:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 15:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 3000 Year Old Mansion Implies a Sizable Malkhus Beis David Message-ID: <20180508194052.GA19392@aishdas.org> >From . What struck me is what appears to be the weakness of the objection -- some of the results are from a poor source, and even though they converge with other results, we'll question the whole thing? Does This 3,000-Year-Old House Confirm King David's Lost Biblical Kingdom? By Owen Jarus, Live Science Contributor | May 3, 2018 02:50pm ET Archaeologists have discovered a sprawling, possibly 3,000-year-old house that suggests a biblical kingdom called the United Monarchy, ruled by King David and later Solomon according to the Hebrew Bible, actually existed. The archaeologists who excavated the house, at a site now called Tel Eton, in Israel, said in an article published online March 13 in the journal Radiocarbon that the date, design and size of the house indicates that a strong organized government existed at Tel Eton around 3,000 years ago. They added that this government may be the United Monarchy. The site is located in the central part of Israel in a region called the Shephalah. ... In their paper, Faust and Sapir argue that evidence supporting the existence of the United Monarchy is often not studied because of a problem they call the "old house effect." The site of Tel Eton, including the massive house, was destroyed by the Assyrians during the eighth century B.C. As such, the house held a vast amount of remains dating to that century, but relatively few remains that date to 3,000 years ago when the house was first built. This "old house effect" is a problem commonly seen in Israel and at archaeological sites in other countries, the archaeologists said. "Buildings and strata can exist for a few centuries, until they are destroyed, but almost all the finds will reflect this latter event," wrote Faust and Sapir, noting that archaeologists need to be careful to dig down and find the oldest remains of the structures they are excavating so they don't miss remains that could provide clues to the United Monarchy. Israel Finkelstein, a professor at Tel Aviv University who has written extensively about the United Monarchy debate, expressed skepticism about the results. Two of the four samples used for radiocarbon dating are olive pits, which pose a problem, he said. "The single olive pits come from fills [material that accumulated on the surface of the floor before the floor broke apart]. They have no importance whatsoever [for] dating the building. At Megiddo, my dig, samples like this, single items/fills, are not being sent to the lab to be dated, because they enter bias into the dating system," Finkelstein said. "There is no connection whatsoever between the finds at Tel Eton and the biblical description of the United Monarchy." Faust told Live Science he expects that some archaeologists would be critical of the use of material found in the remains of the floors for radiocarbon dating. He noted that all the radiocarbon dates, those from the olive pits and from the charcoal, converge around 3,000 years. "The convergence of the dates suggest that we are on safe grounds," Faust said. He also noted that one of the charcoal samples is not from the floor but from the foundation deposit (the chalice), strengthening the conclusion that the house was built around 3,000 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 38th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Yesod: How does reliability Fax: (270) 514-1507 promote harmony in life and relationships? From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue May 8 13:05:25 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 23:05:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer Message-ID: >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag in the places I have seen -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Tue May 8 15:31:28 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 01:31:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 11:05 PM, Eli Turkel via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > >>> > In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some > places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is > leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. > This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. > >>>> > > This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> > > Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. > In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag > in the places I have seen > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Tue May 8 17:28:19 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 20:28:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Me > >> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? RZS: > > Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those > doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim > who are to guide them. Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. David Riceman From eliturkel at gmail.com Wed May 9 00:33:02 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:33:02 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: A while ago there was a debate about gebrochs while some condemned the minhag others defended it. I suggest reading an article by Brown https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 (4th on the list) It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those practices that can be traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a select few don't count. He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of elitism that only gedolim count. OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at most) His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in terms of protecting their communities from modernism. I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. Again see the above article for more details -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Tue May 8 21:46:46 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 14:46:46 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer & Rashbi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2700442c-cb3b-4267-b4bc-7e47e0d3efc8@yypwn-sl-yzhq-hkhn-blbyn> See also From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 02:53:57 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 05:53:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 01:31:28AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but : parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or : by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and : acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only : at Kaddish before Barechu At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night (in the US, mostly Syrian), everyone chants everything together. No shatz, and no one taking the lead even section by section. As per the first clause above. Somoene takes the lead for Bameh Madliqin from their seat. Chazan starts at pre-Qaddish material for Arbit. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:12:47 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:12:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 18:31, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: > > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but > parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together > or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing > up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame > Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu In other words, the same as pesukei dezimra, or the ashre and uva letzion before mincha. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed May 9 10:59:33 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 19:59:33 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> References: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At the Yemenite place I go to Friday night, everyone chants Kabbalat Shabbat together (same tune, every week, for the whole thing). An elderly person will get the kavod of saying the first line of Lecha Dodi out loud, but the rest is sung together. After Lecha Dodi, they say four lines from Shir HaShirim and then one person leads them in a "Bar Yochai" song (this kavod is auctioned off). After that, all together for BeMah Madlilin and Mizmor L'yom Hashabbat. On 5/9/2018 11:53 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night . . . From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:21:40 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:21:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 20:28, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: >> Me >> >>> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? > > RZS: >> >> Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those >> doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim >> who are to guide them. > > Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not the rav who guided him. Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. But at any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to do their job properly they can't be learning all day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:27:09 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 03:33, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 9 12:54:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 19:54:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation Message-ID: Many years ago when my two oldest grandsons were in elementary school in yeshiva, they began to speak in a derogatory manner abut non-Jews. They had heard these things from their fellow students. Their father, my oldest son, and I made it clear to them that this was not the appropriate way to speak about human beings who were created by Ha Shem with a neshama. Fortunately, they listened to us and changed their attitude. No one is saying that one must be "buddy buddy" with gentiles, but they are to be treated with proper respect. I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/letter_11.pdf While I suggest that everyone read the entire letter, below are some excerpts from it. MISHPATIM. All these insights, however, are of value only if you truly live your life according to what you, as man and Yisraelite in God's world, with your God-given powers, have recognized. The first requirement is, therefore, that you practice justice: -Respect every being in your surroundings, as well as everything within yourself, as a creation of your God, -Respect whatever is theirs as given to them by God or as having been acquired according to Divinely sanctioned law. Let them keep, or have, whatever they are entitled by right to call their own; do not be a source of harm to -others! -Respect every human being as your equal. Respect him, his inner self as well as his outer garment-his body-and his life) Respect his property, too, as a legal extension of his body. Respect his claim to property or services that you have to render to him, 1 properly measured or counted, as well as his claim to compensation for harm done to his body or property. -Respect his right to know the truth and his right to freedom, happiness, peace of mind,P honor and a peaceful existence. -Never abuse the frailty of his body, mind or heart/ and never misuse your legal power over him. The Chukkim require of you: -respect for all that exists, as God's property: do not destroy anything! do not misuse it! do not waste! use everything wisely -respect for all the species: their order was established by God-do not intermingle them;u respect for all creatures: they are servants in the household of Creation; v respect for the feelings and instincts of animals;w respect for the human body, even after the soul has departed;x respect for your own body: maintain it, as it is the repository, messenger and instrument of the spirit; -limitation of your own instincts and animal-like actions: subordinate them to God's Law, so that, truly human and sanctified, they can help you attain the holy goal of mankind and will not turn you into a mere animal; -respect for your soul, when you nourish its tool, the body: supply the body only with such nourishment that will enable it to act as a pure and willing messenger of the world to the spirit, and of the spirit to the world, rather than giving it food that will induce sluggishness and sensuality; -concealment and sublimation of the animal in you, rather than according it too much respect and attention: only thus will the conflict within you ultimately be resolved, and the animal in you will also aspire only to the truly human; -lastly, respect for your own person in its purest expression-your power of speech. In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources can express a derogatory view of gentiles. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 19:50:36 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 22:50:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 15:54, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters [...] > [...] > In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources > can express a [contrary view] How about because they are Torah sources, and are therefore not required to agree with your favorite 19th-century writer. On the contrary, you should ask how he could contradict Torah sources. (The answer being that he found some contrary sources which appealed more to him, so he adopted their view; that was his right, but nobody else is required to do the same.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From sholom at aishdas.org Wed May 9 08:15:51 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:15:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 20:09:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 23:09:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180510030910.GB2931@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 11:15:51AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : We know Rashi's famous question and answer: that shmita eitzel har sinai : here is to show us that this, too, and all the details, were also given at : har sinai. See my vertl at . That's the Sifra that Rashi is quoting. : My question, however, is: why davka _this_ mitzvah (shmita/yovel)? Other : mitzvos could have been used to demonstrate the point that Rashi mentions. Rashi mentions that shemittah isn't taught in Devarim. The Malbim explains that this is unexpected, since shemittah didn't apply until entering EY, and such mitzvos tend to be the ones introduced in Devarim. : Thoughts? I ran with it... Suggesting that the whole point is that the reductionist approach doesn't work to understanding Torah. This was brought to light bedavqa with a mitzvah that isn't needed to be known yet for its own sake. But the whole picture was given at Sinai, even shemittah, so that we can understand any of the picture. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 39th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliable person? From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 01:57:15 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:57:15 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? >> My apologies. See https://www.academia.edu/36530833/A_translated_chapter_from_The_Hazon_Ish_Halakhist_Believer_and_Leader_of_the_Haredi_Revolution_The_Gaon_of_Vilna_the_Hatam_Sofer_and_the_Hazon_Ish_-_Minhag_and_the_Crisis_of_Modernity_English_?auto=download&campaign=weekly_digest which has several articles besides the one by Brown, Alternatively, send an email to eliturkel at gmail.com and I can send the article -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 02:43:30 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:43:30 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya 3rd line in the widest lines near the bottom and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about 130-135 CE. Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died about 20 years earlier (see eg wikipedia on Gamliel II) It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 07:51:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 10:51:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Me: >> >> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. RZS: > > Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every > Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not > the rav who guided him. No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. > Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a > yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. Again the Reish Galusa determined public policy, the hachamim determined halacha. > But at > any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the > full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to > do their job properly they can't be learning all day. The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his role? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 10 09:08:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:08:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:51:16AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : The claim that "da'as Torah" is derived from din melech is precisely the : claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise : in other fields... That's NOT the way I understood R' Dovid [haLevi] Cohen at all. We want a melekh, separate from the beis din hagadol. Although one person can be in both roles, like when Chazal refer to "Shelomo uveis dino." However, ba'avoseinu harabbim we lost the melukhah. The obligation of obeying the melekh devolved into obeyind the Sanhedrin. (This would have to have been some time between Gedaliah and Ezra, inclusive.) Obeying the melekh wasn't based on the melekh's comptenecy, but the need for order in running a society. (And, I guess some reason(s) why HQBH advised monarchy in particular as the means of getting that order, except according to some readings of RAYK. But RAYK didn't hold of the shitah we're looking at, so ein kan hamaqom leha'rikh.) Then, we lost the Sanhedrin. Today's rabbanim fill in -- either as their shelichim, or . The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. And just as the melekh might not be the expert across all of society, the Sanhedrin or today's rabbanim might not be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 40th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Yesod: When does Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliability/self-control mean submitting to others? From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 10 06:30:06 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93normal_practice=94?= Message-ID: <4ee8a413f67f49da89acceed596b8f72@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I was bothered by the gemara-Megilla 26a where it says Jerusalem apartment ?owners? took ?gifts? by force as ?rental? from olei regal. The Beit Mordechai (2:16), who lived in the early 20th century, raises the same question and says since the normal practice in Israel was for renters to leave something for the innkeeper in addition to the rental payment, so innkeepers in Jerusalem would take it by force since they could not charge rent. He admits that it?s possible that this would be considered stealing but because of this ?normal practice? of leaving something, it?s almost like they had a legal claim and therefore they felt they could take the items. Interesting that I couldn?t find earlier authorities bothered by this but maybe I missed something. Any thoughts appreciated. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 08:15:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:15:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6f2cda5f-ce57-a7a3-36af-3cc0b767dc9f@sero.name> On 10/05/18 05:43, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh >> between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it wasRashbithat was involved. > > I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, > and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > > > Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya?3rd line in the widest > lines near the bottom > and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Thank you. > Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about > 130-135 CE. Why do you suppose he was killed around that time rather than much later? If he was killed then, then he would have been born around 10-15 CE, have started learning Torah around 15-20 years before the churban, and have come back home with all those talmidim 4-9 years after it. Doesn't it seem more likely that his Torah learning started after the churban, and after Kalba Savua had resettled somewhere and reestablished himself, which would mean his death was also several decades after Bar Kochva? > Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died?about 20 years earlier (see eg > wikipedia?on Gamliel II) > > It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the > story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. Why is this at all difficult to believe? What makes it difficult? > So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of > the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant If you assume both that the students died then and that he himself died then, then when did he have time to teach his five new students? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 10 05:57:21 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 08:57:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim Message-ID: At 10:44 PM 5/9/2018, R Eli Turkel wrote: >I suggest reading an article by Brown >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2Fu%2F0%2F%23search%2Fhillel%2F1633fd7c1ed2a4a7&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce7f2ed89c0b04a153b9008d5b61fe896%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C1%7C636615170523842613&sdata=KHDvBEGhAvUsiq8oxUjnwZDX%2Bt0hzpo7D25XR2o0CPA%3D&reserved=0 > > >It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish > >Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent >past >basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those >practices that can be >traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a >select few don't count. >He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that >the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even >communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of >elitism that only gedolim count. > >OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of >the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In >fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their >unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at >most) > >His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in >terms of protecting their communities from modernism. >I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between >litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. I believe you are referring to an article that recently appeared in Hakirah that is at https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjyg6mKmfvaAhVCuVkKHeutBeYQFggtMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hakirah.org%2FVol24Shandelman.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3XZQch0OGem-hvrLpivEHB (I cannot access the link you give above, because I do not have a google account.) I found this article most disappointing and sent the email below to the Editors of Hakirah Subject: The Gaon of Vilna, the Hatam Sofer, and the Hazon Ish: Minhag and the Crisis of Modernity To the Editor: I must admit that the title of this article truly attracted my attention. However, after reading it I was sorely disappointed. The author writes at the beginning of the article, "We have seen that from the 1930's to the 1950's at least, the position of the Hazon Ish remained consistent and unyielding: A minhag has no normative status of its own, and at best can only be adduced as evidence for an actual halakhic ruling, which in turn derives its authority strictly from corroboration by qualified halakhists." He then goes on to point out that both the GRA and the Hazon Ish did not observe many minhagim that most people do observe. However, he does not give us a list of the minhagim they did not observe nor does he give us a list of the minhagim that they did observe. Surely these should have been included in detail in this article. Later in the article the author writes, "These two Orthodox groups [the Hungarian Orthodox and the latter-day hasidic] turned minhag into an endless opportunity for the creation of new humrot. And this only goes to show that it is not always a broken connection with the 'living tradition' that facilitates the creation of a dynamic of humrot. Again, I think that the article should have included a detailed list of these Chumras. In my opinion, this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much substance. What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about nothing." Dr. Yitzchok Levine -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 10 06:58:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:58:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Wild Wild State of Kashrus Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/2bPRtq It was an innovative way of saving money. The municipality worked it out that they would outsource the financial cost of the Department of Health inspectors. From now on, it would be the restaurants themselves that would hire the health inspectors. The restaurants would pay them, they would take out the FICA taxes, the worker?s comp ?? the restaurant would handle it all. The move ?worked wonders? for the state of health in the restaurants. Eateries that were previously designated with a C minus rating were now rated A plus and health violation write ups were down too. The astute reader will detect an obvious problem here. This is what is called a classic conflict of interest. The upgraded rating and lowered violations are probably due to the unique financial arrangement. When an inspector is paid by the people he supervises there is a risk that his judgment and actions will be unduly influenced. The safety of the restaurant consumers has been placed at risk. Indeed, the general public has also been placed in danger. SAME FOR KASHRUS The same should be true in the field of Kashrus. The mashgiach is there to protect the public from eating non-kosher or questionable items just as the health inspector is there to protect the public from anything that can compromise their health and safety. RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN ZT?L Indeed, last generation?s Gadol haDor, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, in his Igros Moshe (YD Vol. IV #1:8) writes that the Mashgiach should not be paid by the facility receiving the hashgacha, but rather should only be paid by the Vaad HaKashrus itself. Indeed, he should have no direct monetary business dealings with the company. See the above URL for more. Keep in mind that when it comes to private hashgachos the person giving the supervision is always paid by the person or organization being supervised. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 09:28:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:28:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <2dd3576d-2d8e-762e-5afc-570ef2dbaa9c@sero.name> On 10/05/18 10:51, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Me: >>> >>> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. > > RZS: > >> >> Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every >> Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not >> the rav who guided him. > > No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert > on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted > on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. But if the rav paskened that they were wrong they had to obey him. >> But at >> any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the >> full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to >> do their job properly they can't be learning all day. > The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the > claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. And indeed it does; how do you see a contradiction from R Akiva? He didn't say TCh don't have the knowledge to run the town, but that they don't have the time. > Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at > all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his > role? Same story: He is qualified, but he has no time, so he will neglect the work and the town will suffer. That's why we need and have askanim to run things, but they have to know that they are not in charge but must defer to the chachamim. Note that not even the biggest haredi calls for the gedolei hatorah to sit in the knesset themselves, let alone to be mayors and city councillors. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 12:43:38 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 15:43:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: RMB: > > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. I already raised the objection of R Akiva?s advice to his son; RZS?s response is conceptually clean, but (a) it doesn?t fit the words of the text, and (b) according to you it is internally contradictory - - if the rabbis who run the city have a din melech how can they be supervised by others? There?s also the sugya of b'nei ha'ir kofin zeh et zeh ?. Naively the authority of the kehilla comes from din melech, but then why b'nei ha'ir, why not the town rabbi? David Riceman From saulguberman at gmail.com Thu May 10 11:51:40 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 14:51:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > RMWillig has a kezayis of 22.5cc, and writes that Middos veShiurei > haTorah pg 277 reports matzah has half the weight of an equivalent > volume of water. So, RMW says a kezayi matzah weighs 11.25gm. (1cc of > water weighs 1gm, by definition. So, the weight of 2cc of matzah is 1gm.) > We buy matzah by the pound, so you can estimate a kazayis pretty > accurately if you know how many matzos are in a 1lb box. (2lb boxes, > divide by 2, naturally.) There are 40.3 or so kezeisim in a pound. > > matzos / lb -> kezayis matzah > 6 -> 2/13 of a matzah > 7 -> 1/6 > 8 -> 1/5 > 9 -> 2/9 > 10 -> 1/4 > > :-)BBii! > -Micha I wish I had remembered to use this at the seder. My rabbi tells me that he got an electric scale this year and had the grandkids make shiurim bags for the sedorim on erev pesach. Has the benefit of having something for the kids to do and moves the seder along. When I mentioned to my Rabbi that I was looking into smaller shiurim,that are smaller than the plastic sheet that is so popular, he was not interested in continuing the conversation. My daughter informed me that one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in the base of their calculation. Saul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:13:50 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:13:50 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1be6e645-8a41-f71b-3d11-7c7d0823c398@zahav.net.il> IIRC the Ramban writes that David took a census because he made a mistake, he thought that the issur didn't apply anymore. I found that Ramban to be shocking. How is it that no one, no rav, no navi, came to David and said "No, you can't do that"?? Answer - David never bothered to ask and no one had the job of being his poseik. Similarly, there are certain acts that the chachamim praised Hezkiyahu for doing and others that they disagreed with him. I read that as meaning "after he made the decisions, the rabbanim weighed in". I don't get the feeling from any navi that they stood by the sides of the kings and told them "yes you? can do this, no, you can't do that". They only weighed in when society or the melucha was totally out of sync. or when they were specifically consulted or when God told them "Go to the king". I admit that there is an incredible tension between even the good kings, the ones trying to rule according to the Torah, and the prophets (forget the evil kings). The former? were not able to live up to the expectations of the latter. From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 11 03:50:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180511105019.GA17192@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:43:38PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : RMB: : > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took : > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. : : The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give : commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us : what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. Not "implies", we are talking about R Dovid [haLevi] Cohen's explanation of Da'as Torah -- it's the thesis he is trying to justify! However, unlike some other versions of DT, it only speaks of rabbis as communal leadership. Not as advisors on personal matters (whose open questions are not halachic in nature). It has this in common with [pre-Mizrachi] RYBS's version of DT, "hatzitz vehachoshen". : I already raised the objection of R Akiva's advice to his son... There is also the historical precedent of the leadership of the Vaad Dalet Aratzos. There is no record of rabbinic leadership on civil issues. They dealt with halachic matters, eg shochetim, batei din, a law to require haskamos on all published sefarim... :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 41st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Yesod: What is the ultimate measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 of self-control and reliability? From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:02:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:02:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The article is one chapter from an entire book. You walked into the middle of a movie, that's all. Ben On 5/10/2018 2:57 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > In my opinion,? this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much > substance.? What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about > nothing." From isaac at balb.in Thu May 10 21:23:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 14:23:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Eli Turkel asked: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, > from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult > for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat > had to bring the animal as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the > cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of > whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result > in hundreds I suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim. [The Ramban in the 3rd Shoresh there isn't happy with this] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 11 01:40:10 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 08:40:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Shiluach Hakein, Performance of Message-ID: >From yesterday's OU Halacha Yomis Q. How is the mitzvah of Shiluach Hakein performed? A. Before sending away the mother, one should have the intent to fulfill a mitzvah. There is a difference of opinion as to how one should send away the mother. According to the Rambam (Hilchos Shechita 13:5), one should grab the mother bird by the wings and send her away. Though the Torah prohibits capturing the mother-bird when she sits on the nest, when the intention of grabbing the mother is to send her away, this is not considered an act of capturing. However, Shulchan Aruch (YD 292:4) rules in accordance with the Rosh and the Tur that one need not grab the mother bird. Rather, one may use a stick or the back of one?s hand to send away the mother. According to these Rishonim, the important factor is not that you grab the mother but that you cause her to fly away. The Binyan Tziyon (Chadashos 14) writes that some Rishonim disagree with the Rambam on two points. They maintain that if one grabs the mother and sends her away, a) the mitzvah is not fulfilled, and b) one transgresses the prohibition of taking the mother-bird (even though the intent is to send the bird away). It is therefore best to use a stick or, as Rav Belsky, zt?l advised, to push the mother bird off the nest with an open hand, the palm facing upwards so that the mother bird is not accidentally caught. Once the mother bird is chased away, one should pick up the eggs or chicks and take possession of them. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Fri May 11 02:25:19 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 12:25:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: Instead of answering Zev's questions directly let me try and describe how I see the events. I fully admit that the sources of dates for Taananim seem very sparse and I welcome any more information >From the chabad site R Yochanan be Zakai dies in 74 The Sanhedrin under Rabban Gamliel moved about 86 Bat Kochba Rebbelion ended in 133 R Akiva put in prison 134 Mishna completed 189 ------------------------------------------ First most historians take the story that R Akiva (along with several others) lived for 120 years as an exaggeration. Typical dates given are 50-135. This also implies that magic split into 3 sections of 40 years each is also an exaggeration This would give his learning under Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua as after the death of R Yochanan ben zakai about the year 75 when he would be 25 years old I again stress that all dates are speculation. It seems unlikely that R Akiva would have 24000 students when so many older teachers were around. Hence, extremely unlikely that this happened while the yeshiva was in Yavne under Rabban Gamliel. The one date I saw for the death of Rashbi was 150. What seems to be clear is that Rebbe compiled the Mishna after the death of all 5 talmidim of R Akiva (of course we know that the compilation was done over a period of time beginning at least with R. Meir and probably R. Akiva and earlier). Pushing off the death of R. Akiva decades later would give little time for the activities of his talmildim after his death before the time of Rebbe who is the next generation. One date I have seen for Rebbe is 135-220 (again approximately) R Sherira Gaon lists the year 219 as the year Rav moved to Bavel The gemara (Kiddushin 72b) states that Rebbe was born when R Akiva died which gives the birth of Rebba as about 135 assuming he died as part of the Bar Kochba revolt (which the Chabad site seems to also assume) As an aside the dates of Rebbe would seem to be connected with the debate over who was Antoninus see Hebrew Wikipedia on Reeb Yehuda HaNasi This post started with my claim that Rashbi was a student in Yavneh years before the plague that kille3d the 24000 students and so he became a student of R Akiva later in life. I note that the other talmidim also had other teachers. Thus, the gemara notes that R Meir also learned with R. Yishmael and certainly with R. Elisha ben Avuyah though R. Akivah was his main teacher 'The students were given semicha by R Yehudah be Buba R Benny Lau claims that R. Yehuda bar Ilai was mainly a talmid of his father and R Tarfon and only secondary by R. Akiva. R Yisi ben Chalfta also learned mainly from his father and then R. Yochanan ben Nuri both of whom stressed the traditions if the Galil. We have no statements of R. Elazar ben Shanua in the name of R. Akiva. R Benny Lau concludes that the two "talmidim muvhakim" of R. Akiva are R. Meir and Rashbi but both of these also had other teachers besides R. Akiva. Hence, we cannot take the story literally that R. Akiva went to the south and found 5 youngsters who became his students. Rather all 5 were already serious talmidei chachamim before R. Akiva. In addition even later many kept up relations with R. Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 14 09:54:07 2018 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 12:54:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel Message-ID: I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential chillul shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:19:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 02:51:40PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : My daughter informed me that : one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even : smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook : It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in : the base of their calculation. But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be invalid anyway? We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more binding than historical reality? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 44th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Malchus: What type of justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 does unity demand? From saulguberman at gmail.com Mon May 14 12:28:24 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:28:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, > the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis > is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does > that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual > olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be > invalid anyway? > > We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai > and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people > causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more > binding than historical reality? > I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:06:21 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:06:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514190620.GC7492@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:33:02AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent : past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those : practices that can be : traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable... So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 15 04:05:47 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 07:05:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . Shemos 12:39 teaches us: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. Various meforshim deal with halachic problems of this pasuk. For example, they were commanded to eat matzah, and being rushed out had nothing to do with it. Or, chometz was forbidden, and being rushed had nothing to do with it. This thread WILL NOT discuss those issues. If you want to discuss those issues, please start a new thread. My questions have nothing to do with halacha. They relate to the sequence and timing of the events of that night. They relate to "lir'os es atzmo" - I try to imagine myself in Mitzrayim that night, and certain parts of the story don't make sense to me. I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: 1) When was that dough made? 2) When was that dough baked? We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for the trip. I find it difficult to imagine that the flour and water were not mixed until the last 17 minutes before morning. Another problem: Given that they DID take unbaked dough out of Mitzrayim, what happened when they finally decided to bake it? Obviously, if they were able to bake it, it must be that they were not hurrying out of Egypt any more. So why didn't they just wait a little longer, and allow the dough to rise? (Someone might suggest that it was only in Egypt that "it did not become chametz", and that they did let it rise after getting out, but the pasuk disproves that, by telling us that "they baked it into matzah", i.e. that the dough never rose at all, at any point.) There are other questions that could ask, in addition to those, but I'll stop here for now. advTHANKSance Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 15 05:11:46 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:11:46 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Issac Balbin wrote: " suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim." There is a fundamental difference between carrying the aron and the avoda in the mishkan. The Rambam writes explicitly there in the sefer hamitzvos that the mitzva of carrying the aron, was given to the leviim in the midbar "v'af al pi shezeh hatzivuy ba laleviim baet hahe". We do not find any such commandment in the Torah regarding avoda in the mishkan. The Torah ONLY commands/allows Aharon and his sons to do Avoda in the mishkan. Therefore there is no room to say that leviim did avoda in the mishkan in the midbar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at yahoo.com Tue May 15 09:53:47 2018 From: gershonseif at yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 16:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know.TIA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 12:31:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:31:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas In-Reply-To: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20180515193110.GB20847@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 04:53:47PM +0000, Gershon Seif via Avodah wrote: : Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked : many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know. The oldest usage Bar Ilan and I could find was the one I had initially thought of -- the AhS. In OC 494:7, RYME gives 3 reasons for not fasting on that day. #2: And more: On that day, Moshe told them to becom qadosh. Uregilin liqroso "Yom haMyuchas" because of this. Which makes me think the AhS was saying it's just mimetic. Otherwise, I would have expected "uregilin le-" to have been replaced by a source. More than that, his vanilla "uregilin" is more typical of his description of accepted Litvisher practice. He tends to report others' practices by saying whom, even if it's a recent import to Litta. For example, se'if 3 mentions that the Chassidim haQadmonim were up all night on Shavuos, as per the Zohar, "vegam agah harbeih osin kein" and in the morning they go to miqvah, all as a zeikher leMatan Torah. Staying up all night gets a "they", not a "we", and is labeled as lower-case-c chassidic / Zoharic custom. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 15 12:39:06 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:39:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bamidbar Message-ID: <24722D2C-AAFF-48C2-A4B0-144A6165528A@cox.net> THEY DID; SO DID THEY DO According to the Sages, not a single letter is superfluous in the Torah. Anything repeated is repeated for a definite reason and with additional meaning. We may not always comprehend the reason or meaning but that doesn't detract from its significance. Also, there may be various interpretations and reasons given by commentators but that is what makes the Torah so profound. This Shabbos we begin the fourth Book of the Torah, Bamidbar. This portion is read the Shabbat before Shavuot, with rare exception. This year it is read immediately before Shavuot. The reason it usually is read the Shabbat prior to Shavuot is because there is a connection between the subject matter of this portion and the theme of Shavuot. There is a verse in Bamidbar in which appears a seeming redundancy. I grappled with it for a while and came up with an interesting chiddush. The verse states (1:54) "The Children of Israel did everything that God commanded Moses, so did they do." The first part of the verse already says "they did everything," etc. Then at the end it again says: "so did they do." Why is it repeated? First, the Children of Israel did "everything that God commanded Moses" because that was what God commanded and they did it as it was a mitzvah. But then, when it states at the end of the pasuk "so did they do," it already had become part of them. In other words, the initial motivation for performing a mitzvah is because God has commanded it, but then after doing it, one does it automatically and out of love and joy (as opposed to being mandatory). It becomes part of the person -- ("so did they do)." Similarly, when the Jewish people accepted the Torah they said "Naaseh v'nishma" (Exodus 24:7) which means "We will DO and (then) we will understand." In other words, we first will do out of duty and obligation since we are accepting the commandments of the Almighty, and afterwards, we will be doing (observing the mitzvot) out of love and joy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 15:45:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 18:45:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos Message-ID: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> R' Mordechai Torczyner (CC-ed) gave 3 shiurim (chaburos?) on koseiv and mocheiq this past march. Including #2, available here . He raises an interesting (to me, at least) question: Catan, formerly The Settlers of Catan, is a game with a board that changes with each play. The board is tiled from hexagons (and played on the edges and corners between them), where each hexagon has a picture on it denoting a kind of terrain, and by implication the reasources one can get from that terrain. This honeycomb is then held in place by a hexagonal frame, which is assembled from 6 pieces, each of which has jigsaw-puzzle-like edges at the join to hold the whole thing together. See RMT cited in shiur SSJ 16:23 (source #5 on the resource page attached to the YUTorah recording). He says you can play a game with letters or pictures IFF one is placing letters or pieces of letters or pictures or their pieces next to eachother. But not if they are made qeva or put in a frame. And only if they do not attach or stick to one another. So, here is RMT's question... Catan's hexagons do not combine to make one picture, but they do combine to make one "message" -- a usable game board. Is assembling a Catan board mutar on Shabbos? And if not, I wish to add: What if the game is played on a pillow, making it hard to keep the pieces interlocked, and the players agree to end the game before Shabbos? If the assembly is neither made to last nor is there intent for it to last, would it then be mutar? Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:11:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:11:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos In-Reply-To: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> References: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> Message-ID: The frame that comes with the newer editions of Settlers is quite flimsy so I don't believe it can be regarded as "fixing" the hexes together in a way that could even raise this shayla. But leravcha demilsa one can simply lay out the board without the frame, as one does with the older editions (my set is close to 20 years old and therefore doesn't have this problem. From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:30:27 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:30:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Further to your question, we've discussed the time of yetzias mitzrayim before, and some have asserted that it was early in the morning, but the Torah says "be'etzem hayom", and Rashi explicitly says this means high noon. At the time of the discussion I couldn't find this Rashi, but it's in Devarim 32:48. So not only did they have all night to prepare food for the journey, they also had all morning. And yet we're to believe they didn't get around to it until just before noon. However, leaving aside the improbability of this timing, my understanding of the actual event is that they started making dough to bake bread, and would have left it to rise but immediately they got the announcement that they were leaving, so they shoved it straight into the oven and baked it there and then, as matzos. Alternatively, given that they had already been commanded not to bake chametz, we can say that because of this commandment they always intended to bake it immediately, but as it happened the command became irrelevant because the announcement came just as they finished kneading it and were about to put it in the oven, so even had they *not* been commanded they would still have had to bake it as matzos. Which of course is why the commandment was given in the first place. Either way, though, my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the perspective of before it was baked. From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 05:55:56 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 12:55:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? A. The Gemara (Avoda Zara 30a) discusses the laws of giluy (beverages left uncovered). Chazal forbade drinking certain beverages that were left uncovered, due to concerns that venomous creatures, such as snakes or scorpions, might drink from the beverage and leave behind some of their venom. Tosfos (Avoda Zara 35a: Chada) writes that in the countries where we live, this concern does not exist, and beverages left uncovered may be drunk. Ordinarily, once Chazal issue a gezeira (decree), the gezeira remains in force even if the reasoning no longer applies. This case is different since the original gezeira was only enacted for places where snakes were common. Accordingly, Shulchan Aruch (YD 116:1) rules that one may drink a beverage that was left uncovered. However, the Pischei Teshuva (116:1) writes that the position of the Vilna Gaon and the Shelah Hakadosh is not to leave drinks unattended. The commentaries to the Maaseh Rav explain that the Vilna Gaon held that there are secondary reasons for Rabbinic decrees that apply even when the primary reason is no longer relevant. Common practice is to follow the position of the Shulchan Aruch, though some adhere to the more stringent opinion -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:26:24 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:26:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me - perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:27:40 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:27:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Designer Babies? Message-ID: Assume that gene editing technology reaches the point that "designer babies" are possible to an extent. Assume that "intellectual acuity" genes can be identified and screened for. Would a Desslerian philosophy allow (require?) mass screening and eventual genetic tinkering to provide a gadol hador material baby? What if there was a clear tradeoff that this gene also resulted in a materially shorter life expectancy? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Thu May 17 08:29:01 2018 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (M Cohen) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 11:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <09af01d3edf3$c8a0bed0$59e23c70$@com> I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul Shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential Chillul Shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before Shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on Shabbos. ..at least 2 major differences between the two. A. the electricity you use is generated in real time, as you demand it (by turning on the switch) B. but the water you use was made and treated in the past, and now simply stored in water towers until you demand it (by opening your tap) (as the water is used, new water is pumped into the tower at intervals. only a gramma). No melacha is done when you use your water C. electricity production in EY typically involves d'orisa issurim of burning fossil fuels, boiling water to create steam etc D. but water production may only be an rabbinic prohibition (electric pumps and filters, adding chemicals, etc) ======= Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2894, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.22240) http://free.pctools.com/ ======= From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Thu May 17 09:00:40 2018 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:00:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: RMB wrote: 'So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here.' I think the point was there was a tendency not to value or keep minhagim, not an absolute rule. And they possibly gave different status to minhagim which clearly originated with gedolim not un-named masses, eg kabalas shabbos. As for the yamulka example, that's got a makor in shas and is mentioned by rishonim, no? Perhaps another example would be Shir hamaalos before bentching which was innovated by the Chida I think. You'd need a whole range of example and a list of who kept what in order to be more certain, I haven't read the rest of Dr Brown's book to know if he does that. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 12:48:18 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 19:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? Message-ID: The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of externalities at all. YL Unfortunately, the term "chasid," meaning a pious person, has become misunderstood because of misconceptions foisted upon us from without. A "chasid" is a person who totally gives himself in love, does not look out for himself but relinquishes his own claims on the world in order to live only for others, through acts of loving kindness. Far from retiring from the world, he lives in it, with it and for it. For himself, the chasid wants nothing; but for the world around him, everything. Thus we find the term applied to David, a man who, from his earliest youth, labored ceaselessly for the spiritual and material welfare of his people and left the shaping of his own destiny, including redress of the wrong done to him by Sha'ul, entirely to God. No doubt you are familiar with the saying shelach shelach v'sheli shelach - -"He who says 'That which is yours is yours and that which is mine also is yours' is called a chasid." Again, a life of seclusion, of only meditation and prayer, is not Judaism. Torah and Avodah (study and worship) are but pathways meant to lead to deeds. Our Sages say, Talmud Torah gadol she'mavi l'y'day maaseh- "Great is study, for it leads to action" - the practical fulfillment of the precepts. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com Thu May 17 13:03:16 2018 From: gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 20:03:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <306356533.2453717.1526587396833@mail.yahoo.com> On Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:48 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that > there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, > speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of > externalities at all. YL Indeed! See Hirsch's commentary to Beraishis 5:24 where he writes very strong words about this. He says that Chanoch lived a life of seclusion after giving up on his generation. Hashem removed him from the earth because "what use is he here" (or something to that effect). From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 17 20:24:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 05:24:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. At one time calling a child a girl did not mean that you were assuming the child's gender? (girl meant a young person of either sex). Ben On 5/17/2018 9:48 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters? I note > that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of > dress,? speaking a particular language,? etc.? Indeed,? there is no > mention of externalities at all. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu May 17 20:51:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 23:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . I had cited Shemos 12:39: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. R' Zev Sero suggested: > ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked > dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. > I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it > has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the > perspective of before it was baked. It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words to have that meaning, that's okay. But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, > their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Fri May 18 14:41:25 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:41:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: See Malbim, who suggests that according to R Yose Haglili, who says that the issur chometz that year was only for one day, that one day was the 14th, not the 15th, but since with kodshim the night follows the day it was from the morning of the 14th till the morning of the 15th. Therefore they started baking bread at daybreak, intending to let it rise, but they were immediately ordered to leave and had no time. Alternatively, since most meforshim understand the one day to be the 15th, he suggests that they mixed the dough intending to bake matzos, but they didn't even have time to do that and had to take the unbaked dough, which would naturally have become chometz during their journey, but miraculously it did not rise and when they got where they were going they baked it as matzos (or, according to pseudo-Yonasan, the sun baked it, which presents halachic problems of its own, since sun-baked bread doesn't have the status of bread). On 17 May 2018 at 23:51, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I had cited Shemos 12:39: > >> They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves >> of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were >> driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare >> any provisions for themselves. > > R' Zev Sero suggested: > >> ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked >> dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. >> I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it >> has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the >> perspective of before it was baked. > > It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the > pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words > to have that meaning, that's okay. > > But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > >> They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, >> their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. > > This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of > Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is > unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff > they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that > the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. > > Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS > for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why > didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. > > The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not > make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then > they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just > before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to > departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water > together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. > > Akiva Miller > _______________________________________________ > Avodah mailing list > Avodah at lists.aishdas.org > http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org -- Zev Sero zev at sero.name From doniels at gmail.com Mon May 21 03:55:24 2018 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 13:55:24 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Generators_on_Shabbos_in_Israel?= Message-ID: R' Ben Rothke wrote: > I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, > AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. Also, apparently, as a form of protest. > With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is > automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the > potential chillul shabbos? R' Israel Meir Morgenstern put out an entire Sefer on this - http://www.virtualgeula.com/Stock/Books/Show/11160 - and regular updates as booklets. According to him, it's not nearly as automated as they pretend. IIRC he did on-site research, not relying on what the Electric Company wants people to believe. > Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before > shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. There are those who do that too. Check the roofs in Charedi neighborhoods - those with huge black reservoirs are doing just that. That said, I asked his father, R' D. A. Morgenstern shlita about getting one of those water reservoirs and he said it wasn't necessary. (I didn't ask him about electricity.) - Danny From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 20 14:10:28 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 00:10:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance Message-ID: <> What effect does this have on shabbat -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon May 21 23:19:20 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 02:19:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 17/05/18 09:26, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) > one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? > What is the source of this practice? (Me ? perhaps the original practice > of only one person saying Kaddish). I assume you mean in a shul where most of the kadeishim are said by multiple people. If so, I have never seen or heard of such a practise until you described it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 03:52:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:52:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Please see Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part I at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FCT8ohf&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=CAO%2FIULzGszY4Io1E7bD7BDzBnrECxpPQX6SlNtHF%2BU%3D&reserved=0 and Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part II at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FKVjQ16&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=RY%2FzL7M3vLMiFdh1MlJcdiMfMVPVPkRXx%2FtVGOhRiWk%3D&reserved=0 If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 05:04:49 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 08:04:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on > a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking > their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me ? > perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). In all the shuls in Elizabeth NJ, the practice is as follows: If no one has yahrzeit, then there are no restrictions on Kaddish. If someone does have a yahrzeit that day, then the Kaddish after Aleinu is said only by him/them (including anyone still in shloshim). As RJR guessed, this is in deference to the original minhag (still practiced in German shuls) that no Kaddish is ever said by more than one person. [A gabbai usually calls out "Yahrzeit!" in addition to the table-banging.] In Shacharis, the other kaddishes (such as after Shir Shel Yom) are said by all kaddish-sayers. After mincha, an additional Tehillim (usually #24) is recited, so that the other kaddish-sayers will have the opportunity to say kaddish. This is done at maariv too, except for situations (such as in Elul) when there's another Tehillim anyway. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:12:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:12:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 06:52:26AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly : going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. But it could still not be worth the learning missed. There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more "nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. micha at aishdas.org Thus excellence is not an event, http://www.aishdas.org but a habit. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aristotle From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 04:01:35 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:01:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Birkat Kohanim Message-ID: 1) The Priestly Threefold Benediction had the following: The first blessing has three words, the second five, the third seven. They remind us of the foundation for all blessings: The tree Patriarchs, the five books of the Torah, and the seven Heavens. Bachya 2) Israel said to God: "Why do you tell the priests to bless us? We desire Your blessing alone!" Said the Holy One: "Although I have told the priests to bless you, I shall stand in their company to give effect to the benediction." Therefore, at the end of the section it states explicitly (verse 27): "I will bless them." Midrash Numbers R. (11:2, 8, end). 3) Why do we ask God first to bless us and then keep or guard us? Because, if He does give us material blessings, we need to be protected from the evil results such prosperity may bring. The Hasidic Anthology P.359 quoting the Tzechiver Rebbe. 4) There is an interesting connection between Parshat Naso, which is the longest parsha in the Torah, comprising 176 verses, and the 119th Psalm (of Tehillim), which also contains 176 verses and is the longest in the book of Psalms. This psalm carries the distinct title, "Torah, the Way of Life." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 03:57:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:57:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Who Sings In This World Will Sing Also In The Next." Joshua b. Levi, Sanhedrin, 91b Message-ID: <37067FE1-055D-4504-A143-8FB433E508DE@cox.net> LA'AVOD AVODAT AVODA VA'AVODAT MASA 4:47... Note the four words in a row with the same root. (Probably the only place in the Torah with four words in a row with the same root). Rashi says the Avodat Avoda (kind of a strange phrase) refers to playing musical instruments. As far as Avodat Masa (Work of burden) is concerned ? the Gemara in Chulin comments that only when there is heavy manual labor involved, then there is an age limit for the Leviyim (as with the others). And it seems that the age limit of 50 was only for the carrying. In other words, a Levi was able to continue serving in the Mishkan after 50, but only for SHIRA and SH'MIRA. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 04:29:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:29:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor Message-ID: We are told that Hashem spoke the words Shamor and Zachor together, and I have presumed that we heard them together as well. But the Ramban (Devarim 5:12) suggests that "He (Moshe) is the one who heard Zachor, and they (heard) Shamor." The ArtScroll Chumash (page 969) quotes Rav Gedalya Shorr as explaining: <<< At the highest spiritual level - the one occupied by Moses - the awesome holiness of the Sabbath is such a totally positive phenomenon that one who understands its significance could not desecrate it. Thus, the positive remembrance of the Sabbath contains within itself the impossibility of violating it, just as one who loves another person need not be warned not to harm that person. This was the commandment that Moses "heard." Lesser people, however, do not grasp this exalted nature of the Sabbath. They had to be told that it is forbidden to desecrate the sacred day; when they absorbed the Ten Commandments, they "heard" primarily the negative commandment *safeguard*. >>> Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue May 22 08:19:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 11:19:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 22/05/18 06:52, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going > there and seeing the falls is not nothing. Not at all. One says a bracha on many things that one would much rather *not* see, and that one would certainly not go out of ones way to see. Also consider the rainbow. If one happens to see it one says a bracha, and quite a positive one, but one still should not tell others to go outside and see it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:27:43 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:27:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet : he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. But AGAIN, no one obligated RAMiller to hold like RSRH. Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim around, etc... : R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or : taken a plane and learned on the plane. : Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the : world as it is, namely, mostly gray. But this isn't about how RAMiller lived now about life in general. It's advice to a school, an institution dedicated to learning. What I am actually taken by is the importance RAM is giving girls' education. Contrast that to the number of seminaries today that are so exclusively focused on inspiring that textual education is limited. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When we are no longer able to change a situation micha at aishdas.org -- just think of an incurable disease such as http://www.aishdas.org inoperable cancer -- we are challenged to change Fax: (270) 514-1507 ourselves. - Victor Frankl (MSfM) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:54:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:54:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522135452.GC14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 07:29:51AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be : understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so : supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", : I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Except that the Rambam believes the Qol had nothing to do with accoustics or physical sound to begin with. That the term is just being used as a metaphor to help those of us who never experienced such things. (Moreh 2:48) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 06:52:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:52:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:12 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >But it could still not be worth the learning missed. > >There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples >of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at >the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. >And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more >"nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. I know that Rav Schwab also went to Switzerland. Many gedolim in Europe went in the summer to vacation resorts, and there are pictures of Mir students at summer camp. See http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rkimble/Mirweb/YeshivaStudents2.html R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or taken a plane and learned on the plane. Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the world as it is, namely, mostly gray. I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:08:39 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:08:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522140839.GD14915@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 05:24:24AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. ... With that in mind as a caveat, let's look at Chazal's chassidim harishonim. Aside from famously spending 9 hours a day (12 on days when Mussaf is said?) on tefillah, Our sages repeated [in a beraisa]: The early Chassidim would hide their thorns and broken pieces of glass in the middle of their fields 3 tefachim [roughly one foot] deep, so that it would not [even] stop the plowing. Rav Sheishes would put them to the fire, Ravan would place them in the Tigres [the large river alongside which his home city of Pumbedisa was built]. Rav Yehudah said: The person who wants to be a chassid [he should take care] to follow the words of [the tractates on] damages. Ravina said: The words of [Pirqei] Avos. Others say in response [that Ravina said]: the words of [the tractate] Berakhos [blessings]. - Bava Qama 30a "Amrei leih" as the end is most ocnsistent with what we normally discuss about them. However, notice everyone else assumes a BALC definition of chassidus. They come up in Seifer Hakabiim I as among the bravest of warriors, and among the last to accept the permissibility of fighting on Shabbos. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:22:35 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:22:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522142235.GE14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:05:47AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about : the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: : 1) When was that dough made? : 2) When was that dough baked? We are talking about 600,000 or so homes. I assume there are a range of answers. And when the Torah says they didn't have time for it to become chameitz, it means that in many or most of those homes... enough that the haste came to characterize how we left. Just trying to aid the imagination by three-dimensionalizing the peopl involved. : We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally : irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as : Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the : Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to : leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for : the trip... Already in this discussion it was raised that in Shemos we're told we left "be'etzem hayom". And yet, in yesterday's leining, we're told "hotziakha H' E-lokekha loylah" (Devarim 16:1) Rashi ad loc (based on Sifrei Devarim 128:5, Barakhos 9a) says that we got permission from Par'oh at night (Shemos 12:31). So there was, as you write, PLENTY of warning. But they also had get their neighbors' valutables, pack, get the animals in hand, find Yanky's favorite bottle, figure out who was getting custody of those kids wandering around that neighborhood that choshekh obliterated... So, little things like what to pack for lunch was rushed, and in most cases, that meant they were left with matzah. (Despite likely promising themselves that if they ever got out of Egypt, they would never eat lechem oni again!) Your 1 mil assumption, BTW, might come from the matzah of the seder they were commanded to make, and that this matzah was not necessarily KLP. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 11:02:42 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:02:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <24.27.04381.9FB540B5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:27 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls >will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. >It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim >around, etc... The question was asked about girls' high schools, not yeshiva boys! Do you really think he was concerned about the reduction in learning for the girls! I think not! He held that Niagara is "nothing" something that makes no sense to me in light of the fact the Falls are one of Hashem's wonders. [Email #2.] Here is what R. Miller actually said in response to a question about going to Niagara Falls. the question was asked about high schools taking girls to the Falls. As you can see, his statement about Niagara Falls being "nothing " had nothing to do with bitul Torah. I find his response baffling to say the least. YL Rav Avigdor Miller on Niagara Falls Q: What is your opinion of the importance of a high school taking their students on a trip to Niagara Falls? A: My opinion is that it's nothing at all. You have to travel so far, and spend so much money to see Niagara Falls?! Let's say, here's a frum girls' school. So they have the day off, or the week off, whatever it is. And where do they go? To Niagara Falls. What's in Niagara Falls?! A lot of water falling off a cliff. Nothing at all. Nothing at all! It's the yetzer harah. The yetzer harah makes everyone dissatisfied. People who are really happy with what they have are almost impossible to find. They may say, "We're happy," but they're not. And therefore, they're always seeking something else. And so, they travel to Niagara Falls. You might say differently, but I'm telling you, that's the reason why people travel to Niagara Falls. It's the yetzer harah that is making you dissatisfied. So you have to go to see water falling off a cliff. But really it's nothing at all. Of course, you yield a little bit to the yetzer harah in order that more girls should come to your school. You have an outing every year to get new talmidos, new students. But really it's nothing at all. TAPE # E-193 (June 1999) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:41:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522184112.GC16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 03:28:24PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to : be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to : area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume : measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they : were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. >From what I posted in the past from the AhS (OC 373:34), is seems the definitions themselves were not constants. A person is supposed to be using their own thumb, fist or forearm when the din is only about them. And standardized numbers are only invoked for things like eiruv where one has to serve many people and "ameru chakhamim denimdod lechumerah" -- use an ammah that covers a very high percentile of the people relying on it. And I tried to discuss what this would mean for shiurim like kezayis, where a person isn't using his own body or something he could only own one of, as a measure. But the discussion went in its own direction. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, micha at aishdas.org if only because it offers us the opportunity of http://www.aishdas.org self-fulfilling prophecy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:33:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:33:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:10:28AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : > By 2025, 10,000 satellites will provide constant Israeli video : > surveillance of the Middle East sufficient to carry out targeted killings ... : What effect does this have on shabbat How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space that has security camteras? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue May 22 16:41:12 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 19:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> References: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 22, 2018, 2:33 PM Micha Berger wrote: > How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space > that has security camteras? No major difference except that some people still avoid security cameras. As they become more common it will be harder to do. It is already difficult to go to many hotels over shabbat. As these devices appear everywhere some argue that poskim will be forced to accept some minority opinions or else we all stay home From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 23 07:53:38 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 14:53:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: From today's Hakhel email bulletin. THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 23 10:12:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:12:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:53:38PM +0000, Professor L. Levine forwarded (from Hakhel, who were forwarding as well): :> THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted :> at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. :> http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg It's very al-menas-leqabel-peras collecting a list of havtachos and segulos.. There is the stretch from the Rambam onward talking about how davening haneitz is better, or how one should daven as soon after as possible. (Which implies kevasiqin is superior, but not actually saying that.) But the general tenor of the list is about mystical rewards; even the references to the gemara. I didn't think it would be your speed. Also, Hakhel pushed my button on a pet peeve. Whomever at Hakhel writes titles knows diqduq better than whomever sent in about the poster. (Compare the subject line of this thread'S "K'Vosikin" with the quoted text's "VASIKIN".) "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. The words are "kevasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. No "the" there to remove; omitting the "ha-" is just wrong. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The meaning of life is to find your gift. micha at aishdas.org The purpose of life http://www.aishdas.org is to give it away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Pablo Picasso From zev at sero.name Wed May 23 10:21:31 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:21:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2f7061f4-8f98-52f7-67af-3204e6dd8b76@sero.name> On 23/05/18 13:12, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. That would be davening *laneitz*. I'm not sure what "davening neitz" might mean, but whatever it is, it's not AZ. I wonder about those who, on a plane going directly to or from EY, daven out the side windows. Are they davening to the Great Penguin Spirit at the South Pole? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed May 23 10:23:14 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 17:23:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <0A36D278-B7B9-4326-9245-B993DE48CB97@tenzerlunin.com> ?I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you?? I am certainly no chassid if Rav Miller. But criticizing anyone, and certainty not criticizing a Talmid chacham, for personal feelings about a family matter, seems to me to be in poor taste. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed May 23 12:42:02 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:42:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin References: Message-ID: At 01:12 PM 5/23/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >The words are "KEvasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, >and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. I use the terminology K'Vosikin, but Hakhel used Vasikin so I left it. I have often quipped that the only people who know Dikduk are maskilim! >:-} (Note the wicked grin.) Regrading segulos, I found the following of interest. From a footnote to letter 15 of the 19 Letters of RSRH "Segulah" denotes a property belonging permanently to an owner, to which no one else has any right or claim (cf. Bava Kamma 87b). YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 05:59:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 12:59:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? Message-ID: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 06:01:44 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 13:01:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life by a community. Do you agree? It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit and then no more rain falls. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 24 10:39:09 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 17:39:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Does_Ru=92ach_Ra=92ah_=28negative_spiri?= =?windows-1252?q?ts=29_still_exist_today=3F?= Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru?ach Ra?ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra?ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra?ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye. Scientists have revealed the presence of numerous invisible forces in the universe, such as gravity and electromagnetic waves. In fact, scientists today theorize that dark matter, which no one has ever seen, accounts for 80% of the matter in the universe. Just as G-d created indiscernible physical forces in the universe which physicists have shown to exist, Chazal identified invisible spiritual forces that potentially impact negatively on both the body and soul (see Teshuvos Vihanhogos 1:8). The Gemara (Shabbos 109a) states that when awakening in the morning, a person must wash his or her hands (three times) to remove Ru?ach Ra?ah. Until one does so, one must be careful not to touch the mouth, nose, eyes or ears so as not to allow the Ru?ach Ra?ah to enter into the body. Also, one may not touch food, since the Ru?ach Ra?ah will spread to the food. Although the Maharshal (Chulin 8:12) questions whether any form of Ru?ach Ra?ah still exists today, the consensus of most poskim is that this is still a concern. The Halachos of removing Ru?ach Ra?ah from one?s hands are codified in Shulchan Aruch (OC 4:2-5). If one touched food before washing in the morning, the Mishnah Berurah (4:14) writes that bedieved (after the fact) the food may be eaten, but if possible the food should be rinsed three times. The Gemara warns us about other forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah (damaging spirits). However, the Magen Avrohom (173:1) writes that there are some forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah that no longer pose a danger. For example, the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru?ach Ra?ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru?ach ra?ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one?s hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Fri May 25 00:10:22 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:10:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were > all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, > a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype > (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and I cringe every time I go past. But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 04:51:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 07:51:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 03:10 AM 5/25/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: >This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards >went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing >towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and >I cringe every time I go past. > >But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" >from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun >"netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There >certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 >in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not found in TANACH, so why not this one? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 06:49:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 09:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 07:51:45AM EDT, Prof. Levine wrote: : Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not : found in TANACH, so why not this one? Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different topic. People are trying to "do halakhah" without understanding the language the categories they're trying to implements are labeled in. Without understanding the language of Chazal, we are missing a lot of subtlety about what they meant. With bigger problems (if less about din) if you don't know the workings of the language of Tefillah, Tehillim or Chumash. Judaism without diqduq is a paler, less nuanced, thing. I expect you have a LOT from RSRH in your cut-n-paste library on this. Earlier, at 10:10:22AM IDT, Simon Montagu wrote the post that Prof Levine was replying to: : But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from : the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the : root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word : meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's : description of his dream and in Hazal. Nitzotz. Yeshaiah 1:31 uses it to refer to a spark, as it's something that starts a fire. Comes up a number of times in Chazal. Most famously to people who daven Ashkenaz, Shabbos 3:6: nosenin keli sachas haneir leqabeil nitzotzos. There is a beis hanitzotz in the BHMQ. Libun requires nitzotzos coming out of the keli. "Nitzotzos ein bahen mamash". (Shabbos 47b) BUT... getting back to that nuance theme... Haneitz is when there is enough light to make things like that sparkle. It's before alos, which is when the first spark of the sun is visible. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, micha at aishdas.org Our greatest fear is that we're powerful http://www.aishdas.org beyond measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anonymous From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 07:38:32 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:38:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:49 AM 5/25/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This >is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. >There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh >and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from >English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different >topic. Sadly, with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and texting, the English language is, IMO, going down the drain. People do not spell properly, write things that are not words, etc. This is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 08:22:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:22:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525152241.GC9702@aishdas.org> This isn't an MO issue, even if the subject line mentions the affiliation of the mechaneikh. For many people in yeshivish minyanim I attend, davening with a tzibbur is something one does between gaps in looking at a seifer. And among the yeshivish-lite (Shababnikim?), minyan is an excuse to get together for the qiddush. We really don't know how to daven. And all the time we spend teaching how to learn contributes to that. Defining religious inspiration in terms of learning, new knowledge, makes it hard to find what the point is in saying the same words yet again. When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. We define it those terms, tefillah won't get anywhere. On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:01:44PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have : the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community : and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that : did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their : prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life : by a community. Do you agree? I think so, because gap year subtlely teaches the message that true spirituality is incompatible with "reeal life". And that's why they need to go to a 1 year religious experience, with no job, no secular studies, no other concerns, not even the usual setting, in order to get inspiration that is supposed to last year the rest of your life. I believe it's an underdiscussed factor (among the many others) as to why so many MO youth go yeshivish during gap year or upon return. That implied message is not fully compatible with TuM or TiDE. That said... There are other factors. Telecom means you can hear from a famous rosh yeshiva regularly, and don't need to "settle" for someone local as a role model. Never mind that you can regularly connect with the LOR, so that he is actually in a position to better model the role. Also, the whole universal post-HS yeshiva thing feeds the RY-centric view (outside of chassidishe admorim) of religious leadership now prevalent, rather than the rabbinate. The shift from Agudas haRabbanim to the Agudah's (or in Israel, Degel's) Mo'etzes haRabbanim. Secondary effects: There is less tie and sense of belonging to a particular qehillah. More and more people daven in a handful of places, because this one is more convenient Fri night, another Shabbos morning, a third for Shabbos afternoon, Sunday, weekdays... Qehillah could be a source of positive peer pressure when inspiration is running low. But only if you feel attached to one. (An LOR mentioned to me this effect as a factor in OTD rates...) As per the famous machgich line: It's chazaras hasha"tz, not chazaras haSha"s! : It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately : go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit : and then no more rain falls. Although it's less that no more rain falls as much as the crops no longer accept irrigation water. Okay, the metaphor doesn't really work. A good rav who one can interact with regularly may be more useful :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals micha at aishdas.org is not as important as http://www.aishdas.org what you become by achieving your goals. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Henry David Thoreau From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 25 08:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos Message-ID: Halacha L'kovod Shabbos - "Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos" According to some Poskim it is prohibited to intentionally tan in the sun on Shabbos. Nevertheless it is permitted to walk or sit outdoors on a sunny day even if there is the probability of becoming tanned (even if one would be pleased that this happened - so long as one is not intentionally tanning) because the tanning is not intentional. One may also apply a thin and pourable suntan lotion for protection against sunburn when walking or sitting outdoors. However, one may not use a cream. S'U Minchas Yitzchok 5:32, Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchasa 18:70, Sefer 39 Melochos YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri May 25 08:56:20 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:56:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Questions on Theologically Motivated Message-ID: <3CB5DF8F-56E4-482D-BA72-9328800F007E@cox.net> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. 1) What is the difference between ?The religious person? and ?the truly religious person?? 2) What exactly do you mean by "cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:11:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:11:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: In this case, the problem pre-dated the smart? (or cell) phone. On 5/25/2018 4:38 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Sadly,? with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and > texting,? the English language is, IMO,? going down the drain.? People > do not spell properly,? write things that are not words,? etc.? This > is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:05:52 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:05:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular Message-ID: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Ever wonder what is the nafka mina of deciding if secular people are tinok sh'nishba or not? Here is a biggy. There is (apparently) a machloket between Rav Kanyevski and Rav Edelstein if it is permitted to donate a kidney if it may end up in someone secular. RK believes it shouldn't be done because he paskens like Rav Elyashiv that no one today has the din of tinok sh'nishba and therefore they shouldn't get this type of help from the religious. RE paskens like the classic Chazon Ish psak that today's secular people do have the tinok din? and therefore it is permitted to donate a kidney to a secular person. See the article (Hebrew) for more details. http://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/558795 From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 09:31:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:31:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? In-Reply-To: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525163124.GF9702@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:59:56PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious : person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are : theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic : inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral : creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a : Supreme Law?" : Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would : be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a : judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? I think it's self-evident. If the gov't is "of the people and by the people" (regardless of "for the people", appologies Pres Lincoln), then the only way to really seperate church and state would be to separate church and people. And "church" here includes not only all religion, but all religious stances. Including atheism, agnosticism, apathy and Sherleyism. A person's vote should be informed by their values. And a person's values by their religious stance -- whether religious, "truly religious", or an atheist. After all, an atheist cannot phrase abortion or end-of-life issues in terms of souls and therefore their etheism will inform their vote when Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice is a key issue. (Looking at you, Ireland!) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man micha at aishdas.org is how he treats someone http://www.aishdas.org who can do him absolutely no good. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Samuel Johnson From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:11:20 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:11:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Professor L. Levine" T >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra'ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra'ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye....? .....the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru'ach Ra'ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru'ach ra'ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one's hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL ? >>>>> ? It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children.? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:05:24 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:05:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398431932-c8d-935e@webjas-vaa194.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Rich, Joel" >From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" ? Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich ? ? >>>>> ? There is no constitutional requirement, no legal requirement, no ethical requirement and no logical requirement for each individual to erect a wall of separation between church and state in his own heart and mind.? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:52:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:52:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> >>>>> It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ============= IIRC R? A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 12:26:01 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:26:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525192601.GC25353@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 05:52:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : IIRC R' A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. It was ruach ra'ah, as per our discussion. Thus, neigl vasr. I think RAS's understanding was that Chazal were using evidence-based reasoning. People were getting sick, and since bad vapors were believed to be the cause of disease, Chazal presumed there was a ru'ach ra'ah. Which means that given that we today attibute disease to microbes, we would transvalue ruach ra'ah to refer to germs. I don't think too many others understand ru'ach ra'ah as a physical threat. Rashi (Taanis 22b "mipenei ruach ra'ah") understands ru'ach ra'ah to be a sheid entering the person -- "mipenei ruach ra'ah: shenichnas bo ruach sheidah..." and then he might drown or fall and die. Perhaps psychiatric illness? In which case, there is no clear transvaluation to today's science, as minds kind of straddle the physica - metaphysical fence. Sheidim /are/ intellects; so how do we map sheidim talk to rationalist psychology talk? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. micha at aishdas.org If you want time, you must make it. http://www.aishdas.org - Charles Buxton Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 09:30:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:30:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2 Message-ID: It is often confusing when trying to determine whether an item is subject to bishul akum or not. This article should help. YL Click here to download "Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2" From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:50:45 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:50:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular In-Reply-To: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> References: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <8849942693d54a55aab7bd43e07dddc7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/901388/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/from-the-rabbis-desk-choosing-a-recipient,-diverting-tzedakah/ Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz-From The Rabbi's Desk - Choosing a Recipient, Diverting Tzedakah Listen to the 1st part-lots to discuss KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 26 12:17:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:17:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Ben On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Toby Katz via Avodah wrote: > >>>>> > > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? > So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their > children. From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 14:07:40 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:07:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? Message-ID: <1639920e25b-c96-3738@webjas-vaa110.srv.aolmail.net> From:?"Prof. Levine" Date:?Wed, 22 Aug 2012 Subject:?Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? One may download this article that appeared in Tradition at http://www.mesora.org/mezuza-gordon.pdf Towards the end of this article the author writes To claim, then, that the Divine inscription, which directs the attention of the Jew to God, is possessed of its own potency, generating protective benefits, perverts a spiritual instrumentality into a cultic charm.... YL >>>> ? I hope I will be forgiven for resurrecting an old, old thread -- from 2012.? But I recently came across something when I was preparing for my Pirkei Avos shiur, and it made me think of this old thread. ? This is from _Ethics From Sinai_?by Irving Bunim.? On Pirkei Avos 5:22 he talks about the difference between the disciples of Avraham and the disciples of Bilaam.? The former have a sense of security; the latter have no sense of security in the world.?? ? ---quote-- Today we have all sorts of insurance policies: fire insurance, flood insurance, life insurance. On one level they represent a wise precaution [but mainly] the man of piety places his trust in the Almighty. When he closes his place of business at night, he knows there is a mezuzah on the door, to betoken His protection. At bedtime he recites the Shema, to invoke His protection. This is his basic insurance policy.... . The Sages tell of Artaban IV, the last King of Parthia, who sent his friend Rav a priceless jewel, with the message, << Send me something equally precious>>; and Rav sent him a mezuzah.? The king replied, <> Answered Rav < >> --end quote-- ? In a footnote, Bunim explains that that last sentence is a pasuk, Mishlei 6:22, and it applies to the mezuzah. This doesn't make the mezuzah an but does say that the mezuzah is protective. . (I am using << and >> instead of quotation marks in the hope of minimizing the number of random question marks AOL strews in my path.? If anyone can help me solve this problem please let me know.) . --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri May 25 13:29:34 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 16:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: . R' Simon Montagu wrote: > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards > went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing > towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", > and I cringe every time I go past. > > But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. ... I used to cringe too. But then I thought of a different limud zechus, and it's not just an excuse. I really believe this: They are not speaking the language that you'd like to think they are speaking. We are in the process of developing a new dialect, or creole, ... I don't know or care what the technical term might be, but consider the following phrases: making kiddush will be davening had paskened was mekadesh Technically speaking, I do concede that "davening k'vasikin" is meaningful, while "davening vasikin" is bizarre. But the truth, whether you like it or not, is that when someone says "davening vasikin", EVERYONE knows what the speaker meant. In this new language, there's nothing wrong with saying "davening vasikin". It is (I think) EXACTLY like the phrase "Good Shabbos", when the first word is pronounced "good" (and not "goot") and the second word is pronounced "SHABbos" (and not "shabBOS"). What language is that???? It's not Hebrew. It's not Yiddish. It's not English. It's something new. (Where "new" can have values of 50 to 100 years. Maybe more.) I am reminded of going to the bakery when I was twelve years old, and the sign by the brownies said that the price was: .10? each (If your computer messed that up, it is a decimal point, followed by a one, and a zero, and a "cents" sign. You know, a "c" with a line through it.) Twelve-year old me looked at the decimal point, and noted that the sign had a cents sign, and not a dollar sign. So I concluded that the price for the brownies was one-tenth of a cent each. I tried to buy ten of them for a penny. It didn't work. And I was pretty upset about it too. I knew I was right. Plenty of people tried to console me, but no one could explain my error. I was right, and everyone seemed to agree. It took about 40 years, but I finally figured out the lesson of that incident: What people SAY is not nearly as important as what they MEAN. Focus on the ikar, not the tafel. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sat May 26 19:46:16 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 22:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <68109a23-b784-405e-60d5-b1c30853273a@sero.name> Think of saying "netz" instead of "honetz" the same way you do about saying "bus" instead of "autobus", "phone" instead of "telephone", or "flu" instead of "influenza". I recently saw "'bus" written with an apostrophe, but that's very unusual. Most people have no idea that these are abbreviations of longer words. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Sun May 27 05:00:54 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 12:00:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is the meaning of Cholov Yisroel? Message-ID: Please see the video at https://goo.gl/S5mPTn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat May 26 18:36:57 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:36:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Behaaloscha YOU CAN'T WIN 'EM ALL Message-ID: <89C443B9-BCD6-4E3D-A485-59F3CF2C7515@cox.net> Both dedications, the dedication of the Mishkan by the Nesiim and the dedication of the Menorah by Aharon were required. The Midrash mentions that Aharon was depressed that neither he nor his tribe was included in the dedication of the Mishkan. This brings to mind the time when I gave a student of mine a part in the family service that he considered inferior and unimportant. Convinced I had the perfect answer, I confindently and proudly informed him about the dedications of the Mishkan and of the Menorah and how God comforted Aharon by saying that his part of the dedication ceremony was the greatest of all, in that he was charged with the kindling of the Menora. I was sure that would make my pupil feel much better but without batting an eyelash, my student immediately retorted: "Yeah, but you're not God!" I ended up being more depressed than Aharon! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:25:32 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:25:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? Message-ID: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and Reuvain claims insolvency. Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an ongoing business for Pesach? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:27:43 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:27:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? Message-ID: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose. (The gemara in b"b is worth looking at-what exactly is the halachic force of "people don't sell their homes"). Two items: 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? 2. What if the other fundraising fails-would the community sell the Beit Knesset? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 31 11:22:30 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:22:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns > beer over pesach), one source quoted is S?A C?M 99:7, which deals with a > case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows > money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din > is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and > Reuvain claims insolvency. > Do you think it?s a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an > ongoing business for Pesach? Not at all, for two separate reasons. First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. So in this case where the Jew sold not the chametz but the entire business, there's nothing to indicate that the sale was anything but serious and effective. Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to "pierce" it in the name of equity. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 1 03:28:46 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 06:28:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra Message-ID: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> With discussed "Higher" Bible Criticism before, we've discussed the IE on the topic before, RGS went the next step -- the Ramban on the IE on Bible Criticism. I am includng the comment, and I would have written something similar. :-)BBii! -Micha Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student R. Avraham Ibn Ezra has long been a controversial figure. R. Shlomo Luria (Yam Shel Shlomo, intro to Bava Kamma) respectfully but strongly rejects his entire approach to Torah commentary. What does the Ramban, one of the classical commentaries whose work serves as a foundation for modern Jewish thought, think of his predecessor, Ibn Ezra? He certainly disagrees often with Ibn Ezra, sometimes sharply. But there may be a more fundamental reason for opposition. At the end of Ramban's commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim, he writes that anyone who says that Ezra the scribe added to the Torah -- such as Gen. 13:6 or Deut. 3:11 -- is a heretic (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 p. 548). Ibn Ezra famously suggests that four verses imply post-Mosaic interpolations -- Gen. 12:6, 22:14, Deut. 3:11, 31:22. Ramban, who shows clear expertise in Ibn Ezra's Torah commentaryn quotes two of these four verses in describing the heretic! Coincidence? R. Betzalel Naor, in his annotated edition of Rashba's Ma'amar Al Yishma'el (Orot: Spring Valley, NY, 2008, pp. 25-27) finds this correspondence convincing. The author of the commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim must have been condemning Ibn Ezra as a heretic. Even though some supercommentaries and scholars dispute the claim that Ibn Ezra ever intended anything other than that Moshe wrote those verses prophetically, many believe he made the more radical claim.[1] If so, this passage from the Shir Ha-Shirim commentary condemns him as a heretic. However, R. Naor points out that Ramban did not write that commentary. R. Chaim Dov Chavel argues cogently in his introduction to that work that it was written by the earlier, kabbalist R. Ezra of Gerona (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 pp. 473-475). If so, we can ask whether Ramban agreed with R. Ezra's evaluation. R. Naor (ibid., pp. 136-143) makes the following points and suggestions: 1- Even in his introduction to his Torah commentary, Ramban expresses his mixed attitude toward Ibn Ezra, which he calls "a public rebuke and private affection." This might be used to describe a commentary that is both brilliant but occasionally sacrilegious. However, Ramban calls him "Rabbi" Ezra, a term of respect. 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him about Ibn Ezra. 3- Ramban unquestionably rejected any post-Mosaic interpolations into the Torah, as seen in his general introduction to his commentary. While hiss attitude toward the level of prophecy of the Torah varies (commentary to Num. 16:5), that is nowhere near the claim that any verse postdates Moshe. 4- Rabbeinu Tam wrote a poem in praise of Ibn Ezra. Perhaps this influenced Ramban to judge him favorably as an inadvertent heretic, which was a status that, according to the Ra'avad (Hilkhos Teshuvah 3:7), even great scholars fell into. 5- The Chida (Shem Ha-Gedolim, part 1, alef 89) quotes R. Binyamin Spinoza, a late eighteenth century rabbi, who deduces from Ramban's failure to argue against Ibn Ezra's radical suggestions that those comments must be late forgeries (interpolations?). Had Ramban seen them, he would surely have objected. In the end, once we determine that the commentary to Shir Ha-Shirim is misattributed, we can only speculate about Ramban's attitude toward Ibn Ezra. Maybe he agreed with R. Ezra of Gerona's condemnation or maybe he felt the belief was wrong but not heretical. Or maybe, as R. Naor suggested, he rejected the belief as heretical but not the person. (Republished from May '13) [1] On this disagreement, see R. Yonatan Kolatch, Masters of the Word, vol. 2 pp. 310-318. ------------------ J. C. Salomon May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late addition to the text. I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 1 08:03:13 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:03:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <70c7cc6f-c870-c610-b592-25a81940172f@sero.name> I find the entire idea that RABE's "secret of twelve" was a secret heresy to be without foundation, and think it more likely that this is wishful thinking by heretics who would like to find "a great tree" on which to hang their heresy. We don't know what the secret was, because it was a secret, but his comment on Vayishlach makes it unlikely to be what the "bible critics" claim it is. On Bereshis 12:6, he simply says: "If it is not so, then there is a secret here, and the intelligent person should be silent". On Bereshis 22:14, and Devarim 3:11 and 31:22 he makes no comment at all, and indeed there's nothing unusual to hint at, no reason to even suppose these pesukim might not have been written at the same time as what surrounds them. The "secret of the twelve" is in Devarim 1:1, on the words "Eleven days out of Chorev", which makes me think whatever this secret is relates to that, and perhaps to a mystical "twelfth day". It's there that he cryptically mentions these four pesukim, with no context or explanation; the theory that he was hinting at a deep secret heresy in his heart is therefore pure speculation and should be rejected. The Ramban's (or whoever wrote it) comment in Shir Hashirim only means that there existed such heretics in his day; there is not even the hint of a hint that RABE might have been among them. These are the same heretics who claimed him; there's no reason to suppose the Ramban agreed with that claim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sat Jun 2 20:49:06 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2018 23:49:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: >From R'Micha (Avodah V36n64): > When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? > We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. < If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; and "vaya'as kein Aharon." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 00:42:20 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 10:42:20 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua Message-ID: In last weeks parsha we have the Torah stating that Moshe's nevua was unique that Hashem spoke to him directly (see Rambam Yesodei Torah for the list of differences). However, I was bothered by the following question. A number of times the Torah writes Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe v'Aharon leimor where certain halachos are given over to both Moshe and Aharon. The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? In Behaalosecha it is clear that Aharon and Miriam dd not know that Moshe's nevua was different then theirs, yet, if Aharon heard these like a regular nevua as a vision not clearly then how did he not realize that Moshe got a clearer nevua then he did? The first thing Moshe did after getting halachos from Hashem was go over them with Aharon and his sons. Also, the pasuk says that Hashem called out to all 3, Moshe Aharon and Miriam to go out, and Rashi comments that it was one dibur something that a person cannot do. If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 01:54:52 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 11:54:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? Message-ID: At the beginning of Bamidbar the Meshech Chochma asks the following question. A Baal keri is prohibited from being in the machane leviya, if so how could the Leviim ever live with their wives (in the machane leviya) and become a baal keri? Ayen sham his answer. Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A Baal keri is prohibited from going there. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Jun 4 11:24:18 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:24:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> Message-ID: On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns >> beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a >> case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows >> money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din >> is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and >> Reuvain claims insolvency. >> Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an >> ongoing business for Pesach? [Zev Sero:] > Not at all, for two separate reasons. > First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones > property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a > going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and > continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected > to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. AIUI there was no change in the business other than the 'titular" ownership > Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get > away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently > made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of > the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that > the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he > still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity > the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the > Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that > he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So > none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not > an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own > chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, > and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that > CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to > "pierce" it in the name of equity. https://headlinesbook.podbean.com/mf/download/reyy6b/headlines_6-2-18.mp3 6/2/18 Owning Businesses in Halacha and Hashkafa: People who are making a difference- Freddy Friedman, Elchonon Schwartz, Rabbi Yosef Kushner, Nesanel Davis, Shimon Webster, Mr. Sol Werdiger The first half deals with a similar type of arrangement for nursing homes-so aiui you're saying it's up to the Rabbis to evaluate the "need" in each case to determine if haaramah is allowable? KT Joel Rich From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 13:46:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:46:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180604204625.GA25546@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:28:46AM -0400, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : : Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student ... : 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, : as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could : agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him : about Ibn Ezra. ... : J. C. Salomon : May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm : Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that : the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, : before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late : addition to the text. : I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that : certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might : have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate : extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight : verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. Except that the tell-tale idiom is "sod ha-12", not 8. From Devarim 1:1: ... And if you understand sod hasheneim asar... Pit stop: the standard text doesn't even say that, it says "(hasarim) [tz"l hashneim] asar". So there is a slight chance it doesn't even say 12. Back to the IE: ... also "Vayikhtov Moshe" (31:22), "VehaKenaani as Ba'aretz" (Bereishis 12:6), "Har H' Yeira'eh" (Bereishis 22:14), and also "arso eres barzel (Devarim 3:11), you will regonize the truth. If it does refer to the last 12 pesuqim (from Moshe going up Har Nevo), then there are 5 quotes in discussion. 4 refer to the future, likely quotes for someone to say were actually written later. But Og's iron bed? And besides, it's the last 8 pesuqim that amoraim argue how and if Moshe could have written them. Now, if Moshe couldn't write "and Moshe died", then it makes sense to argue that he couldn't write "and Moshe went up Har Nevo" if he never came back. But that is more conjecture, that this "12" is "12 pesuqim", and the last 12 pesuqim at that, and that it is related to chazal's discussion of last 8 pesuqim, and all this despite one of the quotes not having this "problem" of not being true when Moshe left us. And for all we know, the secret could be about prophecy. Even if all 5 were about the future, who knows what secret the IE posited to explain them? One of the parts of the Torah that is NOT in this list is the list of kings of Edom "lifnei melokh melekh liVnei Yisrael", Bereishis 36:31. On which the IE qrites: Some say that this parashah was written bederekh nevu'ah. And Yitzchaqi says in his book that this parashah was written in the days of Yehoshafat, and he explains the generations as he wished. This is why his name was called Yitzchaq -- kol hashomeia yitzachaq li. .. Vechalillah chalilah that the matter is as he said about the days of Yehoshafat. His book is worth burning... And he explains that the kings ran in rapid succession, this being warrior tribes of Edom. And the melekh Yisrael in the pasuq was Moshe, "vayhi bishurun Melekh. A lot of work if the IE was okay with later interpolations of narrative snippets of 12 pesuqim or less. In 2002, RGStudent reposed something from Cardozo at . See fn 50: Most enlightening is Spinoza's observation that some texts of the Torah, such as the ones in Genesis 12:6; 22:14, and Deuteronomy 1:2, must have been written many years after Moshe's death, since they reveal information that refers to latter days. Spinoza relies here on the famous Jewish commentator Ibn Ezra (1088-1167), who wrote that these verses were "mysteries" about "which the wise should be silent" (on Deuteronomy 1:2). The traditional understanding of Ibn Ezra, as also confirmed by the modern Jewish scholar Samuel David Luzzatto (ShaDaL) (1800-1865), is that these passages must be understood as prophetic and anticipating the future. .... However, in RGS's own essay on that web site writes: Also, phrases and even verses were added to the texts that perhaps even these prophets could not have written. For example, Ramban explains (Genesis 8:21) "G-d said in His heart" as meaning that this was only revealed to Moshe at the time of the writing of the Torah. See also Ralbag there and Moreh Nevuchim 1:29. Another case is Genesis 32:33, "Therefore the Children of Israel are not to eat the gid hanasheh." According to the Mishna and Gemara in Chullin 101b, as explained by Rashi, this verse was a later insertion by Moshe. See the Radak's commentary to this verse. It is possible that Ibn Ezra, in his "secrecy", believed that many more verses fall into this category and were inserted into pre-existing narrative by G-d to Moshe. His thesis there is that the Torah was redacted from pre-existing scrolls during the Exodus; that it was this redaction that was dictated to Moshe in Sinai. Since such megillos are named in a few places, it's a pretty hard thesis to totally dismiss. The only question is how much was already given in writing in texts like Seifer Milkhamos Hashem (cf Bamidbar 21:13). Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 14:21:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 17:21:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 11:49:06PM -0400, Michael Poppers via Avodah wrote: : If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two : recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; : and "vaya'as kein Aharon." But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. Y-mi Nedarim 9:4 (violna ed. 30b) has the famous machloqes between R' Aqiva and Ben Azai about whether the kelal gadol baTorah is "ve'havta lerei'akha" or "zeh seifer toledos adam". In the version in the introduction to the Ein Yaaqov, he quotes Ben Zoma, attributes Rav Akiva's opinion to Ben Nanas, and then adds a new opinion: Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi says: We have found a more inclusive verse than that, and it is, "The first lamb you shall sacrifice in the morning and the second lamb you shall sacrifice in the evening." Rabbi Ploni stood up and said: The halachah is like Ben Pazi as it is written, "As all that I show you, the structure of the Mishkan and all its vessels: so shall you do." That makes constancy kind of important. FWIW, here is how my discussion (ch 2. sec. 3) of that quote goes: There are two interesting implications to Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi's and Rabbi Ploni's words. First, Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi could be making the point that Rabbi Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov found in Ben Azzai's position -- the role of personal development. After all, there are a number of verses that discuss this offering; Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi chose a verse that discusses its constant and regular nature. In his opinion, this is the most important verse in the Torah -- even in his or our day, after the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash and there are no korbanos. Perhaps the point here is consistency in avodas Hashem in-and-of-itself, not limited to this one mitzvah. Just as service in the Mishkan has its schedule and routine, so too our observance must be a discipline with well-defined structure and consistency. Second, the anonymous rabbi endorses this view by quoting a verse about the Mishkan and its vessels' structure, their composition, not their service. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi statement is about something done in the Beis HaMikdash as part of its daily service, but the proof is about its structure. This rabbi is relating "so shall you do" not only to following the description of that structure Hashem gave us when building it but also to the discipline of the ritual within it. The discipline in avodas Hashem of the previous implication is a taken as fundamental part of what the building is. At least homiletically, we can say this is true of both microcosms -- not only the Mishkan, but also the human soul, as Rav Shimon ben Pazi is giving importance to structure and consistency even in our era, without a Mishkan or Beis HaMikdash. Discipline in avodas Hashem is not only part of the structure of what the Mishkan is, but also our own soul's structure. This homily would be consistent with Rav Shimon's statement ... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search micha at aishdas.org of a spiritual experience. You are a http://www.aishdas.org spiritual being immersed in a human Fax: (270) 514-1507 experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 15:06:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:06:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180604220616.GC25546@aishdas.org> On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Rn Toby Katz Avodah wrote: > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be > bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before > feeding their children. According the Tosafos (Yuma 77b) and the Yam Shel Shelomo (Chulin 8:31) there isn't any ru'ach ra'ah anymore. Unsurprizingly, the Rambam (Rotzeiach 12:5) doesn't mention ru'ach ra'ah when he discusses not putting food under your bed, his reason is "shema yipol bo davar hamaziq". If it is a modern and mundane issue, I would think ru'ach ra'ah is depression, not a physical illness. The day after Shaul learns he lost his throne, "vatilach ruach E-lokim ra'ah el Sha'ul". (Shemu'el I 18:9) On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:17:24PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Actually, you need to do both for neigl vasr, as you need to get rid of chatzitzos. AhS 161:1, MB s"q 7,10. So the question might be... What's the problem with chatzitzos? Can someone make an argument that it's about places where disease can hide? Then why haqpadah? I really don't know what to do with RASoloveitchik's suggestion that ru'ach ra'ah can be things like germs. If it's a saqanas nefashos thing, then pesaqim should indeed be more maqpidim about things like soap than about using a cup, koach gavra, etc... BUT... this is RAS. I am assuming he did indeed have an explanation. Keeping the discussion alive (and CC-ing R Harry Maryles) to see if we can get down to one. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water micha at aishdas.org that softens the potato, hardens the egg. http://www.aishdas.org It's not about the circumstance, Fax: (270) 514-1507 but rather what you are made of. From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Tue Jun 5 19:06:11 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 22:06:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. < Agreed, and both examples I mentioned are examples of doing, not knowing. The point is that not just "v'halachta bidrachav" but also that "v'halachta" in the path of the noted examples, that one should imitate paragons of *derech H'*. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 05:07:43 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah Message-ID: The article below gives many halachas that are applicable to situations where gentile workers are employed in one's home. IMO it is worth reading carefully. YL Click here to download "Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 6 10:49:54 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:49:54 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Why I support the private kashrut initiative of Tzohar rabbis Message-ID: <628e074c-450f-a464-ed95-2eca5d3ed825@zahav.net.il> Placing this article in Avodah because Rav Melamed uses the model of the 70 elders to show how differences in community leadership should be handled. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22250 A few critical paragraphs: But when groups and institutions try to impose their opinion on members of another circle, and abolish the status of their rabbis (and to boycott them from becoming rabbinical judges and rabbis) we are no longer speaking of a situation where the rabbis of Tzohar should also establish a kashrut organization, but rather a situation in which it is almost obligatory for them to establish one, just like other accepted rabbinic organizations, in order to give halachic and Torah expression to their part in the Torah. If they do not, then they are similar to a prophet who suppresses his prophecy, or as our Sages said: ? Yea, all her slain are a mighty host? ? this refers to a disciple who has attained the qualification to decide questions of law, and does not decide them? (Sotah 22a). How Does a Difficult Dispute Develop? At first, there is an argument over a focused halakhic issue. However, when an agreement is not reached, instead of agreeing to disagree and continuing to respect each other, one side thinks that the other has no authority to retain his position, because, essentially, his position is inferior, since he belongs to a liberal circle, or his position differs from that of most rabbis. Then, that same party departs from the particular halakhic issue they have debated, and moves on to a more acute arena, in which the main argument is that the rabbi against whom he is arguing with is not authorized to express a halachic position, for in any case, who appointed him to be a rabbi who can express a position at all? Since this argument is not convincing enough, and the rabbi who is being attacked remains in his position, consequently we are now moving over to a dispute of a different magnitude ? since we are no longer dealing with a person who rules on a matter without authority, but with a person who undermines the foundations of authority as a whole, and thus, it is compulsory to wage an all-out war against him? From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 11:31:07 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 18:31:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: Please see the article at Eretz Yisroel, Zionism,and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH This article is from The Jewish Observer Vol. 23 No. 6 September 1990/Adar 5751 and is available at https://goo.gl/LNRpZZ YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 7 01:06:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 08:06:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra Message-ID: The letter below appears on pages 113 - 114 of this week's Flatbush Jewish Journal. It is not clear to me that all FJJ readers appreciate the gadlus of Rabbi Shamshon Raphael Hirsch when it came to Torah. Indeed, last week MW (whomever this may be) referred to RSRH as "Reb Shamshon Refoel Hirsch" rather than as Rabbi or Rav or even Rabbiner. Therefore, I feel that I should refer FJJ readers to Rav Yaakov Perlow's article Rav S. R. Hirsch - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra that appears in The World of Hirschian Teachings, An Anthology on the Hirsch Chumash and the Hashkafa of Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, Published for the Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer Foundation, Feldheim, 2008. Reading this article will give one a true understanding of how great a Torah scholar RSRH was. Moreover, the following is from page 102 of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, Architect of Torah Judaism for the Modern World by Rabbi Eliyahu Meir Klugman. We also have the assessment of the K?sav Sofer, Rabbi Avrohom Shmuel Binyamin Sofer, Rabbi of Pressburg and leader of Hungarian Jewry. The K'sav Sofer first met Rabbi Hirsch in Vienna, not long after the latter assumed his post in Nikolsburg. On the first Shabbos after his return to Pressburg, a large crowd came to his home for Shalosh Seudos in order to hear his observations about the new Chief Rabbi. Their curiosity was understandable, since, as followers of the Chasam Sofer, the K'sav Sofer's father, they harbored deep suspicions of anyone versed in secular studies, which they considered a potent danger to the Jewish people. The K?sav Sofer described his meeting with Rabbi Hirsch in the following terms: ?We spoke at length on Torah subjects with the new ?Rosh Medinah? and whatever topic we discussed, his reply showed that he had Shas and poskim on his fingertips. We, the rabbonim of Hungary, have to consider ourselves very fortunate that he holds us to be his superiors as scholars, for if he were only aware of the extent of his own scholarship, we would have no rest from him.? Finally, a talmud muvhak of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, ZT"L, told me that Rav Hunter once told him that anything that Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch wrote is Kodesh Kedoshim. Based on this It should be clear to all that what RSRH wrote about one going to see the wonders of nature is to be taken very seriously. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 7 06:02:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 13:02:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? Message-ID: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, how else might the desired result be accomplished? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 7 07:48:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 10:48:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: [VBM] Chassidic Service of God (continued) Message-ID: <20180607144830.GA19716@aishdas.org> This is where our compartmentalization into camps holds us back. The Piaseczner Rebbe (the "Aish Qodesh", R' Kalonymous Kalman Shapiro zt"l Hy"d) is largely reinventing Mussar. Admittedly his goals are different; the elements of the ideal Jew that are emphasized in Chassidus and Mussar differ. But he procedes to build and advocate from scratch a toolset for somthing that another tenu'ah invested the lion's share of their effort on -- self-awareness. To quote RYGB's loose translation of REEDessler (MmE vol 5 pp 35-39), cut-n-pasted from : In our times: The qualities of "Emet" that personified the Ba'alei Mussar [Mussar Masters] are already extinct. We no longer find individuals whose hearts are full with profound truth, with a strong and true sense of Cheshbon HaNefesh [complete and rigorous reckoning of one's spiritual status and progress]... Contemporary Chassidus lacks the component that was once at its core: Avodas Hashem with dveykus... For today's era, there remain only one alternative: To take up everything and anything that can be of aid to Yahadus; the wisdom of both Mussar and Chassidus together. Perhaps together they can inspire us to great understandings and illuminations. Perhaps together they might open within us reverence and appreciation of our holy Torah. Perhaps the arousal of Mussar can bring us to a little Chassidic hislahavus. And perhaps the hislahavus will somewhat fortify one for a Cheshbon HaNefesh. Perhaps through all these means together we may merit to ascend in spirituality and strengthen our position as Bnei Torah [adherents of a Torah centered lifestyle] with an intensified Judaism. May G-d assist us to attain all this! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight, micha at aishdas.org and he wants to sleep well that night too." http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok Fax: (270) 514-1507 Yeshivat Har Etzion PHILOSOPHY > Great Thinkers > The Piaseczner Rebbe > Shiur #24: Chassidic Service of God (continued) Dr. Ron Wacks Ways of Achieving Hitragshut (continued) The Importance of Self-Awareness One of the primary keys for entering the gates of inner service is self-awareness. Remarkably, although a person is generally concerned for his own wellbeing, he is not always aware of what is happening in his own inner world. His psyche is in constant movement, expressing its will and its aspirations, but even though the person may sense something going on, he is not equipped to interpret it and to take the appropriate steps: The hiddenness and imperceptibility of what is happening inside him distances a person greatly from himself. He is unfamiliar with himself and ignorant of what goes on inside him. Even the psyche of the simplest person never ceases its restlessness and writhing, crying out in supplication over its lowliness, and over all the blows and trials and tribulations that he causes it through his foolish actions, speech, and thoughts. The fact that he senses none of this is because he gives no thought to listening to this tempestuous wretch.[1] A person naturally tends to occupy himself with matters external to himself; he is not attentive to his own inner workings. It is easier to engage with the outside world, with its affairs of greater and lesser importance, than it is to listen inwardly. Even when he detects inner movement, he is unable to decode and make sense of it: For that is the way of man: he always strive for that which is extraneous to himself, the affairs of the world, both those that are vital and those that are not. He interests himself in what happens at the end of the world, but he pays no heed to his own psyche, and does not listen and give attention to the business that is within him. Or he may sense it, but since even at the moment that he senses it his desire, his attention, and his thought are turned to the lowly muck of this world, he hears the moaning and its voice only weakly. This may be compared to a person who is asleep and a mosquito bites him on his forehead. If he is a merchant, he dreams that a bag of his merchandise has fallen on his forehead and struck him; if he is a tailor, he dreams that his needle has pricked his forehead, etc. Each individual perceives his inner workings in the guise of his own dreams.[2] The psyche expresses its longings in different forms, but often a person is unable to decode any of these spiritual needs, such as a desire for teshuva and the fear of God. Sometimes, when he feels something oppressive inside him, he goes to the refrigerator and takes out a bottle of sweet drink and some cake, or he tries to distract himself by joking with his friends. Often, a person makes the mistake of thinking that it is his body that is suffering physical hunger, and he believes that he can satiate it by filling his stomach - while in fact it is his psyche that is starved and crying out in distress: Sometimes the psyche of a Jew is animated by regret, teshuva, submission, fear of God, and so on, and the person feels some sort of movement and restlessness within himself, but he has no idea what the problem is. He thinks he may be hungry, or thirsty, or in need of some wine and wafers, or he may think that he has fallen into melancholy, and in order to lift his spirits he chatters playfully with the members of his household, or goes over to a friend to joke and engage in lashon ha-ra, gossip, foolishness, etc.[3] R. Kalonymus's grandfather, author of Maor Va-Shemesh, also addresses the connection between an unhappy psyche and stuffing oneself with food. Attention should be paid to the chain of wrongdoing: Bnei Yisrael complain, convincing themselves of how bad things are for them. This leads them to melancholy, which gives rise to the craving for meat and the punishment that follows: "And when the people complained, it displeased the Lord" - This means that they fell into melancholy... and the Lord's fire burned amongst them, for black bile is detestable and abhorrent, for it is a tinge of idolatry... and for this reason they were punished. And Moshe prayed, and the fire subsided, but it continued through their melancholy, for they felt a lusting and they said, "Who will feed us meat?" For as we explained, the lust for food is drawn from black bile... Therefore, one has to distance oneself far from melancholy, for it brings a person to all sorts of sins. And despondence begins with a growing desire to eat, as we see when a person is mired in black bile, heaven forfend, he eats with lust, ravenously, and very quickly.[4] When a person tries to "quiet" his inner distress with sweets and snacks, not only has his psyche not received what it really wanted, but it is greatly pained by his failure to understand its true needs. Sometimes, after a person continually ignores and steamrolls his inner voice, it simply grows silent: Sometimes, after all of these actions which he has done, he still feels inner discomfort, since with these worthless medicines not only has he not cured the sores of his psyche, nor given it relief from the blows that he has administered to it, but he has in fact added further injury and assault. But sometimes it happens that after these misguided actions he actually feels better, and his spirit is quieted within him, because the blows and injuries and sores that he has added through his actions have rendered his psyche unconscious, or he has piled mounds of dirt and refuse over it to the point that it is completely hidden. Then he will no longer hear even the slightest peep out of it - and he can relax.[5] The psyche also transmits signals of joy, not only distress. A person often misses these signals too, failing to give them expression. For example, when a person fulfills a mitzva or rejoices in his prayer, and his psyche awakens with joy and hitragshut, he will fail to notice this - both because of his general insensitivity to his inner world and because his attention is oriented elsewhere. R. Kalonymus argues that the way to achieve hitragshut and hitlahavut is not by "importing" new feelings from outside of oneself; they are already to be found inside him. However, they must be given more powerful expression and allowed to effect a greater influence on his consciousness: It is not new excitements that you need to seek, nor a heavenly-initiated awakening. First and foremost, the work is required of you yourself, for everything exists within you. You are capable of hitragshut, and you are a person who is able to attain fervor; you simply need to try to get to know yourself and what is going on inside. Your psyche is full of signals, shouts, and supplications, and all you need to do is to provide space within yourself within which it can be revealed and strengthened. Then you will come to know and feel your natural hitragshut, with no need to garb yourself and your needs.[6] R. Kalonymus not only demands self-awareness, but also explains how to attain it. A person has to learn to listen to his own inner world and ask himself questions: Is my psyche happy, and if so, about what? Is my psyche sad, and if so, why? What are the inner feelings that accompany me in this situation, and how did they come about? At first, this work will involve only the major movements of the psyche. It is not advisable to start with weaker movements, since, owing to their delicate nature, their meaning is not always clear. Attention should therefore be paid to the stronger signals, and when one notices them, he should "provide space" and allow them expression. This is facilitated through paying attention to them, strengthening them, and allowing them to reveal themselves through our power of imagination. We will now elaborate on each of these tools individually. (To be continued) Translated by Kaeren Fish _______________________ [1] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 29. [2] Ibid., p. 40. [3] Ibid. [4] R. Kalman Kalonymus Epstein Ha-Levi, Maor Va-Shemesh (Jerusalem, 5748), Parashat Beha'alotekha. [5] Ibid., p. 29. [6] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 30. Copyright ? 1997-2017 by Yeshivat Har Etzion From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 7 21:17:05 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 06:17:05 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <950f4b82-36d2-0f57-abef-73c113119730@zahav.net.il> RSH's third objection to Rav Kalisher is the key one (RSH couldn't imagine that non-religious Jews could be the vehicle for redemption). Once you say that "I can't imagine. . . " than everything else has to fit into that paradigm that you just set up for yourself. The author's conclusions are also strange. To mention all the benefits and great things that have come from the state but to still look at it as if it is a treif piece of meat boggles my mind. I would also add that if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - he should move here. Like I always tell my Reform Jewish friends - If you move here, you get a vote which is 10,000 times (at least) more important than Facebook posts. Ben From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 07:09:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:09:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi Sacks on 'The Great Partnership' Message-ID: <20180608140928.GA11777@aishdas.org> R/L J Sacks on Science and Religion. In short: It's Gould's notion of non-overlapping magesteria -- they can't contradict, the discuss different topics. But RJS says it so well, giving the idea emotional "punch". And sometimes even maaminim need a reminder that the point of religion isn't to fill in the gaps in our scientific knowledge. (I know I do.) Our rishonim offer answers to the question of why an Omnicient and Omnipotent G-d would create a universe that requires His intervention once in a while. His Wisdom inheres more in the things science CAN explain than in the miracles that even in principle can't be studied scientifically. (Pace the Ralbag, whose actual position on nissim is a longer discussion.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LltoUg_WL2k That said, I think this is overstatement, as they do overlap when it comes to discussion of origins. I would instead posit "barely overlapping magesteria" -- they only overlap at the fringes, where no open question can threaten my trust in either. Yahadus explains the "why?" of life to well to question, and many scientific theories do too well at the "how?" I have a question about where they seem to contradict? Nu nu. Scientists believe that quantum gravity has an answer, and don't expect either QM or Relativity to be overturned just because we have a question where their fringes overlap. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 09:19:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 12:19:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? Message-ID: From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) apply only to male Kohanim, or does it also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V?kidashto applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K?Hilchaso 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash. This description applies only to men and not to women. Although the daughters of Kohanim are entitled to eat Teruma and may eat from certain Korbanos that are designated only for Kohanim, they are not eligible to serve in the Beis Hamikdash. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:48:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:48:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? Message-ID: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> I wanted to talk this out here, as this se'if in the AhS appears to use the kind of reasoning that is exactly what I argued for decades with C rabbis (and more recently with one or two of the more innovative OO rabbis) isn't how halakhah should be done. AhS CM 89:2 discusses the reason for a taqanah that if a sakhir and the BhB disagree about whether the sakhir had been paid, the sakhir can make a shevu'ah binqitas cheifetz, and the employer would have to pay. Normally, f two sides make conflicting unsupported claims, the rule would be that the defendent (the nitba) would make a shevu'as heises (which is a less demanding shevu'ah than the shevu'ah BNC) and not pay. A taqanah beyond the usual hamotzi meichaveiro alav hara'ayah to disuade liars. The stated reason for treating the sakhir as a special case is that many times the employer has many workers, and it's more likely he wouldn't remember the details of who he paid what than the employee not remembering the details of getting paid. However, the AhS continues, this doesn't explain why chazal worried more about employers than salespeople. Someone who has a lot of customers is prone to the same parallel likelihood of confusion. So, he explains that the iqar haataqanah is because employees have a lot riding on getting paid, "nosei es nafsho lehachayos nafesho venefesh benei beiso, chasu chaza"l alav..." And therefore even if it's a boss who has only one employee, and he isn't overhwlmed keeping track of vay, lo chilqu chakhamim. Doesn't this sound bad? Chazal really had some social end in mind, so they invented some pro forma excuse to justify their conclusion. I guess that in dinei mamunus, Chazal can do whatever they want -- hefqer BD hefqer -- and therefore on /that/ ground they can force payment of a worker for the sake of social justice. But that's not what the AhS invokes. Thoughts? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 12:15:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:15:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din but a takanah. By definition, takanos are ends-driven; they're made not because this is what we believe Hashem ordered, nor to avoid some issur, but in order to achieve some desirable goal. The same applies to the usual shvuas hesses that Chazal instituted; it's to achieve the two desirable goals of creating a disincentive for defendants to lie, and of assuring the plaintiff that the courts are not biased against him. So I see no problem with Chazal making a special takana for the benefit of employees, since the Torah itself gives their needs priority, and gives the reason that employees often risk their lives for their livelihood. And just as the Torah does not distinguish between those employees who actually do risk their lives and those who sit on comfortable chairs in air-conditions offices and risk nothing more serious than a paper-cut or RSI, Chazal saw no need to distinguish between a lone employee and one among many. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 12:53:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:53:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:35PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din : but a takanah... Not just a taqanah, a taqanah that needs an justification for why they're not following the din deOraisa. And so simply saying "it's a taqanah" doesn't really satisfy me. DeOraisa, the employer would have the right to not pay the money. The usual taqanah for conflicting claims would require he make a shevu'as heises first. Here, we're putting the power to extract the employer's money despite the deOraisa. Had the taqanah not violated the deOraisa, but went "beyond" it, I wouldn't have asked. And as I said, had the AhS invokved hefqer BD hefqer, we would need no excuse for how Chazal can move money despite the deOraisa. But he doesn't. Instead, he says they came up with a justication that isn't real. That opens a whole pandora's box of ascribing hidden "social justice" reasons for legislation that has an explicit explanation already given. And it makes it sound like legal mechanism can indeed be nothing more than a hopp to jump through, rather than justification in-and-of itself. So my question isn't "how did they make this taqanah", but "how can you claim that they wanted to ignore a deOraisa because they thought they had a 'more moral' alternative, and then just found some way to legally justify it?" :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the micha at aishdas.org second time and as if you had acted the first http://www.aishdas.org time as wrongly as you are about to act now! Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 12:15:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 15:15:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:52 PM 6/8/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's >OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: >: A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto >: applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso >: 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he >: offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... > >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to be "honored" like all other Kohanim? I recall that there was a Kohein when I lived in Elizabeth who had a deformed hand. However, I think that he still got the first aliya. However, I do not think that he duchened. He left the shul right before duchening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:52:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:52:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: : A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto : applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso : 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he : offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 13:21:23 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:21:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:09PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to : >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. : : If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability : that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to : be "honored" like all other Kohanim? ... I think aliyah laTorah is different than duchaning because it's not about the kohein as a kohein, but mishum tiqun olam. So, we divy out the kavod according to strict rules, so that society runs smoother. Not based on qedushah. Maybe it's even kavod vs qedushah. Tangents: BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not a kofer. There is also a separate discussion is someone who is wheelchair bound can get an aliyah at all, or if the chiyuv for an oleh to stand is me'aqiev. From the pasuq "amod imadi". The accepted pesaq really only permits calling someone who can't stand if their reason for not being able to stand is obvious or known to the tzibbur. IOW, oneis Rachamanah patrei for his non-standing, but the kavod haTorah is an issue if it looks bad to the tzibbur. I didn't spend the same time researching this tangent, as you can tell by the lack of a single source. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe micha at aishdas.org you can be certain of improving, http://www.aishdas.org and that's your own self. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aldous Huxley From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:41:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9e545852-4e47-2e1a-0f1b-f6fe418d3daa@sero.name> I don't think it's accurate to say that mid'oraisa he doesn't have to pay. If he really does owe the money then mid'oraisa he has to pay, and has an *additional* obligation to pay this debt over all other debts, because of "lo solin". The only question is whether he really owes the money or not. Normally, the way the Torah left things, we can't be sure he owes it, so we can't *force* him to pay; we have to leave it up to his own conscience. But his obligation (or lack thereof) is unchanged. Now Chazal come along and meddle with that setup, for social reasons. In order to discourage defendants from falsely denying their liability, and in order to give plaintiffs a sense that justice has been done, they instituted the sh'vuas hesses. If you don't swear we'll make you pay, despite the Torah saying we can't. According to you, how could they do that? Here Chazal went a bit further: We can't make the defendant swear, because he may honestly have forgotten or got confused, so we tell the plaintiff that if he's willing to swear, not just hesses but binkitas chefetz, then we'll believe him, and once we do believe him the *Torah* says the defendant must pay. Comes the Aruch Hashulchan and asks, what about the exceptional case where the defendant is not confused and unlikely to have forgotten? And what about other defendants who may be confused or have forgotten? And he answers "lo plug" because there's a deeper reason for the takana here. It's not just that we're worried about the defendant inadvertently making a false oath; if he's really worried about that let him pay up, but if he's not worried we won't be. The deeper reason why we've given the plaintiff a slight edge here is that we're emulating the Torah itself, which made the "takana" of "lo solin" for the explicit reason that employees *in general* risk their lives and so deserve extra protection. And just as it did not distinguish between employees, so we won't either. I have a bigger question, though: This takana seems to be biased *against* the employee whose employer is a yerei shamayim. Without the takana the employer would decline to swear because he can't be sure he's right, and he'd have to pay. Now we say no, you don't have to pay until we test the employee, more rigorously than we were going to test you. So mah ho'ilu chachamim betakanasam? It seems as if our real concern here is not for the employee's welfare but to protect honest employers from employee fraud! That's surely a worthy goal, but opposite to the one the AhS posits. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 9 20:19:14 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2018 23:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Korach "There's Good Even In The Worst Of Us" Message-ID: The rabbis saw a hint that while the Korah rebellion ended so tragically, it had the seeds of redemption. In the Shabbos Maariv we recite Psalm 92: Tzaddik katamar yifrach, the righteous will blossom like the palm tree (v. 13). The last letters of those 3 Hebrew words (kuf, reish, chet) spell Korah. Although blinded by anger and envy, Korah's egalitarian vision will indeed be established. Then the "righteous will blossom like the palm tree, and grow mighty like a cedar in Lebanon, planted in the house of the Lord." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:47:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <36fd05b2-e021-0e98-cdcc-6e84353eb84b@sero.name> On 08/06/18 16:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. > Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the > first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not > a kofer. This is not just RMF, it's the plain halacha. A kohen who eats treif and breaks shabbos can even duchen, let alone get the first aliyah. Even if he's living with a nochris he can still duchen. But the moment she converts and marries him he can no longer duchen. And if he can't duchen then of course he can't get the first aliya either. (The baal mum is different. The only reason he can't duchen is because the deformity is in his hand; if it were anywhere else he could duchen. And even so he still has a *chiyuv* to duchen, which is why he has to leave before retzei in order to avoid it. A cohen married to a grusha doesn't have to leave, since he is a temporary chalal and thus has no chiyuv.) It seems to me that "vekidashto" *does* apply to the wives of cohanim, because for purposes of kavod the general rule is ishto kegufo, and a wife who marries up gets her husband's social status. As for his unmarried daughters, it seems to me that they too are included in their father's status for this purpose, since they are called by his name. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 11 08:07:53 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:07:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. There are two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Should the Kohanim be asked to leave the shul during Kriyas HaTorah, so that both Yisroelim will receive aliyos? A. The Mishnah Berurah (135:9) writes that a Kohen may not give up his aliyah because we are obligated to honor a Kohen. This is the case not only on Shabbos or Yom Tov when the Shuls are crowded and it will be noticeable, but even on a Monday or Thursday when it is less obvious. However, many poskim, including Igros Moshe (OC 3:20), write that if there is a pressing need on a Monday or Thursday, a Kohen may be mochel (forgo) his kovod and give up his right to the first aliyah. In such a situation, the Kohen exits the Shul before the Torah reading so as not to cast any doubts on his lineage. In contrast, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt?l held that it is not proper for a Kohen to relinquish his aliyah. Aside from the issue of the Kohen being mochel (forgoing) the honor of receiving the first aliyah, there will also be a deficiency in the Kriyas HaTorah itself. The Gemara (Megilla 21b) states that the three aliyos on Monday and Thursday and on Shabbos Mincha were instituted to correspond to the three categories of Jews: Kohanim, Levi?im and Yisroelim. If a Kohen is not called up for an aliyah, the Kriyas HaTorah is lacking this kiyum (fulfillment) of reflecting the three categories of Jews. Therefore, one should not ask a Kohen to forgo his aliyah, since this would diminish the fulfillment of the mitzvah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Jun 11 19:53:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:23:36 +0930 Subject: [Avodah] Kashrus - Wooden Sticks and Feathers Message-ID: If a wooden stick is used to stir a hot pot of non-K meat, it becomes non-K. It will in turn, render a pot of hot Kosher food non-K, if it is used, whilst fresh, to stir that pot. But, wood is not a food. May one eat the shavings of that wooden stick? Probably yes. Hog hair is not a food and it cannot be deemed to be non-K. Therefore one may sprinkle hog hair on ones food, or cook it in ones soup. Does it get worse if the hog hair is first cooked in a pot of non-K meat? Probably yes. This is an issue faced today by Kashrus agencies regarding food ingredients/additives that are extracted from non-foods, like bird feathers. In order to facilitate plucking, the dead, non-Shechted birds have been plunged into a tank of boiling water. Thus the feathers have absorbed the non-K taste of the birds. Although the feathers are dissolved in acids in order to extract what will be used as food additives, this consideration is not accepted regarding gelatine since gelatine is a 'food' at the conclusion of its processing, and it is similarly not accepted by the Kashrus agencies for feathers. Some suggest that there is a difference between the two. Gelatine is worse because it is extracted from the non-K item itself i.e. the skin and bones, whereas the non-K absorbed in the feathers, is not the source of the extracted food/additive which are derived exclusively from the feathers that are a non-food. Therefore, even though skin and bones do become inedible during their processing, this is just a temporary state, generated by acids and alkali, which are removed from the finished product and the finished product is essentially still the same skin and bones. Whereas the product extracted from feathers is entirely disassociated with the absorbed non-K flavour and is therefore K. Nevertheless, a well known Rav argues that in any case where the chemical is removed, the product returns to its non-K status, even in the case of feathers. It will permitted only if the chemical remains but is camouflaged by other additives. Therefore, feathers and what is derived from them remain prohibited because whatever chemicals are used to process and extract the foods/additives, are removed. Is it possible that the foods/additives extracted from the feathers are permitted because all, or almost all of the absorbed non-K flavour is removed - in other words, just as we can Kasher our wooden stick, so too we can deem the feathers to have been Kashered? Now if we were to actually Kasher the feathers or the wooden stick, we require 60 times the volume of the stick. For example, a 500g stick requires 30 litres [500gX60=30,000g] and 3 tonnes of feathers would require [3,000litresX60=500,000 litres] which we obviously dont have in the normal processing. Now the only reason we cannot Kasher in less than 60 is ChaNaN [ChaTiCha NaAsis Neveilah] This means, Kashering is not a process of dilution of the prohibited component that is absorbed until it is less that 1:60, in which case we could immerse the non-K spoon or feathers in 100 small pots of boiling water and each dip would further dilute the concentration of the absorbed Issur Kasheing is rather a process that MUST revoke the prohibited status. If it is not revoked - i.e. it is immersed in a pot that does not have more than 60, then EVERYTHING becomes non-K and the spoon is just as non-K as it was before it was immersed. In other words ChaNaN applies to Kelim. And yet the Kosher agencies permit the additives extracted from non-K feathers because the feathers are not food but a Keli, and are therefore not limited by ChaNaN. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Jun 11 11:09:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:09:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:19 PM 6/11/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would also add that >if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >he should move here. Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who come here collecting for all sorts of things? What would they do if there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious community of Jews in the US? Indeed, how many religious Jews living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things. Is this not a huge mitzva? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 11 20:48:41 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 05:48:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <4a055873-1dcb-8b0f-2b31-69cec4cbdb81@zahav.net.il> 1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. 2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - what does that mean? Ben On 6/11/2018 8:09 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the > frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who > come here collecting for all sorts of things?? What would they do if > there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious > community of Jews in the US?? (1) Indeed, how many religious Jews > living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things.? Is > this not a huge mitzva? (2) > > YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 12 05:36:49 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah Message-ID: Please see the article at Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah by Dr. Leo Levi This article appeared in the December 1988 issue of the Jewish Observer which is available at https://goo.gl/9JUkt4 YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 11:25:42 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:25:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? In-Reply-To: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <10180612182542.GA32068@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 01:27:43PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a : Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) : but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose... However, when fundraising, pidyon shevuyim comes first, even after the funds were raised and the building materials bought for the not-yet-existent shul. SA YD 252:1. And the Tur says this is the only mitzvah we may sell those building supplies for. : 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities : and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent : in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? Is this distinction more than semantic? You are asking whether the "other priorities" are outside the label "tzedaqah" and therefore "other halakhot", or within the label, and therefore tzedaqah's priorities would be "multivariate". But the word "tzedaqah" has multiple usages. For example, in the sense we have been using it, we've been including pidyon shevuyim and binyan bhk"n. But it could be used to refer to supplying the poor with their needs exclusively. Or to mean their needs and dei machsero. Etc... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. micha at aishdas.org I awoke and found that life was duty. http://www.aishdas.org I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:31:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 10:42:20AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like : Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem : spoke to both? ... : If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would : seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply : they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. Like "shamor vezakhor bedibur echad"? There is no proof they all heard the same thing, never mind in the same way. But that's not where I wanted to go. If we take the Rambam's approach to the uniqueness of Moshe's nevu'ah, then the difference isn't in the "Dibbur" (which didn't actually involve heard words, leshitaso). It's in the shomeia'. Moshe's seikhel was able to accept the nevu'ah unmediated. Others, the same message could only be received via koach hadimyon so that it reaches the navi's conscious mind cloaked in visions and metaphoric sensations. So, if Hashem did make one dibbur to both, Moshe would still receive it Peh-el-peh and Aharon would experience the revelation as a prophetic vision. OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then we are left with two possibilities: - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, and passing Torah down the generations, etc... - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording the kelal, there could be others. There are other potential exceptions, most enigmatically Bil'am (Yalqut Shim'oni 966) on the very pasuq that describes Moshe's nevu'ah as being "Panim al panim" -- "velo qam navi od beYisrael keMoshe", but among the other nations, there was Bil'am. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that micha at aishdas.org a person can change their future http://www.aishdas.org by merely changing their attitude. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:39:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:39:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? In-Reply-To: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180612203937.GB20060@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 01:02:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 : minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority : of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to : reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish : the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, : how else might the desired result be accomplished? Through unofficial norms. It wasn't all that long ago (at most a couple of decades) when speed was left to the chazan watching the rav (or the chazan himself, if the rav is at another minyan), and the norms of the minyan set the chazan's pace without a watch and often without conscious thought. But then, even in those days people were coming late. I think you're dealing with a misdiagnosis. To my mind, the only real way to get people to come on time and to stay for davening and not spend the time learning with breaks for prayer is to offer programming that helps people relate to davening. If you don't cure the problem of boredum, people will come late regardless of the scheduling system, and find excuses to step out, whether physically or mentally. I would suggest the minyan in question explore in that direction, rather than worry about how Yishtabach time is determined. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. micha at aishdas.org - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 12 14:24:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 17:24:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> References: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <233e14ea-9b86-d3dc-f8fc-2d8bb4c8c50c@sero.name> On 12/06/18 16:31, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part > of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah > itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, > and passing Torah down the generations, etc... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording > the kelal, there could be others. Other possibilities: * Moshe told Yehoshua what he should write the next day. * The Rambam says that after a navi's vision a mal'ach explains it to him. I see no reason why the mal'ach in Yehoshua's vision could not have told him exactly what he should write. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Wed Jun 13 06:07:13 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:07:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW SHOULD COME FROM THE LETTER Message-ID: <9D3675F5-16E2-4542-A632-D76A033B1BCE@cox.net> There?s the story of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi who, when studying Torah, heard the crying of his infant grandson. The elder rebbe rose from his studying and soothed the baby to sleep. Meanwhile, his son, the boy?s father, was too involved in his study to hear the baby cry. When R. Zalman noticed his son?s lack of involvement, he proclaimed: ?If someone is studying Torah and fails to hear the cry of a baby, there is something very wrong with his learning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 13 12:29:17 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 21:29:17 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Perhaps there are several aspects of nevuah. One is the hearing, which Moshe did better. Another is the experience itself.? Here, it doesn't matter if Moshe's experience was "better" than Aaron's and in fact the word better doesn't apply. Aaron experienced this totality called nevuah and he did it his way. After doing that, he isn't the same person, or the same cohen. The same would apply to the hundreds of thousands of people who experienced nevuah but didn't have anything recorded. They became different people, and their avodat Hashem was completely upgraded as a result of the experience. Ben On 6/3/2018 9:42 AM, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was > the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 13 12:51:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:51:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah Message-ID: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> >From your friendly neighborhood clipping service. Taken from , with transliteration added for Avodah digest purposes. R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" of "Torah lishmah" means. I intend to reply, once I have time to collect a mar'eh maqom or two. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Tvunah in English Beit Midrash for Birurei Halachah Binyan Zion Under the Leadership of Maran HaRav Asher Weiss Shlita Learning Torah L'Shma Introductory Note Our Sages[1] have greatly commended one who learns Torah Lishmo -- literally, for its own sake.[2] Many times in the Talmud [Pesachim 50b, Nazir 23b, Horiyos 10b, Sotah 22b, Sotah 47a, Sanhedrin 105b, Erchin 16b] they have stated that one should always learn Torah, even if it not Lishmo, for through this one will eventually reach Lishmo. The goal, though, is total Lishmo. Two questions have to be dealt with: Firstly, is there anything negative or positive if one enjoys one's learning? Secondly, what precisely is Torah Lishmoh? Position One -- Enjoyment Is Not Ideal The Agrah D'Kallah[3] states that the disciples of the Ba'al Shem Tov asked their master if there is a problem if one enjoys learning Torah. He answered that since this is the very nature of Torah, as is written in Tehillim[4], "the statutes of Hashem are straight, [they] gladden the heart," Hashem will not act unfairly towards a person[5] and punish him for having had such enjoyment. This statement seems clear that the ultimate aim would be not to derive any enjoyment from one's learning. A similar sentiment seems to have been echoed by Rav Chaim Volozhiner. He seems to writes[6] that one who enjoys his learning does not commit a sin.[7] On the other hand, the Eglei Tal[8] writes that he has heard some people make a grave mistake, thinking that the ideal is for one to learn without enjoyment. He argues vehemently that one must love and enjoy one's learning. The one whom the Eglei Tal was arguing with was the Yismach Yisrael. He writes[9] that the true learning of Torah is only when one learns with no intention of any enjoyment at all. My feeling is that there is room for both the position of the Eglei Tal and that of the Yismach Yisrael to be correct. On one hand, Hashem wants us to enjoy His Torah, and, as we shall discuss in length soon, it is the proper way for one to study Torah. However, there are many instances where one does not enjoy learning, either because one has had a bad day, or because it is a piece of material which really does not grab his interest. In such a case, one needs to recall the words of the Yismach Yisroel that one needs to study Torah even if one does not have any enjoyment. Position Two -- Enjoyment Is Ideal In my opinion, it seems clear from many Rishonim that enjoyment and pleasure in one's learning is an integral part of the process of Torah study. Firstly, the Mishnah in Avos[10] states that when one studies Torah one needs to know in front of Whom one toils. Rabbeinu Yonah[11] explains that just as the Torah was the plaything of Hashem[12], so to speak, before the creation of the world, so too one's Torah should be one's own plaything. This seems to state clearly that deriving pleasure for Torah study is an ideal. Secondly, the general rule regarding commandments is that they were not given for pleasure[13], and therefore the pleasure of having fulfilled a commandment is not Halachikally considered pleasure. For example, if one took a vow not to derive pleasure from one's fellow, one's fellow may still blow the Shofar on his behalf, since the mere fact that one's fellow is enabling the fulfilment of one's commandment is not considered pleasure.[14] However, regarding the commandment of Torah study, Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar writes[15] that the essence of the commandment is to enjoy one's learning. Therefore, says Rabbeinu Avraham, if one forbade one's fellow from using one's Torah scroll, one's fellow may not use it. Again, this is a clear statement that enjoying one's learning is ideal. [A note of explanation is in order. It is difficult to understand how Rabbeinu Avraham can state that enjoyment is the essence of learning Torah. It is understandable how it is an integral part -- but to be the essence? I think his intent is as follows. The Shulchan Oruch HaRav[16] argues that there are two separate commandments of learning Torah. One is to study the Torah, and the other is to know the Torah. In my opinion this particular formulation is difficult, since we do not find that the Rishonim count the commandment of Torah study as two separate commandments.[17] Rather, it seems that these two categories make up the commandment. The commandment is to learn, while the essence and purpose of this learning is in order to know the Torah. The proof to this understanding of the commandment is that the commandment of Torah study is the verse veshinantam levanekha -- "And you shall teach your children,"[18] and our Sages explain[19] that the word veshinantam is to be expounded from the root shinen -- sharp. The words of Torah should be totally clear to oneself, to the extent that if one is asked about a given Torah matter one should be able to answer immediately, without babbling. This teaches us that the essence of the study is to achieve clear knowledge. Since the clarity of Torah knowledge is the essence of the commandment of Torah study, and this clarity of knowledge brings one great pleasure, Rabbeinu Avraham writes that the essence of the commandment of Torah study is to have pleasure from it.] A third proof: If deriving pleasure from the study of Torah is not the ideal state, how could it be that our Sages instituted the words, "veha'arev na es divrei Sorasekha befinu" in the morning blessing on the Torah? However, it could be that this is not a proof. The Avudraham[20] cites two verses to explain the word ????? in this context. The first is from Malachi[21] -- Ve'orvah Lashem minchas Yehudah viYrushalayim kiymei olam ukhshanim qadmonios -- "And the flour-offering of Yehudah and Yerushalayim will be pleasing to Hashem as the days of old and the years past." However, his second verse is from Tehillim[22] -- arov avdekha letov, which the Ibn Ezra[23] explains is the same root as an areiv -- a guarantor -- "Guarantee Your servant for good". Accordingly, the blessing is to be understood as a request from Hashem that He should act as a guarantor that our children should know the Torah, and does not refer to a request for having pleasure from the Torah. On the other hand, Rashi[24] explains that this blessing is a request that the study of Torah be with the tremendous pleasure of loving, feeling loved by, and being close to, Hashem. His interpretation is also cited by the Avudraham.[25] According to this interpretation, there is strong proof that pleasure is an ideal part of the study of Torah. Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind on this thought. 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must learn Torah in order to fulfil it. Support for these Positions All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the Rishonim. 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov. 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Uniting the Opinions However, in my opinion, it seems that these are really three sides to one coin. Before I demonstrate this, I would like to show some indications in this direction: 1. Although Rashi in Brachos[38] writes that Lishmo means in order to find out what to do, however in his commentary to Ta'anis he writes[39] that Lishmo means to fulfil Hashems will. 2. Although the Ba'al Shem Tov seems to be of the opinion that Lishmo means in order to fulfil the will of Hashem, however two of his main disciples[40] write that one must learn in order to act. Therefore it seems to me that all these three interpretations are really three parts of one whole. The first step is that one has to learn in order to fulfil the will of Hashem. However, what is His will? It is that one should learn and know clearly His Torah. What is the purpose of us knowing his Torah? In order that one should know what to do. In light of this, it would seem that we can understand that which we quoted from Rav Chaim Volozhiner in the beginning of the Shiur[41], even though at face value his statement that "there is no sin," seems to contradict that which we quoted later in the Shiur from him.[42] According to my understanding of Lishmo it is not a contradiction. The earlier quote is directed at one for whom part of his motivation to learn is because of his enjoyment. The motivation, ideally, should be purely because Hashem said so. But one should most definitely enjoy one's learning when one is learning. [1] For example, Mishnah Avos 6:1 and Sanhedrin 99b [2] We shall later discuss another manner to translate this word. [3] Agrah D'Kallah Parshas Chayei Sarah d"h BeMidrash BeParsha Zu Kad Damich Rebbe Avahu [4] Tehillim 19:9 [5] Avodah Zarah 3a [6] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [7] We shall return to this statement in the end of the Shiur [8] Hakdamah to Eglei Tal [9] Yismach Yisrael Parshas Bechukosai [10] Mishnah Avos 2:14 [11] Rabbeinu Yonah ibid d"h VeDah Lifnei Mi [12] Mishlei 8:30 [13] Rosh HaShannah 28a [14] Ibid, as explained by Rashi d"h Mutar Litkoah Lo [15] Peirush Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar Nedarim 48a d"h Sefarim [16] [Blank on web. -mb] [17] See, for instance, Rambam Sefer HaMitzvos Mitzvah 11 [18] Devarim 6:7 [19] Kiddushin 30a [20] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [21] Malachi 3:4 [22] Tehillim 119:122 [23] Ibn Ezra ibid [24] Rashi Brachos 11b d"h Ha'arev [25] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [26] Degel Machane Efraim Parshas Vayishlach d"h Ba Na El Shifchasi [27] Yosher Divrei Emes Os 7 [disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch, who was a major disciple of the Ba'al Shem Tov]; Ma'or VeShemesh Parshas Vayetzei d"h Vayomer Eilav Lavan [disciple of the Noam Elimelech, who was a major disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch] [28] Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 2 and 3 [29] Chiddushei Chasam Sofer Nedarim 81a d"h Shelo Borchu [30] Reishis Chochmah, Hakdamah [31] Shnei Luchos HaBris, Chelek 1, Ba'asarah Ma'amaros, Ma'amar 6, Os 187 [32] Yerushalmi Brachos 1:2 [33] Peirush HaRosh Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen [34] Mefaresh (Rashi) Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen. [There is doubt whether the commentary printed as Rashi on Nedarim is actually from Rashi, hence this commentary is commonly referred to as "the Mefaresh (commentator)"] [35] Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah 10:5 [36] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [37] Tosfos Pesachim 50b d"h Vekan [38] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [39] Rashi Ta'anis 7a d"h Lishmo [40] Likutei Amarim of the Maggid of Mezeritch (otherwise known as Maggid Devarav LeYa'akov) Siman??, Sod Yachin U'Boaz Perek 2 [41] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [42] [Ed. Note] According to the later quote, as is clear from the end of Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 4, learning for the love of the pure understanding of Torah is Lishmoh. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 04:22:44 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:22:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How to pour nesachim, major differences between the first and the second beis hamikdash Message-ID: Yesterdays daf (Zevachim 61b) says that the mizbeach in the first beis hamikdash was 28x28 amos and in the second beis hamikdash was 32x32 amos. Rabin explains the difference as follows: In the first Mikdash, Nesachim would flow into Shisim (a pit south-west of the Mizbe'ach) down the wall of the mizbeach. In the second Beis Hamikdash they enlarged the Mizbe'ach in order that the Shisim would be within (under) the Mizbe'ach and they made the corners of teh mizbeach hollow so that they could pour nesachim in the mizbeach. At first (during the first Beis Hmikdash), they learned from the words "Mizbe'ach Adamah" that the mizbeach has to be completely solid. In the second beis Hamikdash they thought that drinking ('consumption' of libations) should be like eating (Korbanos that are burned, i.e. within the boundaries of the Mizbe'ach) and therefore made the holes to pour the Nesachim as part of the mizbeach. Therefore, they understood that Mizbe'ach Adamah" teaches that the Mizbe'ach cannot be built over domes or tunnels (that are not needed for the Mizbe'ach). According to the Rambam in Hilchos Mamrim, this is perfectly standard practice. Any Beis Din can come and darshen the pesukim differently then a previous beis din. However, according to others this is not so simple. For those who hold that there is one halachic truth, this would seem to be very difficult, in either the first or second beis hamikdash they did the avoda of the nesachim wrong. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 05:50:21 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:50:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40a627c0-37a1-a74d-6f72-165b6d6d9469@gmail.com> On 6/14/2018 8:17 AM, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org wrote: > Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 From: Micha Berger > ...who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah? If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah ... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. ... Another possibility: Hashem dictated the last pesukim about Moshe's death to Moshe beforehand, even before Moshe ascended the mountain, and Moshe dictated them to Yehoshua, who did not write them down until after Moshe's death. Thus, all the Torah, to the last letter, was revealed to Moshe, but it was Yehoshua who put the last pesukim in writing. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Jun 14 06:47:54 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: At 08:17 AM 6/14/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you >regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. >2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That >isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >what does that mean? I am going to give you an answer that I know you will not like and will dismiss out of hand, but IMO, it is the truth. Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to Eretz Yisroel. After all, I said, Orthodox Jews are interested in doing mitzvahs, and one can certainly do more mitzvahs in Israel. He responded by pointing out that the additional mitzvahs that one can do in Israel are only of rabbinical origin at this time. Furthermore, he went on, one has to keep in mind the following. The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the right spiritual level before you go." While reciting the Shema twice a day we say, ?Beware lest your heart be seduced and you turn astray And you will swiftly be banished from the goodly land which G-d gives you.? Thus it is clear to me that one must be on the appropriate spiritual level to live in Eretz Yisroel. Encouraging those who are not on this level to settle in Eretz Yisroel was and is perhaps a mistake. This is a radical statement, and many will react strongly to it. However, is it possible that part of the reason for what is going on in Israel today is a result of the fact that the vast majority of Jews living in Israel are not properly observant, and the statement quoted in Shema is being, G-d forbid, fulfilled? I am not the one to judge anyone else, but each person should look in the mirror and ask themselves if they are sure that they are spiritually elevated enough to live in Eretz Yisroel. As Reb Dovid said, "You just don't go to Israel." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:19:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:19:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? Message-ID: We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping that stringency. Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? KT Joel Rich From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:18:14 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:18:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? Message-ID: The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases (each iteration away from the primary source can cloud fine points, or Godel's incompleteness theorem at play?). I also see much more of the implicit sociological assumptions made over time (and wonder how we define the community [e.g., town, city, continent...] and time [every decade, exile...] that we measure). Two examples: 1) S"A O"C 153:12 (MB:76) discusses an individual who had a stipulation with a community to build a Beit Knesset (synagogue), it stays with him and his family but it's not transferable. Why not? "Mistavra" (it's logical) that that's what the community had in mind unless specifically stipulated differently at origination (me -- who measured? How?) 2) S"A O"C 153:18 (MB:95) concerning a private object (e.g., Menorah) used by the synagogue. Originally, the assumption was they became kodesh once used, however, "now" it's assumed that they remain totally private (as if this were the original stipulation). So how, when, and where did this change? Were the first people who acted this way sinners, but enough sinners makes it OK? KT Joel Rich From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:35:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:35:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17593052-ba12-6371-5050-960187b566d0@zahav.net.il> Yes we have heard this answer before, several times. Putting aside its multiple problems, it is basically rejecting the paper you linked, given that the paper's author supports the state albeit with several large reservations. You can't say that the aliya of the vast majority of people to Israel is a mistake and support the state at the same time. Ben On 6/14/2018 3:47 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if > one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the > exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D > forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong > deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be > on the right spiritual level before you go. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:36:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:36:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. ?Ben On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > > Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? > From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 14 15:07:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:07:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, micha at aishdas.org but it's smarter to be nice. http://www.aishdas.org - R' Lazer Brody Fax: (270) 514-1507 From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 14:18:33 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 21:18:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: , <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. > Ben ?1?/??? Which raises a question I?ve been thinking about lately. When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From zev at sero.name Thu Jun 14 15:39:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:39:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <76b76294-55ee-c10b-66b4-858544078685@sero.name> On 14/06/18 18:07, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the > : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to > : Eretz Yisroel... > > : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one > : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact > : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, > : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed > : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the > : right spiritual level before you go." > > This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It's much earlier than that. It's a Tosfos (Rabbenu Chaim, quoted in Tosfos, Kesubos 110b, sv Hu Omer). -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 22:37:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 07:37:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> Message-ID: <1d515cf4-41e6-53ed-9246-feaee76b81cd@zahav.net.il> I'd guess the latter - the Gemara is telling us you have to decide for yourself and that while the Gemara will give values and weight, it? leaves the final choice up to you. On 6/14/2018 11:18 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 15 01:27:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 04:27:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 06:07 PM 6/14/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the >: Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to >: Eretz Yisroel... > >: The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one >: does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact >: same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, >: in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed >: here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the >: right spiritual level before you go." > >This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. If so, then why are there Satmar Chassodim living in Israel? Are they all on a high spiritual level? And could it be that the Satmar Rebbe left Israel, for this reason? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmeisner at mail.gmail.com Fri Jun 15 05:27:58 2018 From: jmeisner at mail.gmail.com (Joshua Meisner) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 08:27:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > Question -- is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? On Jun 14, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Ben Waxman wrote: > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a > bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. The implication of this sugya is that given that one has made a neder, it is better not to keep it than to keep it. Clearly, it is not suggesting that one violate the neder but rather that one be matir it before a chacham. The meforshim provide different reasons why this is the case -- e.g., because the neder was made out of anger that would hopefully subside or because the neder is characteristic of ga'avah -- but a chumra taken on because a person perceives a need for a s'yag or similar reasons (or, for that matter, a neder bish'as tzarah) may not be what the gemara is referring to. Going back to RJR's question, to provide a few data points, while on the one hand offering a korban without making a neder is assur, one tanna used to be makdish his korban only after he brought it to the mikdash to avoid the possibility of stumbling. Not sure if these cases can be translated into nidrei issur. Josh From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 15 12:02:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 15:02:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Referring to "the holy month of Ramadan" In-Reply-To: References: <163fc9b81f2-c8f-124c4@webjas-vaa038.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180615190235.GA17319@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:18am EDT, Prof. Levine wrote on Areivim: : What about referring to the "holy month of Ramadan"? Aren't their : restrictions regarding what a Jew is allowed to do when it comes to : non-Jewish holidays? Interesting question... Yes, if Moslems are aku"m. But Islam is monotheistic. In fact, they're more pedantic about it than the Torah requires. E.g. Many Moslems believe that the Torah's use of "Yad Hashem" et al even acknowledging they are meant as metaphors shows Shaitan's alleged corruption of the text. So, it's not yom eideihem in the normal sense. For that matter, one might even argue that many versions of Ramadan observance are actually qadosh (in our sense of the word). They fast to learn self-discipline and empathy for those who are less fortunate, they give sadaqah to the poor (I'm bet you can guess that Arabic) and there is a point of having a nightly meal, iftar, in fellowship with the broader community, not alone or as a nuclear family. All values the Beris Noach would want them to be fostering. So, the previous intentionally provocative paragraph aside, is there really a problem talking about Ramadan or referring to it as they do, as "the holy month of"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The trick is learning to be passionate in one's micha at aishdas.org ideals, but compassionate to one's peers. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 12:09:48 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:09:48 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? Message-ID: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with whom did the PC disagree? Ben From hanktopas at gmail.com Sun Jun 17 18:49:29 2018 From: hanktopas at gmail.com (Henry Topas) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch Message-ID: Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in a din Torah pls? Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. Thank you and kol tuv, HT Sent from my iPhone From zev at sero.name Sun Jun 17 21:42:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:42:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? In-Reply-To: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> References: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 17/06/18 15:09, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. > In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered > putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim > on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with > whom did the PC disagree? The issue was the way he wrote about gedolei haposkim, especially the Bet Yosef. http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1640&pgnum=250 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 23:10:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 08:10:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] machloquet - good or bad Message-ID: <5c275a89-82ba-3763-db85-3c8663f1b5a9@zahav.net.il> Summary of a talk given on Shabbat and then my commentary: According to the Rambam, machloquet is a fashla, something we don't want. It started when students didn't properly learn from their teachers. Had they done so, Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai would not have had so many disagreements. Rav Kook and Rebbe Nachman had a much more positive approach to machloquet. According to RK, when say that talmidei chachamim bring peace to the world, it is because they know how to argue with someone yet respect him and his opinion. A talmid chacham knows how to be inclusive, how to allow for and even want other opinions. According to RN, machloquet is a reenactment of Creation. God created the world through tzimmzum, allowing space for others. When there is one opinion only, that opinion fills the entire space so to speak. When someone else comes up with a different opinion, the first person has to contract to allow room for the new idea. This in turn allows for even more opinions. Ad kan the class. Today we don't do machloquet very well or at least we struggle with it. We try and either destroy the other side or we say that the other position doesn't really exist. This week a rav made a statement about Rav Lichtenstein tz'l and his position regarding (a very minor) women's issue. The easiest thing to do if one wanted to know RL's opinion about something is to pick up the phone and ask his sons, his daughter, an extremely close talmid. Instead the rav simply heard something and made a conclusion. When he was shown that his conclusion was incorrect, he pontificated that RL really didn't accept the more liberal position, he simply gave in to pressure. Occam's razor says that if RL said something and did something, it is because RL believed that to be the right thing to do. There is no need to come up with any explanation. Simply accept that there is a machloquet in the matter. Similarly, there is a mechina whose rosh yeshiva said things about women's role in society which people in the left wing MO world don't accept. No one says that anyone needs to send their kid there, but to try and work to shut down the mechina? You can't accept that someone, who BTW probably agrees with the LW on a whole bunch of other subjects, differs with you? You want to shut them down? Come on people, get a grip. From yherczeg at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:15:11 2018 From: yherczeg at gmail.com (Yisrael Herczeg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:15:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Re: Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." ::This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It is also in the Tashbetz Kattan. Yisrael Herczeg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:53:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:53:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is One Required To Live In Israel? (Bava Batra 91a) Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NKZ2eR by Raphael Grunfeld. (Note: Raphael Grunfeld is a son of Dayan Dr. Grunfeld who translated the Horeb and other works by RSRH from German into English.) First, it is not universally accepted that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel. Rashi?s commentary on the Torah as understood by the Ramban implies that there is no obligation to live in Israel. Rabbeinu Chaim, one of the Tosafists of the twelfth century, states clearly that following the destruction of the Second Temple and the exile from Israel, there is no longer any requirement to live in Israel. The Rambam agrees with Rabbeinu Chaim and accordingly did not include living in Israel in his list of the positive commandments. In more contemporary times, the Rebbe of Munkatch, in his responsa Minchat Eliezer, endorses Rabbeinu Chaim?s position. The Rebbe of Satmar, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, points out that the Shulchan Aruch does not include the mitzvah of living in Israel in its code of law. The majority opinion prevailing in the halacha, however, follows the Ramban and maintains that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel today. Although it is preferable to live in Israel, there is no obligation to go. However, once you live in Israel, there is an obligation not to leave. In fact, the language used by the Ramban in his supplement to Sefer Hamitzvot is that ?anyone who leaves Israel? ? ?kol hayotze mimenah? ? is like an idol worshiper. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:56:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:56:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In just a few weeks, we will observe Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av. This particular Rosh Chodesh is always only one day long, and this year it happens to fall on Erev Shabbos. This means that when Shabbos occurs, Rosh Chodesh will be over. I want to discuss the ramifications of a person who begins Shabbos early in this situation. Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal. (I know that there are poskim who advise one to eat a kezayis of bread after tzeis, but they don't require it.) In my experience, mealtime goes much quicker when there are fewer people at the table. This past Friday, for example, I went to a very nice minyan, beginning Kabalas Shabbos and Maariv shortly after Plag, I took a leisurely stroll home, and despite our best efforts at taking our time through the meal, my wife and I were still ready for Birkas Hamazon a full five minutes before shkiah. In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? I don't recall ever learning about this particular situation. There is an analogous but very different situation that I *have* seen discussed, namely that of a Seuda Shlishit that begins on Shabbos Erev Rosh Chodesh, and continues into Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos. In that case, the poskim give a wide variety of answers, but (among the poskim who *don't* pasken to say both) it is not always clear whether their rule is to base oneself on the beginning of the meal, or the end of the meal, or the holier of the two days. Further, some of them make a distinction, paskening differently for one who is merely benching after tzeis but didn't actually eat after tzeis, as opposed to one who actually ate [food in general or perhaps bread specifically] after tzeis. All that is a good starting point for my situation, but it is only a starting point. A tremendous difference between the two cases is that in the more common case, the calendar day DID change during the meal, to some extent or another. But in the case that I'm asking about, the calendar day did not actually change, only that the people involved are doing the mitzvah of Tosefes Shabbos. To be more explicit: Imagine a couple that goes to an early minyan on Erev Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Av. They daven Maariv, make Kiddush, and say Birkas Hamazon, all before shkiah. Then, after benching but still before shkiah, imagine that the wife gives birth to a boy. This boy will have his bris milah a week later on *Erev* Shabbos, and his bar mitzvah will be on Rosh Chodesh. Is it possible that his parents should have omitted Yaaleh V'Yavo from Birkas Hamazon? Of course, I understand that the answer may depend on details like whether or not the meal continued after shika, or even past tzeis. But I am most curious about the simple case, where benching was before shkiah. And the other cases will perhaps flow from that one. Any and all sources are appreciated. Thanks in advance. (Disclosure: I have other questions about the calendar and a person who begins Shabbos early, but I'm starting with this one, and perhaps I'll open new threads later about the others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:10:57 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:10:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What to do with old pots Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I found an old set of pots in my parents' basement. They have not been used in many years. No one remembers if they were milchig or fleishig. I would like to use them for milchig. May they be kashered and used for milchig? A. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Commentary on Nidah 27a) writes the pots may be designated for meat or dairy without kashering. The pots have not been used in more than 24 hours. After 24 hours any taste that was absorbed in the pot becomes foul, and on a Torah level the pot can be used for meat or dairy without kashering. Nevertheless, there remains a Rabbinic obligation to kasher pots even after 24 hours have elapsed. However, in this case, we may apply the principal of ?safek d?rabbanan l?kula? (in cases of doubt that pertain to a Rabbinic prohibition one may be lenient). Additionally, Igros Moshe (Y.D. II:46) writes that if a utensil is not used for more than a year, there is an opinion that holds that it does not need kashering. Although we don?t follow this opinion, it can act as an additional mitigating factor. However, since one can avoid the doubt by kashering the pot, it is proper to do so. Although the Magen Avrohom (OC 509:11) writes that the custom is not to permit kashering a fleishig pot to use it for milchig, in this case kashering is acceptable since it is only a chumra (extra stringency). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 04:30:24 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:30:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder Message-ID: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don?t know the exact reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That?s only known by HQBH. However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah that you?ve taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 07:50:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:50:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Learning, Spirituality, and Neo-Chassidus In-Reply-To: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> References: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180618145018.GE28907@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 1:14pm, R Aryeh Stein wrote on Areivim: > Rabbi Shafran's letter to Mishpacha included the following paragraph: >> It's easy to say that a person has a relationship with Hashem wherever >> he is, regardless of what he is doing, but it's not true. Many of us break >> that connection through destructive habits and the like, and sugarcoating >> them doesn't make them any less destructive. "Feeling spiritual" may >> be better than feeling bad about yourself, as quoted in the article, >> but are we to be content with feeling spiritual? I think the real problem with R' Avi Shafran's article was picked up in the replies. It's not an either-or. Rather, people whose core learning is the regular gefe"s or shas-and-posqim aren't getting inspired by intellectual pursuit *alone* and are looking for a better connection to the emotional and experiential aspects of Yahadus. Addition, not replacement. The question is more: Are we content with thinking the right thoughts while being parched spiritually? > Rabbi Moshe Weinberger was very disturbed by this paragraph in which > Rabbi Shafran seems to state that one's relationship with God can be > severed if one engages in destructive behavior. > He didn't discuss this specific point in his response to Rabbi Shafran > that was printed in Mishpacha, but he dedicated two shiurim to > demonstrate that Hashem's love for every Jew is eternal and > unconditional (see links to shiurim below) At 03:59:40PM -0400, Zev Sero via Areivim wrote: : To Hashem's love may be unconditional, but the direct connection a : person has with Him can certainly be severed; that is what kares : means. See Igeres Hateshuvah ch 5-6: : https://tinyurl.com/y9hckn5t : https://tinyurl.com/y6wtghxf But on another level, I don't think a person or even an object can be fully severed from the Borei, because withough Or Ein Sof, there is no such thing as existing. This fits kareis as per the Rambam, that the onesh after misah is ceasing to exist. (Except that we would have to translate the Baal haTanya's "Or Ein Sof" language into the Rambam's chain of sikhliim.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:14:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:14:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180618151454.GF28907@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:49:29PM -0400, Henry Topas via Avodah wrote: : Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in : a din Torah pls? : Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. A to'ein is a plaintiff. Could you ever have a din Torah in CM without a to'ein and nit'an? Ah, just googled. I take it you mean a to'ein rabbani, a modern Israeli coinage in order to avoid calling someone an oreikh din, since the job was defined in a way so as to avoid violating "al ta'as atzmekha ke'orkhei hadayanim" (Avos 1:8). The Yerushalmi, Kesuvos 4:10 and BB 9:4 (same quote; both gemaros are short and it's easy to find the quote), says the issur in the mishnah is telling only one side the law when they're still trying to phrase their claim. See also Kesuvos 52b and the Ritva d"h "asinu". So, while I don't have a maqor for when it became normal to have to'anim rabbaniim, I would think the place to look is the earliest shu"t that explain how they're not orkhei din. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, micha at aishdas.org The end is near. http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Moshe Sherer Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:57:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:57:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms Message-ID: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> See "Hezekiahs Religious Reform -- In the Bible and Archaeology" on the Biblical Archeology Society web site at . Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to get rid of everything hidden in private homes. A large 9th-century horned altar was discovered [in Beersheba] -- already dismantled. Three of its four "horns" [rectangular projections on the four corners of the top of the altar] were found intact, embedded in a wall. Their secondary use indicates that the stones were no longer considered sacred. The horned altar was dismantled during Hezekiah's reign, which we know because some of its stones were reused in a public storehouse that was built when the Assyrians threatened Judah and was destroyed by the Assyrian army in 701.... Next we move to Lachish. The second most important city in Judah after Jerusalem, Lachish was a military and administrative center in the Judean hills.... In 2016, an 8th-century BCE cultic place at Lachish was uncovered next to the main city gate. Archaeologists have called this cultic place a "gate-shrine." In it were found two small horned altars, whose horns had been cut off and embedded in an adjacent wall. Further, a square toilet was found installed in the shrine but was never used. The toilet was more of a symbolic act of desecration (see 2Kings 10:27) -- part of Hezekiah's cultic reforms. The best candidate for the elimination [of these cultic sites and others] is King Hezekiah, who probably ordered the abolition of all official cultic sites. Only the Jerusalem Temple and small, household shrines were spared. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. micha at aishdas.org Life is about creating yourself. http://www.aishdas.org - George Bernard Shaw Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:48:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:48:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder In-Reply-To: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> References: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180618154848.GG28907@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 07:30:24AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don't know the exact : reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That's only known by HQBH. : However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah : that you've taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. To do a mitzvah Hashem obligated you in, yes. But one you've taken on yourself? I don't know. As for untuitiveness, see my 9/8/2001 post at . But it ties together why Hashem would command men in something He didn't command women to that mitzvah likely being of more value to a man, to the greater reward. A line of reasoning that doesn't apply to volunteerism. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten micha at aishdas.org your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, http://www.aishdas.org and it flies away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 18 12:50:21 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:50:21 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? On 6/18/2018 5:57 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's > portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the > archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to > get rid of everything hidden in private homes. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 12:13:52 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:13:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chukas Message-ID: <0955AA8C-8FE3-48BA-A965-3E9AA6A10782@cox.net> 1) Four Torah laws cannot be explained by human reason but, being divine, demand implicit obedience: a) to marry one's brother's widow (Deut. 25:5); b) not to mingle wool and linen in a garment (Deut. 22:11); c) to perform the rites of the scapegoat (Lev. 16:26, 34); and d) the red cow. Satan comes and criticizes these statutes as irrational. Know therefore that it was the Creator of the world, the One and Only, who instituted them. Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 19:8). 2) [Ch.19:1] "Hashem spoke to Moses and to Aaron saying:" Symbolically the cow came to atone for the sin of the Golden Calf, as if to say let the mother come and clean up the mess left by her child. If this be the case, this explains why the commandment was directed to Aaron, the one who made the calf. 3) [19:2] "Zot chukat ha-Torah...." This is the statute (also translated as "ritual law," or "decree") of the Torah......" This unusual expression occurs only once more in Bamidbar 31:21. The rabbis have commented that it should have said ?Zot chukat ha parah.? Why does it sound as if this chok is the whole Torah? There are several explanations such as only Jews can be ritually impure. A non-Jew cannot have tum?ah. Also, since a chok is incomprehensible, it is as if you have observed the whole Torah if you follow an irrational, illogical commandment. 4) The Midrash to this chapter focuses primarily on one paradox in the laws of the Red Cow: Its ashes purify people who had become contaminated; yet those who engage in its preparation become contaminated. I thought of a contemporary example of something that would appear just as paradoxical. Radiation treatment is used to treat many forms of cancer, and yet, the same radiation can cause cancer. For someone who has no knowledge of medicine, this would appear as irrational as the paradox of the Red Cow. In a similar vein, the Midrash notes a number of such paradoxical cases of righteous people who descended from wicked parents, such as Abraham from Terach, Hezekiah from Ahaz, and Josiah from Ammon. The Talmud adds the paradox that it is forbidden to drink blood, but an infant nurses from its mother, whose blood is transformed into milk to become the source of life (Niddah 9a). You won?t go broke if you follow the chok. But if you don?t keep trying, you?ll end up dying. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 12:24:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:24:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180618192417.GC12350@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:50:21PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, : had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real : reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split : with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have : been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira : in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? I dunno. Look at David haMelekh. He had what to do teshuvah for as well. (Yeah, yeah, I know, kol ha'omer David chatah... But let's look at the navi's presentation of David, if not the historical figure.) However, he owned his mistakes, did teshuvah. And indeed, excelled at singing shirah. It seems there is a big difference between someone who errs, but stays connected to the Borei through it all well enough to be moved to song, and someone who doesn't. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, micha at aishdas.org and after it is all over, he still does not http://www.aishdas.org know himself. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Jun 19 00:15:18 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:15:18 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive into a hostile Arab town? Ben From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 19 03:01:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 06:01:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive : into a hostile Arab town? I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, no? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 19 06:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Used Metal Pots Bought From a Non-Jew In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Q. I bought a set of used metal pots from a non-Jew. Do I kasher them first or do I tovel them first? A. Shulchan Aruch (YD 121:2) writes that one should first kasher the pot and afterwards immerse it in a mikvah. If one toveled the pot first before kashering, it is a matter of dispute among Rishonim whether the tevila was effective. The Rashbam (cited in Beis Yosef YD 121) writes that toveling a pot before kosherization is like immersing in a mikvah while holding a sheretz (unclean item) and the tevila is ineffective. However, other Rishonim disagree and maintain that tevila is a separate mitzvah and is not connected with kashering. The Shach (YD 121:5) writes that if one was to tovel a pot before kashering, tevila should be repeated without a bracha because of the uncertainty. Nonetheless, the Dagul Merivava writes if the pot had not been used in the past 24 hours, one may tovel before kashering. After 24 hours, the non-kosher taste that had been absorbed in the pot is ruined. At that point the absorbed taste is no longer similar to a sheretz. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 19 08:17:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:17:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <3cd91821-d660-3a72-164e-c3abb8aaf807@sero.name> On 19/06/18 06:01, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone > : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the > : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the > : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive > : into a hostile Arab town? > > I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, > no? I don't know the answer, and wouldn't dare try to pasken it, but I do see a big question. The person is in no danger now. He will be in danger only if he chooses to drive on Shabbos. Is it permitted to help him do so safely? Does it make you an accomplice to his avera? Does hal'itehu larasha' perhaps apply here? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ydamyb at mail.gmail.com Tue Jun 19 05:19:56 2018 From: ydamyb at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:19:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 6:17 PM Akiva Miller wrote: > Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and > begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal > before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal... > In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a > regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling > Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Akiva Blum From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jun 19 09:44:50 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 16:44:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10d8a9cc4d8f47e593bd2928a907b8fd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. -------------------------- I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you can daven maariv after plag-would he say if you did that you don't say retzeih if you ate later? BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 05:11:06 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 08:11:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some degree or another. Would they pasken the same way if the Seuda Shlishis was earlier, and - for whatever reason - he had davened maariv and said birkas hamazon on Saturday afternoon after Plag Hamincha? I concede that it is a bizarre example, but the boundaries of halacha are defined by exactly this sort of situation. It's not done nowadays, but a person *IS* allowed to daven maariv on Shabbos afternoon after Plag. If someone did so, and did it during seudah shlishis, and then chose to say Birkas Hamazon while the sun was still above the horizon on Shabbos afternoon, perhaps he should indeed say Retzeh? Perhaps not, but I'd love to know what a posek might say. Summary: The question in this thread concerns someone who is benching on Friday afternoon which is Rosh Chodesh but he already said the non-RC maariv. This is VERY analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday afternoon which is Shabbos but he already said the non-Shabbos maariv. It is NOT so analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday night and he already said the non-Shabbos maariv, and the only argument in favor of saying Retzeh is that the meal began on Shabbos. I just thought of another difference between Friday Rosh Chodesh and the situation cited by RAB. If a person davened Maariv during seuda shelishit - and presumably included Ata Chonantanu - then he has verbally and explicitly declared Shabbos to be over, and it would be contradictory to reverse this by saying Retzeh in the benching (even if the sun is still shining on Saturday afternoon). BUT: When someone says maariv on Motzaei Rosh Chodesh he merely omits Yaaleh V'yavo, and there is no explicit declaration that RC has ended, so perhaps he could still include Yaaleh V'yavo on Friday afternoon. [There would still be a problem of including both Retzeh and Yaaleh V'yavo in the same benching, but some poskim do allow that in the Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos situation.] Akiva Miller From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 20 13:47:08 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:47:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi S. R. Hirsch Takes On The Rambam Message-ID: My grandson Daniel Levine who is studying in Yeshiva KBY and I are in the process of reading RSRH's Nineteen Letters with the notes written by Rabbi Joseph Elias. Today we read part of letter 18. While I knew that RSRH criticizes the RAMBAM, I was surprised at how strong this criticism is. Some of what is in letter 18 is posted at https://goo.gl/o3uXdg Below is a sampling. "Pressure of the times demanded more: the underlying ideas of the Tanach and the Talmud were recorded in the aggados, but again, in a veiled form, requiring of the student an active effort on his part in order to grasp the inner spirit, which really can be passed down only by word of mouth." "However, not everybody grasped the true spirit of Judaism. In non-Jewish schools Yisrael's youth trained their minds in independent philosophical inquiry. From Arab sources they drew the concepts of Greek philosophy and came to conceive their ultimate aim as perfecting themselves in the perception of truth. Hence rose conflict. Their quickening spirit put them at odds with Judaism, which they considered to be void of any spirit of its own; and their view of life was in contradiction with a view that stressed action, deeds, first and foremost, and considered recognition of the truth to only be a means toward such action." And so the times brought forth a man of spirit who, having been educated within an uncomprehended Judaism as well as Arab scholarship, was compelled to reconcile this dichotomy within himself. By giving voice to the way in which he did this, he became the guide for all who were engaged in the same struggle. It is to this great man alone that we owe the preservation of practical Judaism until the present day. By accomplishing this and yet, on the other hand merely reconciling Judaism with the ideas from without, rather than developing it creatively from within, and by the way in which he effected this reconciliation, he gave rise to all the good that followed- as well as all the bad. His trend of thought was Arab-Greek, as was his concept of life. Approaching Judaism from without, he brought to it views that he had gained elsewhere, and these he reconciled with Judaism. Thus to him too, the highest aim was self-perfection through recognition of the truth; and the practical, concrete deeds became subordinate to this end. Knowledge of God was considered an end in itself, not a means toward the end; and so he delved into speculations about the essence of God and considered the results of these speculative investigations to be fundamental axioms and principles of faith binding upon Judaism. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ydamyb at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 21:34:54 2018 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:34:54 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, 4:46 p.m. Akiva Miller via Avodah, < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > R' Akiva Blum wrote: > > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. > > Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are > presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and > benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some > degree or another. > > Please see the MB 424:2 where he quotes the MA specifically about where one davened maariv while still day that he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. I wonder about a case where one said kabolas shabbos, then ate and davened maariv later. I would think that too would be sufficient. Akiva -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 21 03:56:40 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:56:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Timeless Rav Hirsch Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/ZEcnxP The writings of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (RSRH) deeply resonate with many people today, as they have since the time he penned them in the middle of the nineteenth century, using them to recreate a community of modern, Torah-faithful Jews in Frankfurt that had all but disappeared. Many find that, ironically, his words seem more suited for our times than when he composed them. He stands almost alone among commentators in dealing with many themes of modernity: cultural evolution; our relationships with non-Jews; the Jewish mission to the rest of civilization; freedom of the will versus determinism; autonomy and totalitarianism; understanding the impact of paganism on the ancient world. Of course, his treatment of symbolism. This web page contains links to commentaries on the parshios by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein based on the writings of RSRH. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 06:00:23 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:00:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: Perhaps the machmirim would say to respond, "It is Shabbat and it is assur to drive, so I cannot tell to how to go. BUT I will tell you this: Do not go on such-and-such a road, because it will take you through such-and-such a dangerous area." That would not be a problem by those who the OP refers to as machmirim, it seems to me. (Of course, personally, I would label Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as the machmir, and would use the response he suggests: "It pains me that you are driving on Shabbat, so to minimize the Chilul Shabbat, I will give you the very best directions...") Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 21:02:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:02:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. And R' Joel Rich asked: > I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent > and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you > can daven maariv after plag - would he say if you did that > you don't say retzeih if you ate later? This situation is raised by Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen in "The Radiance of Shabbos" (ArtScroll). He writes (pg 95?), "If one interrupts a prolonged meal to daven Maariv or recite Havdalah, he does not say Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon afterwards. If one merely said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, he should still recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon. Rabbi Cohen cites MB 263:67 that if one said "Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol" during the meal, it is a "Tzorech Iyun" whether he can say Retzeh. Then he cites Eliya Rabba 299:1, Petach Hadvir there, Chayei Adam 47:24, Kaf Hachayim Palagi 31, and Rav Moshe Feinstein all as saying that one *can* still say Retzeh, but that Shulchan Aruch Harav 188:17 says not to. Personally, I am surprised that so many poskim distinguish between Maariv/Havdala on the one hand, vs. Omitting Shem Umalchus on the other hard. Here is a situation which will illustrate this point: Suppose someone had a long seuda shlishis, and after Tzeis he said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, and then he actually did a melacha. Would those poskim still say that he should recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon? Akiva Miller From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 21 18:01:47 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 01:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Individualism? Message-ID: <6b39dd928de144b0ba94b9a16c4318c5@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Anecdotally, it seems to me I've seen an increase in "individualistic" practices across the orthodox spectrum [e.g., davening at one's own pace with less concern as to where the tzibbur is up to (shma, shmoneh esrai, chazarat hashatz . . .), being obvious about using a different nusach hatfila, wearing tfillin at mincha . . .] I'm curious as to whether others have seen this? If yes, any theories as to why? (e.g., outside world seeping in?) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Jun 22 13:51:26 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:51:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In Avodah V36n72 (to which I'm humming "Chai, Chai, Chai/Am Yisrael Chai" :)), RJR asked: > BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? < Iff we're considering when one ended the meal; but then you're comparing unlike items (BhM vs. Ma'ariv), not to mention that BhM is a Torah-level *mitzva* while Ma'ariv is .... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 23 19:24:37 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 22:24:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BALAK "JACOB'S TENTS, ISRAEL'S DWELLING PLACES, MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD" Message-ID: "How goodly are your tents, O Jacob; your dwelling places, O Israel." [Num. 24:5] Why the repetition? What does each of these terms [tents and dwelling places] represent? And furthermore, why is the first appellation used "Jacob" and the second one "Israel?" In addition to the sensitivity and modesty demonstrated by the arrangement of the tents and camps, the Sages (Sanhedrin 105b) expound that these terms refer to the habitats of Israel's spiritual heritage. Tents (Ohalecha), alludes to the study halls, and dwelling places (Mishk'nosecha), which is related to Shechinah, or God's presence, alludes to the synagogues and Temples (Sforno). Rav Kook has a novel interpretation. He says that the verse, which mentions tents first, reflects a lower level and hence, uses the name Jacob, the first and lesser name. However, the verse which mentions dwelling second, reflects a higher level. Thus, it uses the name Israel, Jacob's second and more elevated name. The reason Rav Kook considers "tents" to reflect a lower level and "dwelling places" a higher level is because the tent is inherently connected to the state of traveling. It corresponds to the aspiration for continual change and growth. The dwelling is also part of the journey, but is associated with the rests between travels. It is the soul's sense of calm, resting from the constant movement, for the sake of the overall mission (sort of a parallel to Shabbos). I delved into the gematria aspect of this and came up with some heavy, mystical stuff. The gematria for "Ohalecha Ya-akov" (your tents O Jacob) is 248. There are 248 positive mitzvot. The word 'Avraham' and 'bamidbar' (In the wilderness) is also 248, as is the phrase 'Kol Adonai Elohim' (the voice or sound of Hashem, God). The word 'romach' (spear) is also 248. Now to tie all this together-- Balaam had intended, in a manner of speaking, to use a 'spear' to harm the Jewish people and curse them 'in the wilderness.' However 'the voice of Hashem, God' caused Balaam to turn the negative to the positive, (symbolized by the 248 positive mitzvos). Thus when Balaam said "How goodly are your tents O Jacob," he was blessing the Jewish people completely right from 'Abraham.' The gematria for "Mishk'nosecha Yisrael" (Your dwelling places, O Israel) is 1,381. As Rav Kook said, this part of the verse was on a higher level. In Gen: verse 25 (last part) and verse 26 (first part) we have: "Vayar Elohim ki tov. Vayomer Elohim na-a-seh Adam b'tzalmeinue" ("And God saw that it was good. And God said: "Let us make man in Our image..."). The gematria for this is also 1,381 as is the word "Ha-ashtaroth" (the principal Phoenician goddess, the consort of their chief male deity, Baal). Though Balaam was steeped in idolatry ("Ha-ashtaroth"), when he pronounced the second part of the phrase, ("mishk'nosecha Yisroel") God 'saw that it was good.' And so, the "image of God" wins out! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 25 07:17:25 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:17:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Waiting After Some Cheeses Before Eating Meat Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I know that we are supposed to wait after eating certain cheeses, before we can then eat meat. After which cheeses should one wait, and what is the basis for this practice? A. The Rama (Yoreh Deah 89:2) writes that the custom is not to eat meat after eating hard cheese. The waiting time for this is equivalent to the amount of time that one waits after eating meat, before then eating dairy foods. (See Taz ibid. 89:4, Aruch HaShulchan ibid. 89:11, Chochmas Adam 40:13.) There are two reasons that one needs to wait after meat before then partaking of milk; these two reasons apply as well to eating certain cheeses after meat. The first reason is that of basar she?bein ha-shinayim ? meat that gets stuck between the teeth ? which takes a considerable amount of time to dislodge or disintegrate, before which one may not consume milk. (Rambam, Hilchos Ma?achalos Asuros 9:28) The second reason for waiting after eating meat is meshichas ta?am ? an aftertaste left in the mouth, due to meat?s fattiness; only after a substantial lapse of time does this aftertaste dissipate, whereupon one may then consume milk. (Rashi in Chullin 105a s.v. ?Assur?) Poskim apply both of these reasons to cheese: Hard cheese, due to its firm and brittle texture, is like basar she?bein ha-shinayim, and is termed gevinah she?bein ha-shinayim ? cheese that gets stuck between the teeth. One therefore needs to wait a considerable amount of time for such cheese to dislodge or disintegrate before then consuming meat. (Sifsei Da?as Yoreh 89:2) Also, cheeses that are very pungent and leave a noticeable aftertaste are like meat that has meshichas ta?am; one must wait for the aftertaste to dissipate before then eating meat. (Taz Yoreh Deah 89:4) Although some classical poskim argue as to whether one or both of the above rationales for waiting apply to cheese, contemporary poskim rule that both apply. The next installment of Halacha Yomis will discuss further details. View OUKosher's list of Aged Cheeses. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sun Jun 24 23:26:22 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:26:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] [Commentary] Rabbi Meir Soloveichik: Why Christians Are Reading the Rav In-Reply-To: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: [RET emailed me this under a subject line that began "Too long for Avodah thought you might be interested..." But I thought his reluctance was missplaced. I just held on to the piece for its own digest. -micha] Jun 20, 2018 The nature of the dilemma can be stated in a three-word sentence. I am lonely. - Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik In 2015, I was invited to a conference held at a Catholic University in Spain, celebrating the first Spanish translation of *The Lonely Man of Faith*, the seminal philosophical essay of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik (my great uncle), reverently referred to by many Orthodox Jews as "the Rav." Published 50 years earlier, the essay contrasts two biblical accounts of the creation of man and teases out two personas, known as Adam the First and Adam the Second. In the first chapter of Genesis, humanity is created in the image of God and instructed by the Almighty to "fill the world and subdue it." Adam the First, Rabbi Soloveitchik suggests, is majestic; through his God-like creative capacities he seeks scientific breakthroughs, to cure disease, to build cities and countries, to advance the health and comfort of mankind. But then there is Adam the Second, who in Genesis 2 is created from the dust of the earth and remains in the sanctity of the garden of Eden, "to work and protect it." This represents the religious aspect of man, man who is ever aware of his finitude, who finds fulfillment not in majestic achievement but in an intimate relationship with a personal God. These two accounts are given, Rabbi Soloveitchik argued, because both are accurate; both Adam I and Adam II are divinely desired aspects of the human experience. One who is devoted to religious endeavors is reminded that "he is also wanted and needed in another community, the cosmic-majestic," and when one works on behalf of civilization, the Bible does not let him forget "that he is a covenantal being who will never find self-fulfillment outside of the covenant." The man of faith is not fully of the world, but neither can he reject the world. To join the two parts of the self may not be fully achievable, but it must nevertheless be our goal. In his letter of invitation to the conference, the president of the Spanish university reflected on how Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings spoke to his own vocation. As a leader of a Christian school, he said he grappled constantly with the challenge of being an *hombre de fe* in a Europe that, once the cradle of Christendom, was now suddenly secular: As Adam the First understandably and correctly busies himself with the temporal concerns of this world, we encourage our students to not lose sight, within their own hearts, of Adam the Second, the thirsting Adam that longs for a redemption that our technological advances cannot quench. We hope that our students, who come to our university seeking degree titles that will translate into jobs, will leave it also with awakened minds and hearts that fully recognize the deep aspirations that lie within their youthful spirits, and which *The Lonely Man of Faith* so eloquently describes. The letter reflected a fascinating phenomenon. As Orthodox Jews mark this year the 25th anniversary of Rabbi Soloveitchik's passing, more and more of his works are being studied, savored, appreciated, and applied to people's own lives -- by Christians. As interesting as this is, it should not be surprising. *The Lonely Man of Faith* actually originated, in part, in a talk to Catholic seminarians, and today it is Christians who are particularly shocked by the rapidity with which a culture that was once Christian has turned on them, so that now people of faith are quite lonely in the world at large. In his essay, Rabbi Soloveitchik notes that though the tension between Adam I and Adam II is always a source of angst, "the contemporary man of faith is, due to his peculiar position in secular society, lonely in a special way," as our age is "technically minded, self-centered, and self-loving, almost in a sickly narcissistic fashion, scoring honor upon honor, piling up victory upon victory, reaching for the distant galaxies, and seeing in the here-and-now sensible world the only manifestation of being." Now that the world of Adam I seems wholly divorced from that of Adam II, people of faith seek guidance in the art of bridging the two; and if, 70 years ago, Reinhold Niebhur was a theologian who spoke for a culture where Christianity was the norm, Rabbi Soloveitchik is a philosopher for Jews and Christians who are outsiders. The Catholic philosopher R.J. Snell, in a Christian reflection inspired by the Rav's writings, wrote that "like Joseph B. Soloveitchik in *The Lonely Man of Faith*, I am lonely," and he tells us why: In science, my faith is judged obscurantist; in ethics, mere animus; in practicality, irrelevant; in love, archaic. In the square, I am silenced; at school, mocked; in business, fined; at entertainment, derided; in the home, patronized; at work, muffled. My leaders are disrespected; my founder blasphemed by the new culture, new religion, and new philosophy which...suffers from an aversion to the fullness of questions, insisting that questions are meaningful only when limited to a scope much narrower than my catholic range of wonder. Yet Rabbi Soloveitchik's thesis remains that even when society rejects us, we cannot give up on society, but we also cannot amputate our religious identity from our very selves. Adam I and Adam II must be bridged. This will not be easy, but a theme throughout Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings is that all too often religion is seen as a blissful escape from life's crises, while in truth the opposite is the case. In the words of Reuven Ziegler, Rabbi Soloveitchik insisted that "religion does not offer an escape from reality, but rather provides the ultimate encounter with reality." Traditional Jews and Christians in the West face cultural challenges to their faith -- disdain, scorn, and even hate -- but if the challenge is faced with fortitude, sophistication, and honor, it will be a religious endeavor worthy of being remembered. And as both traditional Jews and Christians face this challenge, it will often be as compatriots, in a fellowship that we may not have foreseen 50 years ago. After attending the conference, I was emailed by another member of the administration, the rector of the university. He thanked me "for the pleasure of sharing that deep friendship which is a sign of the community inspired by the principles of the second Adam," and added, "[I] really enjoyed the time we passed together and the reading of the book of Rabbi Soloveitchik," which was, he reflected, "so stimulating for a better understanding of my own life and my faith." To be a person of faith is indeed to be lonely in this world. But more and more, lonely men and women of several faiths may be brought together by *The Lonely Man of Faith.* From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:42:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:42:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627194234.GE22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:18:14PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand : the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic : sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's : underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases... This is why the Maharal (Be'er 1, ch 19 or so) says that the Tur is only usable because of the BY, and SA, because it comes with the suite of nosei keilim. Speaking after years of learning AhS daily... There is a strong feel for the flow of the pesaq and how each area of halakhah is reasoned through by going to Tur, BY, SA, nosei keilim, AhS. It could be the Maharshal too would be more bothered by the Yad than by the other codes, IFF once studies the Tur or SA (or MB) with the other texts that explain how we got there. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The worst thing that can happen to a micha at aishdas.org person is to remain asleep and untamed." http://www.aishdas.org - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:36:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:36:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627183655.GC22635@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 11:54:52AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At : the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking : against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi : comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas : keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same : question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A : Baal keri is prohibited from going there. Or to put it less obliquely... The pasuq there (Bamidbar 12:4) refers to their location as Ohel Mo'ed. But the idiom is not necessarily referring to the Mishkan. Moshe went to the Ohel Mo'ed to get nevu'ah *outside* the camp. (Shemos 33) It had a pillar of cloud at the door, not at a mizbeiach. In Bamidbar 11:16 we learn that the 70 zeqeinim, after getting ruach haqodesh at the Ohel Mo'eid, returned to the camp. The Sifrei Zutra where (Bamidbar 11) writes: And he set them round about the tent the tent for speaking which was outside the camp. They made two tents, a tent for service and a tent for speaking. The outer tent had the same dimensions as the inner one, and the Levites served in both with the wagons. Two ohel mo'eds, the mishkan, and the nevu'ah center. The Ohel Mo'eid in this story also has a cloud at the door. So, I would think it was Moshe's place of nevu'ah, not the Mishkan. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and micha at aishdas.org this was a great wonder. But it is much more http://www.aishdas.org wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a Fax: (270) 514-1507 "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:38:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:38:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627193824.GD22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:19:19PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency : greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? It depends why gadol hametzuveh ve'oseh. The accepted theory is that it's because the YhR chimes up when a prohibition -- issur or bitul asei -- is involved (what pop-psych would describe as the attractiveness of "forbidden fruit"), so so one gets greater sekhar for winning the greater battle. Lefum tzaara agra. In which case, the YhR would work against keeping a neder, and so one should get more sekhar for fighting that battle. I argued that it's that someone we are obligated to do is indeed obligated because we need its effects more than someone who isn't. In which case, no one *needs* the chumerah for basic development; because if they did, it would have been obligatory. Then there would be no added value for keeping the chumerah in terms of the substance of what he's doing, but there is added value to keeping a neder. Meanwhile, it's subject to the Chullin 2a: "Tov shelo tidor mishetidor velo meshaleim." (Qoheles 5:4) Utanya: Tov mizeh umizeh, she'eino nodei kol iqar. -- Divrey R' Meir. R' Yehudah omer: Tov mizeh umizeh, nodeir umeshaleim. The gemara then continues by limiting R' Yehudah to nedarim of "harei zu" not shavu'os of "harei alai". Which would appar to include maintaining a chumerah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:07:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:07:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah In-Reply-To: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> References: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180627180708.GB22635@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 03:51:17PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote: : ... : R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" : of "Torah lishmah" means. ... :> Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions :> :> We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing :> opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. :> :> 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion :> of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent :> generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to :> fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice :> was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind :> on this thought. :> :> 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing :> in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo :> [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, :> one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is :> learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] :> :> 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh :> means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to :> learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah :> is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- :> i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar :> with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must :> learn Torah in order to fulfil it. :> :> Support for these Positions :> :> All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the :> Rishonim. :> :> 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara :> in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir :> bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the :> commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, :> that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." :> :> 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text :> reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake :> of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, :> for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out :> of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of :> the Ba'al Shem Tov. :> :> 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] :> and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Along the lines of #3, Yesushalmi Beraikha 1:1 (vilna 1a), Shabbos 1:2 (vilna 7b): One who learns but not in order to do, would have been pleasanter that his umbilical cord would have prolapsed in front of his face and he never came into the world. The Meshekh Chokhmah, Devarim 28:61, explains this in terms of the idea that the soul learns Torah with a mal'akh before birth. Someone who wants to learn as an end in itself would have been better off staying with that mal'akh! And (citing the intro to Qorban Aharon) a soul that was not born is a seikhel nivdal who grasped his Creator. All that is being given up by being born. But, if one is learning al menas laasos, which one can only do after birth, then their birth had value. The other opinion in the Y-mi is that someone who is lomei shelo al means lelameid is better off not existing. Again, the MC, notes, because the point of learning is to bring it into the world. The MC also gets this from Sanhedrin 99b, where the gemara concludes that "adam la'amal yulad" is for amal peh -- speaking Torah. While the gemara doesn't say al menas lelameid is a definiition of lishmah, the transitive property would lead me to conclude that's the implication. Al menas and lishmah... can they be distinguished? And if not 4. Al menas laasos. (I have discussed this MC before. He ends up showing that in terms of priorities, one who is going somewhere to teach doesn't have to stop to do mitzvos maasiyos; but someoen who is actually learning (and not teaching) has to stop even for a hakhsher mitzvah (maasis). This is one of my favorite shtiklach; worth a look! (There is a complete copy with a bad translation scattered among .) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jun 29 11:07:36 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 18:07:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? Message-ID: >From OU Kosher Yomis Q. What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? A. Chazal, the Talmudic Sages, prohibited cheese that is not made under the special supervision of a Jew (Avodah Zarah 29b, 35a-b). Various reasons are advanced for this rabbinic prohibition, but the reason accepted by most halachic authorities is the concern for the use of rennet enzymes from the stomach flesh of neveilah/non-kosher animals. Unsupervised cheese is termed Gevinas Akum. Cheese is only permitted if it is Gevinas Yisroel ? Jewish-supervised cheese (Yoreh Deah 115:2). This rule is unrelated to the rules of Cholov Yisroel (Jewish-supervised milk) and Cholov Akum/Cholov Stam (milk not under Jewish supervision). Therefore, even if a person eats Cholov Stam dairy products, he may only eat Gevinas Yisroel cheese. According to the Rama (Yoreh Deah 115:2) and many other poskim, Gevinas Yisroel is obtained by the mashgiach visually supervising the incorporation of the enzymes into each vat of milk in the cheese-making process; this way, the mashgiach will verify that the enzymes are kosher. According to the Shach (ibid. 20) and many other poskim, the mashgiach must manually add the enzymes to each vat of milk in the cheese-making process. The Vilna Gaon (ibid. s. 14) provides the rationale for this: Gevinas Yisroel is similar to Pas Yisroel (bread with onsite Jewish involvement) ? just like Pas Yisroel means that a Jew actually participated in the baking process, so too does Gevinas Yisroel mean that a Jew actually participated in the cheese-making process. Contemporary poskim rule that the basic halacha follows the Rama, although kashrus agencies typically endeavor to fulfill the Shach?s requirement as well. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:00:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:00:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Game Theory and Bankruptcy Message-ID: <20180629190056.GA23432@aishdas.org> Nobel Laureate R/Dr Robert Aumann famously (in our circles) explained the distribution of funds in the mishnah on Kesuvos 93a. In that mishnah, a man left behind 3 wives -- but the case works for 3 debts in general. Whatever wife 1's kesuvah is worth in the mishnah would be the same as if 1 of 3 creditors were owed the same amount. It is the creditor version that is the topic of AhS CM 104:15. But it only holds in cases where the assets aren't real estate, or if the debts are loans without certified contracts, if all the debts' contracts have the same date -- in other words, in cases where one doesn't pay the oldest loan fast. Creditor A is owed 100 zuz, creditor B is owed 200 zuz, and creditor C, 300. And the debtor has left than 600 zuz to divide. The AhS notes that there is a minority opinion that would have them divide as we today would probably consider more intuitive -- proportionally. A gets 1/6 of the assets, B gets 1/3 (ie 2/6) and C gets 1/2 (=3/6). And in his day this was a common practice. So, while one may say this became minhag hamaqom and thus a tenai implicitly accepted when doing business or lending money, the AhS recommends that if the creditors assume this division, beis din seek pesharah and divide this way. However, iqar hadin is as per the mishnah. Which the gemara tells us is R' Nasan, and R' Yehudah haNasi disagrees. (Stam mishnah, and the redactor of mishnayos doesn't mention his own opinion???) The first 100z has three claims on it and is divided in thirds. The second 100z has two claims on it, and is divided equally between B & C. And whatever is left is given to C. What this means is that whomever has the biggest loan is most likely to absorb the loss. RRA explains this case in two papers. The first, aimed more at mathematicians, invokes the Game Theoretic concept of nucleolus. (R.J. Aumann and M. Maschler, Game Theoretic Analysis of a Bankruptcy Problem from the Talmud, Journal of Economic Theory 36, no. 2 (1985), 195-213.) In the second, written for people who learn gemara, he avoids all the technical talk. ("On the Matter of the Man with Three Wives," Moriah 22 (1999), 98- 107.) The second paper compares this mishnah to the gemara at the opening of BM, and derives a general rule, RAR saying that no other division in Qiddushin would follow the same principles as the 2 person division in BM. Here is an explanatory blog post on Talmudology blog ("Judaism, Science and Medicine"), by R/Dr Jeremy Brown. (The blog would particularly be interesting to someone learning daf who is interested in science or math.) The aforementioned AhS gives two sevaras for R' Nasan's position: The first is that the first division is taken from the beinonis (mid-quality property) of the debtor's or the estate's holdings. Therefore, it has to be divided separately from the rest of B & C's debt. Each has claim to the full 100z, so each gets equally. The second division is taken from the beinonis of what the person owned that the time he started owing B & C money, and if there is non left, from the ziburis (lesser quality). Again, different material, so it is divided without consideration to the remainder of the debt to C. merchandise. Therefore, it is accounted for separately The second explanation focuses on why this case is different than shutefus, where the shutefim do divide proportionally to their investments. The debtor's assets are entirely meshubadim to A just as much as to B or C. C can't get his 300z until A's 100z is accounted for, no less than the other way around -- each has full power to halt distribution of any of the man's assets. So the division is by shibud, which is equal. But with shutefim, the profit is clearcut. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late micha at aishdas.org to become the person http://www.aishdas.org you might have been. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - George Eliot From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Migo vs Chazakah Message-ID: <20180629194917.GA8106@aishdas.org> AhS 82:18 is a qunterus on migo. Looking at #6 (within se'if 18), RYMEpstein looks at two gemaros that discuss migo bemaqom rov -- BB 5a and Qiddushin 64. In BB, Raza"l say that while rov adif meichazaqah, this is not true for every chazaqah. Chezqas mamon outranks rov (you don't make someone pay up on a "probably"), because the mi'ut yeshno ba'olam, so we can't take something out of his hands -- maybe he is of the mi'ut. This is true even though chezas haguf adif mechezqas mamon and migo adif meichezqas haguf. So chazaq IOW: rov > migo rov > chezaqa chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon So rov > chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon But chezqas mamon > rov -- where mi'ut yeshno be'olam, without bitul Acharei rabim lehatos is a case of bitul, so if the majority of dayanim rule that the nit'an has to pay up, that rov does trump chezqas mamon. Hoserver the gemara in R' Nasan says: "Mah li leshaqer?" ki chazaqah dami. Lo asi chazaqah ve'aqrah chazaqah legamrei. (R' Nasan shows up in two of my posts in a row!) Migo doesn't trump chazaqah, because assuming a person wouldn't give that particular lie is itself a chazaqah. Which is it? Another related issue that confuses me is what kind of chazaqah is a chezqas mamon: One could say it's a chazaqah demei'iqara -- preserving the status quo of who has the money. One could say it's a chazaqah disvara -- normally property belongs to the person holding it. Now, say the to'ein is tofeis the money he claims. This can at times work, because it shifts which is hamotzi meichaveiro when they get to BD. However, we know this is a normal case of the person holding the money, we know how he got it. So how would my chazaqah disvara apply? OTOH, it's not your usual case of presrving the old halachic state, because everyone agrees that before the dispute, the property was the nitan's. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger How wonderful it is that micha at aishdas.org nobody need wait a single moment http://www.aishdas.org before starting to improve the world. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anne Frank Hy"d From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jun 30 21:01:59 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? Message-ID: Naaah, of course he was not Jewish. The subject line was just to get your attention. But then again.... I would not have surprised me if Bil'am had said, "I can't do what my god doesn't let me do." After all, religious people of *any* religion generally refrain from going against the will of their god. Likewise, I would not have been surprised if he said, "I can't do what Hashem doesn't let me do." He is a professional, and he knows the rules of the game (most clearly seen in maftir). He knows who he is dealing with, and if he is trying to curse the Jews, it would be a good idea to follow the rules of the Jewish God. But Bil'am didn't say either of those things. What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase. There have been plenty of polytheists who accept the idea that there are many gods, One of them being Hashem, the God of the Jews. But in this pasuk, we see that Bil'am goes beyond accepting Hashem as *a* god - he accepts Him as "my God". I checked my concordance and found about 50 cases in Tanach of the phrase "Hashem Elokai", spelling "Elokai" with either a patach or a kamatz. It seems that this was the ONLY case where this phrase was used by a non-Jew. Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Sat Jun 30 22:44:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 01:44:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180701054415.GA28439@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 12:01:59AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me : do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase... : Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding : has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply : spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now : it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not : have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I : guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. This works well with my recent (few minute old) blog post. I argue that the whole point of Bil'am might have been to illustrate how monotheism and deveiqus don't guarantee being good people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Aspaqlaria Bil'am the Frummy by micha ? Published 18 Tammuz 5778 - Sun, Jul 1, 2018 Sun, Jul 1, 2018 The Medrash Tankhuma (Balaq 1) says: And if you ask: Why did the Holy One blessed be He, let his Shechinah rest upon so wicked a non-Jew? So that the [other] peoples would have no excuse to say, `If we had nevi'im, we would have changed for the better', He established for then nevi'im. Yet they [these nevi'im] broke down the moral fence of the world... For that matter, the Sifrei says on the last pasuq of the Torah: And another navi did not arise again in Israel like Moshe: In Israel, [another] one did not arise, but among the nations of the world, one did arise. And who was it? Bil'am ben Be'or. So here you have a prophet with the abilities of Moshe (whatever they meant by that) and yet he was no paragon of moral virtue. He didn't teach them how to lift themselves up, but how to corrupt the Jews. So how does that address the complaint of the nations? They had their navi, but they said it was unfair that they didn't have nev'i'im to give moral instruction -- and Bil'am wasn't capable of leading them in that way. Perhaps Bil'am stood for them as an example to teach them just that point. The nations are described as complaining that if they only had a navi they would have been as good as the Jews. But Bil'am was there to show them nevu'ah wasn't the answer. Even being a navi and having the Shechinah rest upon them is not sufficient to make an ideal person. The whole detour into telling us about an event in the lives of Balaq and Bil'am is such a departure from the rest of the Torah, it is considered a separate book. "Moshe wrote his book and Parashas Bil'am" (Bava Basra 14b) So why it it included? Based on the above suggestion, the section teaches us about the dangers of frumkeit. We can get so caught up in the pursuit of deveiqus, one's personal relationship with G-d, one can end up as self-centered and honor-seeking as Bil'am. We need to start out pursuing moral and ethical behavior, ehrlachkeit, and then the connection with the Divine can be harnessed to reach those goals. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 30 21:01:27 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pinchas Message-ID: <56A42568-E095-442F-A19F-017F306492C3@cox.net> ?Pinhas? has turned back Chamasi, my wrath, from the people of Israel.? (Num.25:11) Pinhas has proven his unusual power to turn back God?s wrath from Israel through a very courageous, difficult and controversial act. The Vilna Gaon brilliantly observes that in the word chamasi (my wrath), the two outside letters ches and yud read chai ? life ? while the inside letters mem and sav read meit ? death. The hidden meaning is that by Pinchos facing squarely what has taken place on the outside, he has miraculously turned back the wrath of the Almighty. In doing so, he has removed death (meis) from the inside, replacing it with life (chai). Why do we pray with a set text? An opinion recorded in the Talmud states that prayers correspond to the daily sacrifices offered in the Temple which are mentioned in this coming week's portion of Pinchas. (Numbers 28:4) It has been argued that this opinion may be the conceptual base for our standardized prayer. Since sacrifices had detailed structure, so too do our prayers have a set text. If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 08:09:35 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 01:09:35 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: This year's incarnation of the Gebrochts discussion attempts to discuss the Halacha and I think traverses territory not clearly enunciated in the past. Also I would not characterise this as Gebrochts-bashing; I dont believe anyone is troubled by those who say, "My Rebbe/My tradition is not to eat whatever it may be" the issue is that Gebrochts is promoted as Halachically legitimate and therefore preferred if not mandated. The ShA HaRav declares firstly, that as far as the Halachah is concerned, there is no concern with Kneidlach during Pesach, see the link - http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=25074&st=&pgnum=486 He does however advise that it is a valid stringency his first observation/proof however is that flour can be found on the surface of the Matzos and later on says this is quite common However, A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years B] no other Posek ever verified this claim this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within the finished Matza - but C] there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already been made D] even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link provided - It is universally accepted these days that flour is not added to a dough already made and there is no Matza baking program that permits adding flour to the already made dough Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 18:30:38 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 21:30:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The not-Korban Pesach Message-ID: I had asked: : It has come to me attention recently that the Torah never refers to : the Pesach as a Korban... : My question is this: Whatever reason it was, why the Torah avoided : using that word in this context ... why did Chazal feel differently? Upon further research, it seems that my question was based on the *mistaken* assumption that the Pesach was unique in this regard. It turns out that while the Torah does use the word "korban", it never uses phrases such as "Korban Tamid", "Korban Todah", or "Korban Musaf". These were referred to simply as the Tamid, the Todah, and the Musaf, just as the Pesach was. Apparently, construction of the phrase came much later, and was applied to them all. Exception: The "Korban Mincha" is mentioned three times in Vayikra 2, but that would change the whole question drastically. I should also clarify: these phrases aren't missing only from the Torah, but from the whole Tanach. They seem to have arisen after the Tanach. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sun Apr 1 20:40:08 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 23:40:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b27445d-5dde-c27e-a809-871e12258604@sero.name> On 01/04/18 11:09, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years Who is "we"? > B] no other Posek ever verified this claim > this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within > the finished Matza - but > > C]? there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not > thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product > the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already > been made Perhaps you mean no *other* posek, because this one clearly says it. It's no surprise that nobody before him mentions it, because he says it's a recent phenomenon. > D]? even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link > provided - This is a bizarre claim. The teshuvah "admits" no such thing. First of all, the footnote is obviously not part of the teshuvah, not by its author, and thus completely irrelevant to anything. Second, the footnote does not "admit" such a thing either. It brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 1 21:12:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 06:12:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions, one that basically is an exception that proves the rule and the other is a real exception. 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. 2) Powered chalav nochri. Labels here are supposed to state that a product containts powered chalav nochri (if it does). This was the result of a lawsuit.? I guess that no one wants to start listing every possible kula that goes into a food product. OTOH? if meat isn't halaq, labels generally don't state it. They only state the meat's halaq status if it is halaq. Ben On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: > I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the > lines to fine, or it becomes unusable. Once it's certifying a product > as lacking qitniyos, it might as well stick to avoiding all qitniyos > rather than having a confusing (to some) explanation on each package > which minhagim can or can't use the product. > > The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that > in a number of ways. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 1 18:58:35 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 21:58:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which >is eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give >his full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are >15,000 Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. Have patience and watch developments. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 2 07:10:57 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:10:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 01/04/18 21:58, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >> I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which is >> eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give his >> full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are 15,000 >> Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. > > Have patience and watch developments. Do you claim prophecy, or are you breaking silence on some vast and hereto unsuspected conspiracy? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 3 08:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180403150030.GA23693@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 06:12:23AM +0200, Ben Waxman wrote: : On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: :> I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the :> lines to fine, or it becomes unusable... :> The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that :> in a number of ways. : I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions... I think what I said is really particular to the US, or maybe chu"l as a whole. Where people who keep kosher will suffer with less, and people who don't won't care what has a hekhsher and what doesn't. Few people will make a less observant choice if an Amerucan hekhsher chooses to be more machmir than their own minhagim require. Non-Mehardin rabbanut has a strong motive away from least common denominator. They have a responsibility to a large population that will buy with a hekhsher IFF and only if the sacrifice is not too onerous. : 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that : they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that : proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any : case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically : stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. I recall the marshmallows sold in the US with a long explanation as to why the mei qitniyos they contain are a non-issue. Tha candy with a teshuvah on every wrapper. (Even better than Laffy Taffy or Bazooka Joe!) Unfortunately, they all have the same one. Pretty much the same thing. But didn't work in the US in the long run, as the rightward drift continued. :-)||ii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 3rd day micha at aishdas.org in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Chesed: What is perfectly Fax: (270) 514-1507 balanced Chesed? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 3 21:58:05 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:58:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin Message-ID: One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, he does this privately, since the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was sitting up front without wearing tefillin. When I asked his brother, who does put on tefillin during Chol Moed, about this, he told that the rabbi put on tefillin during Chol Moed until he married. "Our minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed," he said. My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in the ladies section. Thus I do not understand how the rabbi of the shul that I davened in yesterday could sit up front facing everyone without wearing tefillin. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 06:28:11 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:28:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Professor L. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 12:58 AM > My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them > in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put > on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should > not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in > Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in > the ladies section. This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom came from different places with different minhogim. According to halokho, what the acharonim say about wearing t'fillin or not halakhically does not apply here. Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where there was a mnhag hamokom. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 4 07:44:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:44:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin References: Message-ID: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 09:28 AM 4/4/2018, Mandel, Seth wrote: >This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." >But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from >Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom >came from different places with different minhogim.... >Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where >there was a mnhag hamokom. If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 08:07:12 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 15:07:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: , <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: From: Prof. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 10:44 AM > If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section > than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin > can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section Any shul has the right to set up its own rules, and anyone who davens there has to follow its rules. That is also halokho. Even if they were to make a rule, for instance, that one must wear green on Chanukka. Or that the shul must say the prayer for the State of Israel. But to claim that it is halokho that in America people who daven with t'fillin may not daven together with people who do not is wrong. There is no such halokho in America. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 4 20:58:28 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 05:58:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6b0af463-987c-0e3e-d5a2-27cb630b86ba@zahav.net.il> On 4/4/2018 6:58 AM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is > to put on tefillin during Chol Moed,? he does this privately,? since > the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. > > > Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin > during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was > sitting up front without wearing tefillin.? When I asked his brother . > . . . . > Wouldn't the rav in question be the proper person to ask? ?Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at mail.gmail.com Wed Apr 4 23:46:31 2018 From: meirabi at mail.gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: The ShA HaRav does not initiate this ban on Gebrochts as his own, rather he bases himself upon the propositions of Poskim which we are now exploring, and it seems that they actually do not support the proposition to create a ban against Gebrochts. A] The observation made by the ShA HaRav, which is central to his anti-Gebrochts argument - is un-supported. Our Poskim and our personal experience, has verified that there is no such thing as flour being found on the surface of baked Matza. B] The ShA HaRav does not issue his own assessment [other than observing flour on the surface of baked Matza] but relies upon other Poskim to support the proposition that flour remains within the finished Matza. However, no such thing is found in the Poskim, other than in situations where flour is added to a dough which is ALREADY formed. No Posek ever suggested that a normal dough may not be thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product. And the ShA HaRav admits this by saying that nowadays the dough is made very hard, dry, with very little water i.e. it is not surprising that Poskim have not discussed this as it is a concern that is due only to this recent change. But no other Poskim from his time endorsed the reasoning that flour is found on the surface of baked Matza etc. C] it is surprising to hear a devoted Chabadnik suggesting that the footnotes found in the KeHos, the official Chabad publishers' publication - are completely irrelevant to the Teshuvah. There are 2 versions to understanding note 33 on the link provided = here is the gobbledigook version - "it brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions" = here is the plain speak version - "this is the best we can find to support the proposition" which is, however which way you turn it, no support at all for this new concern of flour remaining within the baked Matza. One can hardly but suspect that the footnote was added because the Taz and MaAv that the ShA HaRav next refers to, is no support at all for banning Gebrochts, because their observations are exclusively applicable to thick soft Matzos that were under suspicion of having had flour added to the dough during its kneading - and as we mentioned - this had already been comprehensively stamped out by the times of the ShA HaRav. Remember, they were kneading soft dough for soft Matza and it was quite likely that the dough may have been a little too loose and one would be tempted to add more flour to it. So there we have it - if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not - then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha - then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Apr 7 20:38:51 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 23:38:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Isru Chag Message-ID: <64A81636-64D4-4FF1-B35D-C25381E32A1C@cox.net> The gematria for Isru Chag is 278, the same gematria for l'machar found in Bamidbar, Ch.11, vs.18. This is in the Sidra, Beha'alotch, where God has Moshe establish a Sanhedrin because Moshe complained that he could not carry on alone. God says to Moshe: "To the people you shall say, 'Prepare yourselves for tomorrow and you shall eat meat..." There is an interesting tie here. The day after a festival is the "morrow" and even though the holiday is over, we must always be preparing ourselves. As a matter of fact, in counting the omer, we are preparing ourselves for mattan Torah in 50 days. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Sat Apr 7 21:15:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 14:15:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 "Rabbi Meir G. Rabi" wrote: > So there we have it -- if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your > parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o > Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and > enjoy Pesach Is RMG Rabi's post on Gebrokts consonant with the comment of the Mishna Brura. The Chafetz Chaim stated that even though one may have doubts as to the Halachic imperative of being careful (yes, perhaps needlessly) about Matza Shruya, nevertheless, "one should not be MAZNIACH [translate as you will] those who have this Chumra" In particular, it seems to me that the practice of actually keeping Shruya is very much in line with many other Chumras that people have. Consider Garlic on Pesach, for example. I would posit that today the chance of garlic inducing Chametz is akin to itinerant matza flour being present on a baked Matza. Nonetheless, those who have this Chumra, keep it. They keep it because of the Minhag to be Machmir on Pesach! That Minhag, by its nature is concerned with the infinitessimal. There are many other examples. The Belzer don't eat carrots because of a Chametz incident. They were Machmir from then on. Lubavitchers has an incident with sugar and were Machmir from then on to pre-cook it. Halacha on Pesach does admit the concept of remote Chumras! Yes, for those who look at things from a non Pesach purist halachic view, may well scratch their heads. Nonetheless, the Chafets Chaim taught us that we should not be Mazniach. The idea that Pesach cannot be enjoyed without Kneidlach is fanciful, and not directly born out by plain Halacha. The Halacha specifies Meat and Wine as primary inputs from Gashmiyus food that give rise to happiness. Yes, B'Sar Shlomim (not chicken) and wine (good enough for Nisuch Hamizbeach?) To state "if you are CONCERNED about Halacha... eat Kneidlach" is perhaps a worse actualisation than "Mazniach" as it implies that such people are acting in perhaps some antinomian-like chassidic voodoo practice. [ One can argue quite cogently, for example, that wearing a Gartel today is also "not in line with the Halacha". (We wear underpants!) We do not, however, dismiss such practices. [On Shruya see also Gilyoney Hashas from Rav Yosef Engel Psachim 40b]] The Ari z'l stated that he would never 'talk against' a minhag yisrael/chumra on Pesach. In summary, and I've felt that RMG Rabi, Halacha is not a pure science which leads to a true/false conclusion for every question that is investigated using the rules of the Halacha. Admission: My father a'h had the Minhag from his family (likely via Amshinover fealty) not to eat Gebrokts. This is Toras Imecha for me, especially on Pesach, and whilst I know that in general this practice is unique to families who follow the minhogim of the Talmidei HaBaal Shem, and is most minor, I state quite openly that deciding NOT to follow a family minhag/chumra on Pesach would be FAR more upsetting and disturbing to me than not eating Kneidlach. I'm happy to wait for the last day, and for the record, I am not a fan of them, despite my wife being a superlative cook. Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a "hot dog roll". "It is only the anticipation of redemption that preserves Judaism in Exile, while Judaism in the Land of Israel is the redemption itself." Rabbi A.I. Hacohen Kook From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 8 05:55:41 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 12:55:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent actions of Simcha Felder. >From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv "Using his leverage as the swing vote in the divided State Senate, Sen. Simcha Felder appears to have strong-armed a provision into the budget that significantly changes state oversight of yeshiva curricula, political observers say. " I have talked to some people who live in Willimsburg, and the picture they paint of the level of secular education in Hassidic yeshivas is not a good one. One Satmar woman who lives in Williamsburg told me that her sons received no secular education in the Satmar yeshiva they attended. For the record NYS law requires that all children receive a secular education. What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf R. Barukh Schick of Shklov (d. 1808): When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . . . He urged me to translate into Hebrew as much secular wisdom as possible, so as to cause the nations to disgorge what they have swallowed, making it available to all, thereby increasing knowledge among the Jews. Thus, the nations will no longer be able to lord it over us-and bring about the profaning of God's name-with their taunt: "Where is your wisdom?" R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. I:Iayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, 6 through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash. The Gaon of Vilna's sons: By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... 8 First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): I cannot refrain from repeating a true and astonishing story that I heard from the Gaon's disciple R. Menachem Mendel. . . . 10 It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. This included its inner and outer manifestations. He explained: All secular wisdom is essential for our holy Torah and is included in it. He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. He especially praised music, explaining that most of the Torah accents, the secrets of the Levitical songs, and the secrets of the Tikkunei Zohar could not be comprehended without mastering it. ... He explained the significance of the various secular disciplines, and noted that he had mastered them all. Regarding the discipline of medicine, he stated that he had mastered anatomy, but not pharmacology. Indeed, he had wanted to study pharmacology with practicing physicians, but his father prevented him from undertaking its study ,fearing that upon mastering it he would be forced to curtail his Torah study whenever it would become necessary for him to save a life. . . . He also stated that he had mastered all of philosophy, but that he had derived only two matters of significance from his study of it. . . . The rest of it, he said, should be discarded. To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw for this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 8 05:22:36 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 08:22:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Message-ID: <9ABBE35B-0F5B-4CD1-917D-550FD3E33394@cox.net> 9:1 "Vay'hi bayom hashemini..." The Sages teach that the word "vay'hi" often indicates that trouble or grief is associated with the narrative (Megillah 10b). What trouble or grief could there have been on that joyous first day of Nissan? It presages the tragic deaths of Aaron?s sons, Nadav and Avihu. Another explanation: Even in the midst of our greatest rejoicing, a Jewish wedding, we pause for a moment to recall the destruction of the Temple and the fragility of life through the breaking of the glass. Here, too, we have such a happy occasion, but the "Vay'hi" is to remind us of our fallibility and the frailty of life. There are many commentaries on Aaron?s response when told of his sons' deaths: Vayidom Aharon, ?and Aaron was silent.? It is somewhat coincidental that the third syllable of vayidom sounds a little like the English word ?dumb.? One of the literal meanings of the word ?dumb? is mute and unable to speak. It seems to me that Aaron?s silence was his inability to speak due to shock. Many people would faint dead away if told of such news. So it really isn?t surprising that his reaction was one of a deafening silence. When two egotists meet "It's an I for an I" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 8 12:08:57 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2018 21:08:57 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rabbis Ben Nun, Sherlo, and Rimon have come out strongly against the wheat substitutes and feel that they should be banned. In their opinion, the primary reason for the kitniyot minhag is to prevent mixing up the various grains. Eating these types of products will lead to the same confusion. Ben On 4/8/2018 6:15 AM, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: > Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they > essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and > pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are > quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a > "hot dog roll". From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 07:29:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 10:29:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180409142919.GG25254@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 12:55:41PM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects : in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent : actions of Simcha Felder. : : From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv ... : What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular : studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept : only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time : studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, rather than the one you're critiquing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 07:54:47 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:54:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: Message-ID: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:29 AM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with >the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? > >You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh >in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, >rather than the one you're critiquing. And what do you do with the GRA's statement When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . simply ignore it? This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech cannot go against the facts. Also from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf Friesenhausen's critique, however, was hardly confined to the left; he also had to contend with the right: I appeal especially to all those who fear God and tremble at His word, that they not heed the false claims of those who plot against secular wisdom . . . , unaware that those who make such claims testify against themselves, saying: "We are devoid of Torah, we have chosen folly as our guide." For had the light of Torah ever shone upon them, they would have known the teaching of R. Samuel bar Nachtmeni at Shabbat 75a and the anecdotes about Rabban Gamaliel and R. Joshua at Horayot 10a. Also, they would have been aware of the many talmudic discussions that can be understood only with the aid of secular wisdom. Should you, however, meet a master of the Talmud who insists on denigrating secular wisdom, know full well that he has never understood those talmudic passages whose comprehension is dependent upon knowledge of secular wisdom. . . . He is also unaware that he denigrates the great Jewish sages of the past and their wisdom, as well. Worst of all are those guilty of duplicity. They speak arrogantly in public, either to appease the fools and gain honor in their eyes, or out of envy of the truly wise, disparaging those who appreciate secular wisdom, yet in their hearts they believe otherwise. See in the above link the Chasam Sofer's evaluation of Rabbi Friesenhausen. He was indeed a talmud Chacham. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 08:17:47 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:17:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:54:47AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : And what do you do with the GRA's statement .... : simply ignore it? Yes, that's exactly what the Chassidim who run the mosedos in question do with many of the Gra's statements. Why would it surprise anyone if they ignore this as well? As for me, as in your question, "what do you do", that's an entirely different issue. : This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree : with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech : cannot go against the facts. It may be more productive to ask about 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on and 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. Being surprised when Chassidim don't see the world the way the Gra did isn't really useful or warranted. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 11:28:06 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 14:28:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 1144 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 13:30:59 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:30:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180409203059.GB4975@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is : not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with : what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find : that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Or any of a million other things someone who disagrees with the Gra might suggest. A few years back there was a storm, and my son's grade school rebbe ended up losing a son to a downed power line. The friend who tried saving the son died immediately. The boy lingered for about 2 weeks. We attended the levayah. The father was proud that his young son went to his Maker pure, unsullied even by learning the alphabet. Alef-beis, yes, the child knew; but they hadn't yet begun the English alphabet. Not a sentiment I would share. In fact, hearing it from a rebbe who taught my son in a MO school, I found it kind of startling. But it's a perspective. And if it fosters accepting ol malkhus shamayim and ol mitzvos, raising children who are "ohavei H', yir'sei E-lokim, anshei emes, zera qodesh..." who am I to say it's not the right answer for someone else? :> It may be more productive to ask about :> 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on :> and :> 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. : Rabbi Dr. Shnayer Leiman, who wrote the article from which the : quotes come... I meant in each point something different than what your responses reflect. To spell out further: 1- The reports that lead you to believe the norm for secular education in chassidishe chadorim today is actually as weak as you believe. Rather than the likelihood that the more extreme stories are the ones more often reported. They could all fully be true, and yet not reflect the experiences of a statistically significant number of American students. Or perhaps they do. I would want statistics, not anecdotes, before judging. For example, I did not notice it any easier to teach Sukkah 7b-8a "sukkah ha'asuyah kekivshan" and the diagonal of squares vs circles or their areas to MO Jews who weren't themselves in STEM fields than to American chareidim. And if things were so bad, how do so many end up "in computers", if not in a job that requires as much post-HS education as mine? 2- How do they understand those "facts" about needing limudei chol to succeed in limudei chodesh. Which of the numerous possible responses I refered to in response to the first snippet in this email they actually believe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 15:12:48 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 18:12:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:30 PM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: >: One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is >: not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with >: what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find >: that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... > >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 15:31:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 18:31:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409223134.GD12000@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:48PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's : >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. : : Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" : is learning? I hope not. I am implying that it is valid for the chassidim whose school you are critiquing to believe so. And yes, they probably believe that the Gra's hisnagdus was an error caused by his exposure to the wrong set of ideas. They *certainly* believe that of RYBS. (Or at least did in his lifetime. I see an "acharei mos - qedushim" effect currently going on with RYBS's memory.) As I wrote, I am defending the position in an eilu va'eilu sense. It is not a position to which I personally subscribe, nor could subscribe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com Mon Apr 9 23:17:53 2018 From: rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com (Rabbi Meir Rabi) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:17:53 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Gebrochts - MInhag but absolutely no foundation in Halacha Message-ID: My Gebrochts postings have been to clarify one point - it is wrong to claim that Gebrochts is Halachically mandated or justified and points to anything other than a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition. and I do thank RIB for his query to which the answer is a firm NO - my observation - [if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach] - is in no manner a violation of, "one should not be MAZNIACH [ridicule] those who have this Chumra" IF they do not eat Gebrochts FOR THE RIGHT REASON i.e. a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition BTW - I do not see this in the ChCHayim, pity RIB did not provide sourcing But it is in the ShTeshuvah [460:2] - Nevertheless those who wish to sanctify themselves by refraining from that which is permitted - soaked and cooked Matza, even that which has been [baked hard] and ground [again referring to the corrected practice of making Matza meal from thinner hard baked Matza and NOT from thicker soft Matza which was grated on a Rib Ayzen, and at greater risk of being underbaked and Chametz] - should not be ridiculed. RIB has not suggested any argument to associate not eating garlic during Pesach with Gebrochts, and I have no idea what makes one Chumra IN LINE with other Chumras. Neither do I understand the significance to our discussion/disagreement. We both urge those who do not wish to eat Gebrochts/Garlic etc because their parents etc did not - to keep their tradition. However, the natural corollary is - that IF you DO NOT have such a custom - then eat them and enjoy Pesach because there is no legitimate Halachic imperative. Also, the reference to Keneidelach being an important contribution to Oneg Yom Tov is not of my making - it comes from great and highly respected Poskim. It is also not correct to characterise this Minhag as being concerned with the infinitesimal - because that is the Halacha - a speck of flour can become Chametz and ruin your entire Pesach. Indeed this was the very point I am making - there is no substance in Halacha to support this concern - if there was it would be Halacha. And finally - If anything, the urging that we not be Mazniach, demonstrates that Halacha has no concerns about this issue. We ought to however, nevertheless, not ridicule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 01:37:42 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:37:42 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: " Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge." You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a question of cost/benefit for the masses. Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is greater then benefit. The people you listed were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 02:23:50 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:23:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: At 04:37 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will >affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a >question of cost/benefit for the masses. > >Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be >harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is >greater then benefit. The people you listed > >were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 03:05:03 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:05:03 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular > studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am > paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular > subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not > study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" > > I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from > observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of > Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. > > YL > > And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: "All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are largely Orthoprax." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 02:16:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:16:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: Will those who are against the teaching of secular subjects simply ignore what R. Yhonason Eybeschutz wrote in Yaaros Devash 2:7 (as translated by L. Levi in Torah and Science, pages 24-25)? For all the sciences are ?condiments? and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impureand how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:32:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:32:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:31:27AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: :> Is that a common interperation of minhag hamaqom -- that there be :> a common practice in all things? I understood minhag hamaqom to :> be designated practive by practice. : Otherwise the concept of Minhag Ha Makom is meaningless.... Again, why? It is meaningful to say, "here, the minhag hamaqom is to say "umoried hageshem", not "gashem", without making reference to anything else the qeillah might do. Why do we need a context of a qehillah that has many such rules rather than a few? And how many? : Many people wear tefillin on chol hamoed in Eretz : Yisroel, including some gedolim. However, some do : it betzinoh so it is not so well known. You misspelled, "a tiny percentage". : One such godol is the Erlauer Rebbe. You can go : in his beis medrash and see him with tefillin. He : keeps the minhogim of his zeide, the Chasam : Sofer, to wear tefillin on chol hamoed and daven nusach Ashkenaz. One may argue that the Erlau community has their own minhag, and their beis medrash it's own minhag hamaqom. But that raises questions of how one defines "maqom" that I don't know how to answer. .... : Bekitzur, Al titosh toras imecho, keep on : following your minhog and Al yisbayeish., as the : Rama says in beginning of Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim. Minhag avos is inferior to minhag hamaqom. In fact, we have had a hard time finding its basis. The best I can come up with is that minhag avos means that in the absence of a minhag hamaqom in your current location, you should follow the minhag hamaqom of your prior location even if that means the location of your avos. :> For other things? Give it time. How long did it take Jews from Provence, :> Italy and elsewhere to congeal into a single minhag Ashkenaz? : On the contrary, I doubt that the Chassidim will : ever eat Gebrokts on Pesach, the Sephardim will : stop eating kitnyos, and the non-Chassidic world : will stop eating Gebrokts on Pesach. And yet nowadays Sepharadim make an Ashkenazi qutzo shel yud, to be yotzei lekhos hadei'os. Yekkes and Litvaks eat glatt out of necessity (go find reliable non-glatt), but how many would eat that piece of non-glatt if they found a reliable hekhsher for it? Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. The choilam is far broader in the US than its ancestry; and in other communities, tav-lessness caught on. How many non-Morrocans in Israel celebrate Mimouna nowadays? It seems from the media, this minhag is spreading. (I think it would be a beautiful thing for "misht-night" communities to adopt. After a week of not being guests, make a point of sharing food and showing it had nothing to do with a lack of friendship.) I see lines coalescing. These things take centuries, and accelerate as people who remember pre-migration life pass away. We just begun. I think it is less that a Minhag America can't emerge than the mashiach won't give it the time necesssary to emerge. And Minhag EY may go back to being by sheivet and nachalah, but in any case its evolution will be radically changed by the rapid influx of the rest of Kelal Yisrael. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:03:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:03:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:37:30PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as : a trivia question for now). There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one were considered propitious for a large crop. (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:12:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:12:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101226.GC31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 07:50:13AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat before Biur : Chametz? What makes this mitzva different from so many other mitzvos, where : we cannot eat until doing rhe required act? When the issur de'oraisa begins is a machloqes tannaim (RH 28a-b): Rabbi Yehudah holds starting from chatzos, R Meir - from sheqi'ah. (Does the issur start from when the non-qorban could be shechted, or when it could be eaten?) The Rambam in Chameitz uMatzah 1:8 pasqens chatzos, as do we when we make the zeman 1 hour before chatzos (rather than 1 hour before sheqi'ah). MiDerabbanan, it's pushed earlier, and that's the safety margin. But I don't think that's enough to make it a morning mitzvah that it must be done first thing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:19:33 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:19:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 02:15:47PM +1000, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: : Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they : essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and : pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are : quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a : "hot dog roll". It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. Like not declaring quinoa to be qitniyos. And unlike declating peanuts to be. (Which some of Eastern Europe did, and as RMF attests, some didn't.) For that matter, is there anyone whose ancestors had the minhag of qitniyos but didn't include corn when it was brought over from the New World? Since minhag is by definition informal and mimetic, what happens to catch on or not doesn't trouble me. Boils down to a qasheh oif a masseh. (You can't ask a "question on a story"; how it happened is how it happened, unreasonalbe or not.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From isaac at balb.in Tue Apr 10 03:24:59 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:24:59 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> On Apr 10, 2018 at 8:19 pm, wrote: > It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, > even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. > There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels > would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of another term. From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 02:59:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:59:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] PESACH -- AFTER 400 YEARS GD'S IN A HURRY TO REDEEM US? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410095948.GA31049@aishdas.org> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:28:48PM +1100, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: : We begin the Seder with Matza being a reminder of our suffering -- but we : conclude it with a new perspective -- Matza reminds us of how quickly Gd : took us out of Egypt. Actually, that's the end of Maggid, not the end of the seder. Later than that in the seder, Hillel reminds us of a third aspect of matzah -- al matzos umorerim yokhluhu. Not that of slavery, nor of leaving, but of the midnight in between, and every Pesach thereafter. There is a fourth aspect: Lechom oni -- she'onim alav devarim harbei. Rashi takes this idea so seriously that he holds you're not yotzei the mitzvah with matzah eaten before Maggid. Matzah that didn't have the haggadah is not lechem oni. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:51:53 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:51:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> References: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> Message-ID: <20180410105153.GB23901@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:24:59PM +1000, Isaac Balbin wrote: : It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the : Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of : another term. The only thing we know for sure is that it included some subset of grain-like foods and of legumes. Any reason as to why is a post-facto theory. Multiple exist. In principle, pasqaning one such shitah is right, and therefore the rabbanim who made a din must have intended to include the new case is possible. But not compelled. We often leave a gezeira off where it originally ended because it's not for us to ban more things than Chazal did. All the more so in a case like qitniyos, when it's not a rabbinic issur but a minhag. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 05:14:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 08:14:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10.4C.08474.AFAACCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:05 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies >curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not >higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance >is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study >http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p >which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: >"All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, >when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are >largely Orthoprax." I am not claiming that the study of secular subjects is any sort of guarantee that one will remain religious. The reasons for someone to give up observance or to water down their observance are complex. However, for many reasons it is important to have a basic secular education. One of them is to open up some opportunities to earn a living. And let me be clear, I am not talking about a "Harvard" secular education. But I see no reason why someone born in the US should not be able to speak, read and write English. I have an Op Ed piece that will appear in this week's Jewish Press on the topic of secular subjects in chassidic yeshivas. In part it reads Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. Parents do not have a blanket right to determine the education of their children. Would you say that a parent has a right to send his child to a school that preaches Antisemitism and prejudice? Also, based on my experience as an educator for over 50 years, I have to say that parents do not always know what is best for their children educationally. Choosing to enroll one's sons in a school that does not give a basic secular education is a very poor choice. Also, having a school that does not give a basic secular education is against the law as is clear from my recent Jewish Press article. Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma let alone a Regents diploma? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Tue Apr 10 04:29:37 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:29:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: It's not only the lack of secular education (that R' Yitschok Levine refers to) or knowledge to interact with the secular world (that R. Hirsch z"l is reported to have referred to) that is the problem; it's the abysmal standard of the education they do receive, the overall intellectual integrity, and their attitude to anything scientific. Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. As far as i recall, the Munkatche Rebbe [frequently?] visited the Natural History Museum when he could. There is such a terrific gap in some of our children's education that it's hard to believe it's not going to be detrimental in some way to their development. [I know I'm spouting to the 'converted', but thanks for the opportunity to at least voice my concerns somewhere.] Dovid Rubin From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 06:07:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:07:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. I will just deal with one of the things you raised. If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against the crowd, this practice would end. YL The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of Volumes I-IV. The German custom to bring a young boy to the synagogue with a wirnpel (wrapping for t he Torah scroll) has no connection whatsoever to the practice of the chalaka (the Arabic term for Upsherin) observed by Sepharadirn and later ad opted by many Chasidirn. Th e custom of holding a special celebration marking the boy's first haircut developed among these groups. The celebration takes place at a specific age, usually three. Th e festivity is customarily held near the gravesite of a tzadik or in a synagogue. T his custom was unknown in ancient Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities. The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are found in accounts written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim. Some three centuries later, we find the first indications that the custom had made its way into Chasidic circles. The most important source concerning the chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. The details of this story are somewhat vague, and it is unclear whether the Ari-zal made a chalaka for his son, or whether the account refers to his disciple, Rabbi Yonatan Sagish. There is also some question as to whether the Ari-zal participated in Lag Ba 'omer events in Meron after his kabalistic insights because the custom to conduct a chalaka on Lag Ba 'omer runs in opposition to the Ari-zal' s final ruling that forbade hair cutting during the orner period. Furthermore, the custom of the chalaka has given rise to some questions as to the propriety of hair cutting at a gravesite or synagogue, which might constitute an infringement upon the sanctity of the site. Some have also questioned the permissibility of haircutting on Lag Ba omer, during bein ha-rnetzarirn (the three weeks before Tisha B' A v) or during Chol Ha 'rno 'ed. Yet another concern was the immodest behavior that occasionally accompanied this event. :Most Sephardic and Chasidic rabbis applauded, or at least defended the practices observed in their circles, though there were those who forbade The custom in this manner. Rabbi Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik of Brisk (1889-1960) disapproved of bringing children to rabbis on their third birthday for the chalaka, claiming that this practice "has no reason or basis." He noted that there are sources indicating that one should introduce the child to matters of Torah at the age of three, but none that involve haircutting. Rabbi Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky [the "Steipler Ga'on," (1899-1985)] also opposed this practice, and would send away parents who brought their children to him for the chalaka haircut. The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. Some, however, dismissed this argument, claiming that to the contrary, the chalaka perhaps began as an ancient Jewish practice which was later adopted by the gentiles. There are some older customs, originating in the times of Chazal and the Ge'onim, such as fasting on Erev Rosh Hashana and the ceremony of Kapaprot on Erev Yom Kippur which were opposed by some rabbis since they feared that their origins could be found in pagan rites. In any event, although some communities accepted this custom, Ashkenazi communities \yere never aware of such a practice. They did not receive this tradition from their forebears, and they found no mention of it in the writings of the Rishonim. The ancient tradition among Ashkenazi communities was to cut a boy's hair at a very young age. In fact, during the times of Chazal, parents would cut an infant's hair not long after birth, and they even permitted cutting a baby's overgrown hair on Chol Ha 'mo' ed. In the times of the Rishonim, too, boys' hair in Ashkenaz was cut already within the first several months after birth. The phenomenon of children with overgrown hair simply did not exist in Germany, and a boy with overgrown hair would have been mistaken for a girl. The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no special affair was held to celebrate the event. .. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:21:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:21:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 09:07:38AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for : >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. : : I will just deal with one of the things you raised. I only raised one thing. You are discussing an example, and not the point. : If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go : against the crowd, this practice would end. Which has nothing to do with the general principle of whether the resettlement of Jewry post-war should or shouldn't evolve into new minhagei hamaqom, nor the topic I raised -- the claim they actually are. Nor the reason why I raised the topic: the idea that minhag avos is only a stop-gap, a way to manage when in a maqom that has no minhag. Nor the reason for my post: Your claim that minhag hamaqom only has meaning if the maqom has loits of minhagim. That it can't be applied one-off to whatever practice is under discussion. And if you are correct, what's the threshold of minhagim that unify a community sufficiently to qualify. Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line accordingly. : The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: : Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of : Volumes I-IV. WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. : The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are : found in accounts : written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... It has to be earlier. Originally, chalaqah was held at the qever of Shemuel haNav on the 43rd of the omer, his yahrzeit. See teshuvos haRadvaz 2:608. (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get associated with a haircut at age 3. The move to Meron and Lag baOmer happened when the Ottomans restricted access to the qever in the 1500s. But that has little to do with upsherin in general, eg on a birthday.) The Radvaz, R' David b Shelomo ibn Zimra, was among the gerushei Sefarad, who ended up in Tzefas in 1513 and eventually end up in Egypt where he was RY (he taught the Shitah Mequbetzes, R' Betzalel Ashkenazi) and ABD. So, upsherin was already a practice old enough to get recorded as minhag by someone who lived through the transition from rishonim to achronim. : The most important source concerning the : chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. What makes this "post important source" if the practice predated the Ari by generations? Raising questions about a tradition that the Ari practiced it is a distraction if he isn't the basis of the minhag. AND, the problems with the story isaren't around upsherin, but around making a celebration the night of Lag baOmer, again nothing to do with making one on the child's 3rd birthday. (Unless it too is in the wrong part of the omer or during the 3 weeks. Issues we already navigate for bar mitzvah parties that aren't on Shabbos.) .... : The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice : stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka : transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's : hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in : ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation : of pagan ritual... All I know is that people invoke a similar Hindu practice. And while Hindus may wait to age 3 before making a celebratory first haircut, waiting until 5 or 7 are more common, and not making any ceremony at all is most common. (Although a girls' only haircut being at 11 months is most common.) Observant Sikh men never get a haircut. In Mongolia, between 2-5, girls get their first haricut when they are 3 or 5, boys when they are 2 or 4. No match. China - 1 month. (They wait until after the bulk of infant mortality; lehavdil but yet similar to our considering a child who dies in their first month a neifel.) Poles: a pre-Xian tradition that survived into the 1700s was 7-10. Ukraininans, 1st birthday. Polenesians, teens. Yazidi, originally 40 days, now, 7-11 mo. Interestingly, Moslem boys get their first haircut at 1 week old -- in other words, on the 8th day. In short -- no culture that wikipedia or google found for me has a special haircut for 3 yr old boys ceremony. And yet, I turned up much else. We've seen similar attacks on shlissel challah ('tis the week for that perrennial) based on a difficult to assert connection to key-with-cross breads in Xian communities that were nowhere near the areas where shlissel challah originated -- in either time or space. And yet, the same people continue dressing up their children in Purim costumes, despite the similarity to Carnivale -- and both being local to Italy in origin. Or milchigs on Shevu'os starting in the same region that already had Wittesmontag on the Monday before the Xian Pentacost. For that matter, both of those customs are first originated LATER than chalakah! ... : The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or : other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic : communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern : Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. : Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no : special affair was held to celebrate the event. Is using the haricut to tell the boy "You're not a baby now, time to start chinukh in earnest with alef-beis" really so terrible? Nothing will make that point as deeply as weeks of build up, followed by changing the look in the mirror. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From sholom at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:09:18 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:09:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> References: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <22b69f274e57a0d24c6dcbc45c456a93@aishdas.org> > : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? > : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as > : a trivia question for now). > > There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one > were considered propitious for a large crop. > > (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) REMT wrote me off line and noted: "I don't know its source, but I first heard it when I was a young child." He also answered my trivial question, writing: "In a leap year, the parsha read eight times will always be Acharei Mos. I know of no one commenting on its significance." It just occurs to me that the main event in parshas Acharei Mos occurred on the same day as the events in parshas Shemini. Kol tuv! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 09:30:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:30:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 11:21 AM 4/10/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line >accordingly. > >: The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: >: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of >: Volumes I-IV. > >WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. It was not RSRH who wrote this, but Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger who has spent much time investigating minhagim. >: The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are >: found in accounts >: written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... > >It has to be earlier. Again you are questioning Rabbi Hamburger. I suggest you contact him about this and the rest of your post. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:31:21 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:31:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 09:07, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >> Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >> children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. > > I will just deal with one of the things you raised. > > If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against > the crowd,? this practice would end. YL That is simply not true. The Baal Shem Tov and his talmidim practised it, and that is more than enough for most people. That not everyone did it is irrelevant; very few practices had unanimous support. The BeShT was far greater than the sources you cite, and many more people follow him today than follow those people, so they would have no reason to change. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:35:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:35:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, > and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get > associated with a haircut at age 3. Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From seinfeld at jsli.org Tue Apr 10 10:08:53 2018 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:08:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Playing devil?s advocate here. For the record, I have college and graduate degrees, my children all read and write well etc. However, in response to Prof. Levine. If the cost of that exposure to American secular culture (language, history, values, etc.) is that a certain percentage of children may be enticed by it and go OTD - more than would have otherwise - then, yes, it makes sense. That?s an unacceptable cost. I?m not saying that that is a real cost, but that is the perception. If you want to change the practice, you have to change that perception (which may have some truth to it, I don?t know). >Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America >cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade >science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he >has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the >history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what >happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the >mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic >knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the >digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of >HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has >no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. > From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 10:29:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180410172934.GA1877@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:35:39AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : >(This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, : >and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get : >associated with a haircut at age 3. : Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. As per the same discussion in previous years.... That's what the rishonim run with -- see Rashi and Radaq on the pasuq. Although Rashi says 22 mo in our girsa, I think the other girsa of 24 mo is more likely, because... As the Radaq points out, this fits halakhah, that the time a woman is mish'ubedes to nurse is 24 months. But while elegent, it is not mukhrach that Chanah kept to the minimum. (Thinking out loud: The exchange in 1:22-23 fits better if it was about Chanah not attending an aliyah laregel that was after Shem'el was 2. After all, why would Elqanah have pushed her to bring ShMemu'el to the mishkan before it was safe?) More to the point (and back to repeating myself), there is a machloqes in the medrash whether Shemu'el lived 52 or 53 years. And since that's 50 years after he was weaned and brought to the Mishkan, it implies a machloqes about when he moved into the Mishkan. The minhag was apparently based on the position that he was niftar at 52, and thus moved into the Mishkan at 3. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:06:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:06:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? Message-ID: One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has no inherent "Jewish" quality.) However, there are opinions that say that the Jews spoke Egyptian while in Egypt. I have posted some selections from the Sefer Lashon HaKodesh, History, Holiness, & Hebrew by Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/jews_egypt_hebrew.pdf While it is true that according to one Medrash the Jews did speak Hebrew while in Egypt, there is another Medrash that contradicts this. >From the above reference: GOD SPEAKS TO THE JEWS IN EGYPTIAN While the above sources point to the notion that the Jews in Egypt did not speak Egyptian, there is another Midrash that implies otherwise. This Midrash likens the Jews in Egypt to a prince who was kidnapped for an extended period of time. Finally, his father the king decided to exact his revenge on the kidnappers and release his son. Upon saving his son, the king conversed with the child in the language spoken to him by the kidnappers. Similarly, explains the Midrash, after God redeemed the Jews from exile in Egypt, He spoke to them in Egyptian.221 The Midrash explains that the Jews had been in Egypt for many years, where they had learned the Egyptian language.222 Therefore, when God wanted to give them the Torah, He began to speak with them in the Egyptian language with which they were already familiar. He began by proclaiming, "I (anochi, ) am Hashem, your God ... !"223 According to this Midrash, the word "anochi" in this context does not denote the Hebrew word for "I"; rather, it refers to the Egyptian224 word anoch (11:ix), which means "love" and "endearment."225 One Midrashic source even explains that the Jews forgot Lashon HaKodesh, which is why God had to speak to them in Egyptian. >From page 99 THEY SPOKE LASHON HAKODESH, BUT TOOK ORDERS IN EGYPTIAN Similarly, we can posit that even when exiled to Egypt, the Jews indeed continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, they were not accustomed to accepting orders in Lashon HaKodesh; their Egyptian taskmasters spoke to them only in Egyptian. Therefore, at Mount Sinai, when God was giving the Jews the Decalogue, He spoke to them in Egyptian, the language in which they were accustomed to "taking orders." THEY MAINTAINED THE ESSENCE OF LASHON HAKODESH, IF NOT THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE Even if we assume that the Jews completely forgot Lashon HaKodesh, we can still reconcile the contradiction based on a previously mentioned concept set forth by Rambam. Rambam, as we already mentioned, writes that Lashon HaKodesh is called so because it lacks the explicitness found in other languages, making it a chaste and holy language. Therefore, one can explain that although the Jews in Egypt spoke the Egyptian language, they did not deviate from the moral standards manifested by Lashon HaKodesh. God had to speak to them in Egyptian since that was the only language with which they were familiar. However, they did not change their manner of speaking; that is, they internalized the refined and moral linguistic style of Lashon HaKodesh, which they maintained even when speaking Egyptian. And from the Chapter Summary After discussing Joseph's personal exile to Egypt, we segued into discussing the Jews' collective exile to Egypt. A well-known Midrash states that the Jews in Egypt did not change their language, meaning that they continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, another Midrash states that God began presenting the Torah to them in Egyptian, because that was the language that they spoke in Egypt. While these two Midrashim seem at odds with each other, we presented several approaches to reconcile them and give a more concrete answer as to whether the Jews in Egypt spoke Lashon HaKodesh or Egyptian: ? Radak explains that there were some Jews who were not enslaved, and they spoke Lashon HaKodesh exclusively. Their not-so-fortunate brethren spoke Lashon HaKodesh between themselves, and Egyptian with their Egyptian overlords. ? Alternatively, it is possible that all the Jews spoke Lashon HaKodesh, yet God presented them the Torah in Egyptian because they were acclimated to accepting orders in that language. ? A third possibility is that since the hallmark of Lashon HaKodesh is its embodiment of holiness and purity, even if the Jews forgot the literal language, they could still be said to speak Lashon HaKodesh- The Holy Language-if their manner of speech remained holy. After the Jews exited Egypt and eventually arrived in the Land of Israel, establishing their own rule, it is clear that Lashon HaKodesh alone served as their spoken language. This arrangement lasted for several centuries until the language began receding under Babylonian influence, toward the end of the First Temple period. Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may not be true. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:22:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:22:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Legendary Chassidic Rebbe Admits: The Noda BiYehudah Was Correct In His Opposition to Lisheim Yichud Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/QEUCPq However, what is less well known, is that the Divrei Chaim, despite being a great Chasidic leader, actually said that the Noda BiYehuda was correct in the matter, and, based on that, his followers do not say lisheim yichud before sefira. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:39:28 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:39:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:06 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews > from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. > Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their > children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far > as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has > no inherent "Jewish" quality.) > > > ... > Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may > not be true. > > YL > > > May not be true is the operative word, there is no disputing that there is an opinion in Chazal that it is true and that the Jews spoke only Hebrew in Egypt. This is the opinion that the Chasidim follow and therefore they are against speaking English. I don't see how you can find fault with them when they are following a valid opinion in Chazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:10:49 2018 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Yehuda Gluck) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 04:10:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Wed Apr 11 02:59:49 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: R? Moshe Yehudah, Thank you for taking notice of my post! ?Only a narrow band of Torah studies are benefited by a narrow band of secular studies? - I agree with you - but only in part. 1. If I may add the word ?directly? to your statement (- ?only a narrow band of Torah studies are *directly* benefited?), as, arguably, the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education [though admittedly, this was not the thrust of my original statement]. 2. Re the case in point, Chullin and biology. Though, in general, the biology syllabus does not necessarily help in learning Chulin, biology could be taught in a manner that would: i.e. a teacher familiar with the various sugyos, could give a thorough grounding in anatomy, etc. This would be better than relying on Temunei Chol [or similar compilations], which (might) stifle critical thinking. Furthermore, an appreciable amount of Torah literature is based upon a medieval understanding of chemistry and anatomy. A fuller understanding of those thinking processes, coupled with a comparative study of [human] biology and the basics of modern chemistry, could conceivably open the door to a much fuller Torah experience. Indeed, a syllabus could conceivably be drawn up that would both benefit the Ben Torah and satisfy the requirements of an Examinatory Board. 3. Re maths; again, you are right, so far as a basic understanding of the sugyos are concerned. But to appreciate maths as a backbone of the world?s structure and thus marvel at the???? ????? , to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory to deeper areas of the Torah [which surely some of them will want to learn], requires a fundamental grounding in the subject. Dovid Rubin Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ________________________________ From: Moshe Yehuda Gluck Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 9:10:49 AM To: 'The Avodah Torah Discussion Group' Cc: 'D Rubin' Subject: RE: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:23:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:23:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Lets take a step back for a second. There has been a machlokes for thousands of years (see the Gemara in Berachos 35) whether the ideal is torah only or for lack of a better phrase torah im derech eretz. There is no disputing that in the last 200 years the overwhelming majority of Gedolim have been in the Torah only camp and in the 20th century the Torah im derech eretz is pretty much RYBS and the followers of R' Hirsch. I can provide an almost endless list of Gedolim who had zero secular education and knew kol hatorah kula while on the other hand the list of Gedolim who had a secular education is much much much smaller. Your position regarding secular studies while certainly a valid one is unquestionably the minority opinion and therefore it is ridiculous for you to simply dismiss the other opinion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 03:23:23 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 10:23:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <79615f4629784da49fb5941943399ebd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. ----------------------------- Bingo-and probably true on a micro level but not, I fear, on a macro level. I used to tell my boys that 80% (not based on a study but the handy 80/20) rule)of what they learned would not be used later, the problem is you don't know which 20% will be. Look here for the background of the inventor of the m-16 and you'll see what he brought together https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Stoner Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 04:40:52 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 07:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote, and I quote his closing last paragraph in full: > Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them > to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend > a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma > let alone a Regents diploma? The first and second sentences don't have any logical connection that I can see. There are plenty of boys who attended a Hassidic yeshiva, who now earn enough to support a family. Diplomas are not guarantees, and I'm don't know how much they help. They certainly don't help as much as drive and persistence and elbow grease. My boss, for example, asks me for help occasionally with English spelling and grammar, but that doesn't seem to have hampered his ability to own his business at half my age. (His mathematics abilities are a good example. He understands enough of the concepts that he can figure out anything on his calculator without my help. But he avoids doing even simple arithmetic in his head. And because he refuses to do the arithmetic in his head, I make more mistakes than he does.) Akiva Miller From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 11 06:22:58 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:22:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <1F.0A.18065.33C0ECA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:10 AM 4/11/2018, Moshe Yehuda Gluck wrote: >I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that >a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. >What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion >sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some >secular knowledge in order to understand them. Please read RSRH's essay The Relevance of Secular Studies to Jewish Education (Collected Writings VII) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 06:50:01 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:50:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption Message-ID: Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:20:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:20:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org> I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:45:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:45:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:50:01PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may : be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? All I have is the reverse. R' Gedalia Felder (Yesodei Yeshurun 2 pp 188-191) holds that an adopted child can be called up "ben Micha Shemuel", but that this shouldn't be done when the adopting father or the son is a kohein. In order to avoid confusion about the child's kehunah. (Or that of a future descendent, when people vaguely remember his name years later). I assume leviim too, but that's not in my notes. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 12:08:20 2018 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:08:20 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> References: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Tangentially, there is a convention to write the name of a chalal in official documents as Ploni ben Ploni Vehu Kohein, to signify the difference in status between father and son. I'm not sure that this would be recommended (or desirable) in the case of an adopted child. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 11 23:46:36 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 01:46:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: I suspect that some will feel that my position on the issue "secular" studies comes from the left of center. First off, we need to delineate what we mean by "secular" studies. This word as we use it today is far different from the science the GRA or the many achronim, rishonim and of course Chazal learned in the sense of math, astronomy and biology. Today that word would also include many areas such as social studies, psychology, philosophy, evolutionary biology, cosmology, comparative religion, black studies, sexual awareness, cultural studies etc, etc, that could lead a young untrained mind into problematic areas that could raise many question they are not prepared to deal with. The scientific study required by the various sugios in shas and halacha really require a minimal study of some elementary math such as some trig and geometry, some values such as that of Pi, square root of 2 etc and Pythagoras theorem, astronomy (mainly lunar orbit, seasonal and diurnal calculation), anatomy and some other limited areas of biology plus a handful of other concepts. By this logic much of what we call science today would be excluded from being necessary for learning Torah. Mi'sevoras libi, I would say that the study of much of what we think of in modern parlance of the many new fields of mathematics and the physical sciences such as the many branches of modern physics both classical and relativistic and quantum mechanics, the many branches of chemistry, biology and medicine and of course modern astronomy including much more than just solar system dynamics (mainly lunar & seasonal) and positions of a handful of stars are mandated for a very simple reason -- an understanding (the deeper the better) in these fields makes one truly understand that the world is so highly complex and functions so beautifully that this it can not be a random happening and that there must be a borei olam. A havana into the very ultra small as we find through quantum mechanics and particle physics, or into the wonders of the atom and chemistry and how things combine, or into the wonders of dynamics, optics, elec & magnetism, or the modern fields of solar and stellar astronomy and spectrographic analysis and through the beauty and understanding exposed through the many modern branches of modern math including advanced algebraic theory, statistical analysis, advanced calculus and vector and tensor analysis and the many other fields to numerous to mention here that are so useful throughout all of modern science.. These literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam. The understanding of biology from its lowest levels of its physics and chemistry to the molecular with the tremendous complexities at its molecular and cellular levels and onto its study at the organic and systemic levels, through developmental biology of the miraculous changes from conception through the fetus to birth, infancy and childhood to the adult and ultimately death. Many of these may not help much with the simple peshat of any particular sugio in shas, but they surely create emuna and tremendous yiras haromeimus. No one who has even the smallest inkling of any of this knowledge could believe that existence as we now can begin to perceive it is a bunch of random events. Just the mind boggling complexity of the functioning of a single cell is awe inspiring. With so many thousands of things happening in each cell with perfect timing, with everything just in the right place at the right time in each of the billions of cells in our bodies. Worst of all, leaving a young mind unexposed to many of these areas and without proper training in them leaves him vulnerable to the many questions he will eventually encounter as he goes through modern life. He will not be prepared to deal with evolution, cosmology, philpsophy etc that he will surely encounter no matter how well shielded he may be. In addition to the above, in our modern society some of the above may be needed merely to functional and earn a living in todays highly technical society and he will be severely limited in the types of parnasa available to him. I am sure that many will differ substantially from my position above. Please excuse my rambling and repetition at times and run on sentences in the above. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 12 10:20:51 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 17:20:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not utter the phrase with the congregation? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Apr 12 12:42:50 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:42:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "There is no way that a "Rabbinical committee (namely the Rabbanim/Poskim/Rebbeim of the respective chassidishe Yeshivos whom Simcha Felder is representing) decided that systematic secular education is forbidden by Orthodox Jewish law. The reason is that the Torah requires one to study secular subjects. I have posted part of an article by Dr. Yehudah Levi from his book Torah Study. " Of course there is. Dr. Yehuda Levi is coming from a Torah Im Derech Eretz point of view however, Chasidim and most Charedim have a different viewpoint, namely Torah only. You seem to be a classic case of someone living in an echo chamber. The only opinion/derech that you recognize as legitimate is Torah Im Derech Eretz. As I stated many times, Torah Im Derech Eretz is a small minority, the overwhelming majority of gedolim rejected it. So much so that Gedolim like R' Baruch Ber could not believe that R' Hirsch thought that it was lechatchila. R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch wrote a teshuva (end of Bircas Shmuel Kiddushin) where he explicitly forbid a secular curriculum: ?What emerges is (a) that according to the Torah the obligation of Banim Ubeni Banim means you must make your children into Geonei and Chachmei Torah ? and not merely to prepare them for life as a Jew. But rather, you must teach them and get them to learn the entire Torah, and if chas v?sholom you do not, you violate the entire Mitzvah of learning Torah as per Banim Ubnei Banim. ... (c) To learn secular studies on a regular basis is prohibited as per the Rama 246:4 ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 12 12:34:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:34:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu In-Reply-To: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180412193406.GA7972@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:20:51PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to : bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "barchu : hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in : order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait : and not utter the phrase with the congregation? See the Agur, Hil' Berakhos 98, which can be found at . The Maharam miRothenburg held the sha"tz needn't say it at all. R' Yehudah al-Barceloni says he should say. The Agur adds: and we are noheig to say it. The next source, the Avudraham (or to be accurate: Abu-Dirham), says that the sha"tz says it to be among the community of mevorkhim. He cites the Y-mi (Berakhos 7:3). And he adds that R' Yehudah b"r Barzili Barceloni (I assume the same source as the Seifer haAgur) writes in the name of R' Saadia that even though the sha"tz said "haMvorakh", and therefore didn't remove himself from the klal, he needs to return himself to the klal "legamrei" and day "Barukh H' Hamvorkh". Like in bentching, where the leader says "nevareikh" and yet repeats the responses of the rest of the zimun. No answer there. However, note that the assumption is that Borkhu doesn't need the sha"tz or the oleh to repeat it. The sha"tz needs to repeat it for his own sake, so as not to exclude himself from the kelal of mevorkhim. (Except according to the MmR, who doesn't believe the sha"tz has such a need.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 12th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Gevurah: What aspect of judgment Fax: (270) 514-1507 forces the "judge" into submission? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 01:31:53 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:31:53 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am surprised that you even bothered to quote him." And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his teshuva. There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 02:10:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 05:10:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: >"In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz >wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am >surprised that you even bothered to quote him." > >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with >his teshuva. If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in EY are pursuing higher secular education. >There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' >Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and >Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through >this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not >with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to >learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a >book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the >Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of >issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even >happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas >and poskim. Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat and Yom Tov (holy days) - and furthermore, it is better to occupy oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). >And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but >Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after >them." as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as >the Mishna Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of >people are capable of studying Torah all day. Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? The following is taken from Rav Schwab on Chumash, Parshas Acharei Mos. "At all times the Torah's unchanging teachings must be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, attitudes, relationships to man and beast, and positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and evaluation of the Torah. "What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the 'ways of the Earth.' The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world that surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities that confront him. "What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more crucial it is that this wisdom be conveyed to the Jewish contemporary world. It must be transmitted in a language that our generation understands and that will attract the searching youth, the ignorant, the estranged and the potential ba 1al teshuvah to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah leader must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. "There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose life task is to enlighten and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those 'messengers of G-d' the highest respect and a loyal following. These are the kohanim and levi'im of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. "Yet education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore it becomes mandatory for the present day 'Tribe of Levi' to initiate and encourage an educational system that can serve the other "eleven tribes who comprise the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meets its challenges, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head-on the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. "The Divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Sun Apr 15 05:53:59 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:53:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Micha Berger) In-Reply-To: References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com>, <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org>, Message-ID: This reply was sent earlier to R' Michah and is still valid: I agree. With respect, I did allude to ?learning skills and a mode of thinking? in both of my previous posts: ?the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education?, ? to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory?, and my reference to ?the [lack of] overall intellectual integrity?. Related to this: Is it incorrect to posit that a lot of ma?amorei Chazal was formulated in accordance to their understanding and cultural absorption of sciences of their day? Can we not further Torah with our understanding of modern science, both peripheral and integral ? even though clearly lacking their sya?ato dishmayo and Ru?ach HaKodesh? Is that not the derech taught both by the Ba?al Shem and his disciples, and the GRA and his school [to use the chochmoh of the world..]? Another q: Do we view Torah SheBa?al Peh on a par with Torah SheBiKsav, in the sense that it must be learnt ?as is?, without consideration of the worldview that shaped those comments? [I rather think we can see two views in the Rishoinim.] Dovid Rubin ________________________________ From: Micha Berger Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 5:20:06 PM To: Moshe Yehuda Gluck via Avodah Cc: Moshe Yehuda Gluck; 'D Rubin' Subject: Re: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:39:19 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:39:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:45:43 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:45:43 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 3:01 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a > regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance > secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > > > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > > The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he > already knew shas and poskim.? > > > Can you verify this assertion? > Not really but given that the Gra was a super genius and the stories that abound about how much he knew as a child it is certainly plausible to believe so. The fact is that no one really knows how old the Gra was when he learned these things so your assertion that he learned mathematics as a youth is unprovable as well. > > > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > > Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in > 1518? > > > Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there > would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. > > > And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple according to the Rama, the study of Torah is what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get us into the world to come and the study of secular studies will not. That fact remains the same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 03:39:38 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:39:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >> And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his >> teshuva. > If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who > attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend > the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in > Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today > offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. Touro College was established against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim see http://haemtza.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/yosefs-folly.html for example for details. > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in > EY are pursuing higher secular education. Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a pig with a streimel (see http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html ). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: " *Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the other nations, she didn't want to burn them, rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need any outside wisdom and therefore she was priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the world with his wisdom which was solely torah based. * *We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt."* >> There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch >> Ber. The Rama writes: >> "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >> and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will >> acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other >> wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all >> other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called >> by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the >> Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he >> knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >> regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance >> secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles > Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also > learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He > taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning > of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is > permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this > excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible > and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh > De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his > decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy > only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat > and Yom Tov (holy days) -- and furthermore, it is better to occupy > oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). Not sure what you point is here, the Rama is quoted exactly as I wrote, you cal leanr secular studies only now and then and only after you know shas and poskim. > And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but > Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them." > as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as the Mishna > Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of people are > capable of studying Torah all day. > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in 1518? From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 05:01:14 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:01:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:39 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. >R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a >pig with a streimel (see? >http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html >). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak >Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: > >" Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn >them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the >other nations, she didn't want to burn them, >rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need >any outside wisdom and therefore she was >priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the >world with his wisdom which was solely torah based.? > >We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish >home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish >wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt." Too bad this statement does not differentiate between un-Jewish and non-Jewish. as RSRH did. I agree that we do not want un-Jewish influences in the Orthodox world. However, there is no problem with non-Jewish influences. I wonder if they are against the use of, for example, modern medicine or electricity or running water, and countless other things that are "non-Jewish wisdom and come into Chareidi homes. >>There is no question that the simple reading of >>the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: >> >>"But it is not for a person to learn anything >>but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >>decisors that come after them and through this >>they will acquire this world and the world to >>come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >>In any case, it is permitted to learn through >>happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >>isn't a book of heresy.? This is what called >>by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person >>should not take a trip in the Pardes until he >>has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] >>and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> >>The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >>cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >>only that, but he writes that even happenstance >>secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > >Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > >The Gra was sui generis, when he studied >mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim.? Can you verify this assertion? >>And how many people are capable of capable of >>learning "anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >>and the halachic decisors that come after >>them."? ? as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah >>in Koheles as well as the Mishna Brurah make it >>clear that only a very small percentage of >>people are capable of studying Torah all day. > >Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > >Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah >less in 2018 then it was in 1518? Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 09:44:37 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:44:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:45 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not >for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna >and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come >after them and through this they will acquire >this world and the world to come. But not with >learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple >according to the Rama, the study of Torah is >what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get >us into the world to come and the study of >secular studies will not. That fact remains the >same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person >should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. The facts do not remain the same in 2018 as in 1518. The day school movement in the US as well as all of the Orthodox schools throughout the world where secular studies are routinely taught from kindergarten on show that things have changed. Please spend the time to read "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 ? 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 The Jewish Press, July 6, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916)" "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1786-1879)" "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1654 ? 1785) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 08:07:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:07:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi >world agrees with his teshuva. > >There is no question that the simple reading of >the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything >but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >decisors that come after them and through this >they will acquire this world and the world to >come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >In any case, it is permitted to learn through >happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by >the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should >not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and >he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >only that, but he writes that even happenstance >secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. I must admit that I do not understand your assertion against secular studies in conjunction with Torah studies even for boys at a young age.. The day school movement in the US was founded on the principle of a dual curriculum. The model was RJJ. Today in the US the vast majority of yeshivas follow this model save for some of the Chassidic yeshivas. Gedolim like Rav Yitzchok Hutner (Chaim Berlin), (Mr.) Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz (Torah Vodaath), Rav Avraham Kalmanovitz and Rav Shmuel Birenbaum (Mir), Rav Dr. Yosef Breuer and Rav Shimon Schwab (Yeshiva RSRH) , to name just a few, headed yeshivas in which boys were taught Torah and secular studies in elementary and high school grades. I am sure they were well aware of what the RAMA wrote and paskened that it did not apply today. Even in Europe in the 19th century there were some places where secular and Torah studies were taught along side each other. The Kelm Talmud Torah was one. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelm_Talmud_Torah "In addition to Jewish subjects, students studied general subjects such as geography, mathematics, and Russian language and literature for three hours a day. The Kelm Talmud Torah was the first traditional yeshiva in the Russian empire to give such a focus to general studies. " There was the L?mel-School in Jerusalem where both Torah and secular subjects were taught. So I really do not understand why you focus on the RAMA when it is clear that yeshiva education in many places, since the 19th century and throughout the 20th century involved a combination of Torah and secular studies. What are you arguing about? YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 11:16:15 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:16:15 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> On 4/15/2018 11:10 AM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, > in EY are pursuing higher secular education. I just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different story entirely). From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 10:14:25 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:14:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916) ... There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in have secular studies: 1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would have had no students 2. The law mandated secular studies Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a bdieved. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:22:23 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:22:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:14 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in >have secular studies: >1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send >their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would >have had no students >2. The law mandated secular studies When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young people. >Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but >as a bdieved. Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! YL From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:29:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:29:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <4C.65.18065.A7C83DA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:16 PM 4/15/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I Just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went >through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these >colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or >should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different >story entirely). And many of those who attend these institutions find their secular knowledge woefully inadequate and probably wish they had a stronger secular education when they were younger. Look at the first part of the video at https://goo.gl/WKrKyT and see what he says about his own yeshiva education. At about 2 minutes in he says he discovered that he didn't know anything when it came to being prepared to work. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 15 05:48:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:48:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria Message-ID: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> The leprosy mentioned here was special kind of leprosy which only the Jewish people suffered from only in Israel. It never occurred outside of Israel, even in a Jewish home. The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical but rather a spiritual disease. The Rabbis comment: b?sorah tovah hee l?Yisroel ? "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and mortar to act as if it were alive. It would be most unusual for a house to become sick just like a human being. Such an illness borders on the miraculous. Why does the Torah say that a house may be afflicted with leprosy? It means that a Jewish home is different from other homes; it has life and spirit attached to it. When the people who live in these homes are sinful, the very bricks of the home reflect that sinfulness. The Rabbis tell us that leprosy is a sign of evil and sin; therefore, it is natural that house would manifest leprosy as a sign of its inhabitants evil. Now we can understand why the rabbis say it is good news when a house is stricken with leprosy. If one can notice the disease before it spreads, he has a chance to cure it. When the disease goes unnoticed, the real trouble ensues. Since in today?s world we don?t have the warning of leprosy attached to our houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. The Bible will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible Dwight L Moody -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 11:02:08 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:02:08 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sunday, April 15, 2018, Prof. Levine wrote: > When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 > there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young > people. > Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a > bdieved. > Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 15 12:45:46 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 19:45:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. _______________________________________________ Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 13:08:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 16:08:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <13.9E.29097.691B3DA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:02 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >This is not something to be happy about. This is >more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu >torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very >difficult decision to violate the Halacha in >order to save the next generation. This was not >uncommon in America of that time. Young >Israel???s sponsored mixed dances for the same >reasons. However, now that the Torah community >is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. ? On the contrary, this is something that is appropriate for our time and the future. Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? See my article "Frum or Ehrliche?" The Jewish Press, October 20, 2006, page 1. This article is also available at "Frum or Ehrlich". Letters to Editor Also see "The Obligation to Support a Family" The Jewish Press, February 18, 2015, front page. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 15:35:12 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 18:35:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the > community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the > congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l?olam vaed" > and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included > with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not > utter the phrase with the congregation? Incidentally, the same situation and question applies by the Borchu prior to Birchos Krias Shema, as per S"A 57:1. I can't bring any source, but in my mind, the simple answer is that if the oleh would say it together with the congragation, he might not be heard. The delay is to insure that no one mistakenly thinks that the oleh is excluding himself. I was going to ask a related question about Kaddish that has bothered me for some time. Namely: When the Kaddish-sayer says "Yhei Shmei Raba" himself, why does Mishne Brurah 56:2 tell him to say it *quietly*? But I am *not* going to ask that question, because RJR's post has forced me to compare these tefilos carefully, and I have found a difference that might help to answer his question. RJR was very correct when he used the word "command" to describe what the oleh is saying. The word "Borchu" is indeed the tzivui/imperative form of the verb. But no comparable command exists in Kaddish. Yes, the Kaddish-leader does command them "v'imru", but he even specifies what it is that he wants them to say. Namely, a simple "amen". And so they do. May I suggest that the "Yhei Shmei Raba" is an impromptu addition, that the tzibur adds of their own accord, NOT commanded to do so by the Kaddish-leader. Thus, there is no fear of causing any illusions that he is somehow excluding himself. Indeed, he himself added to the praise by saying "Yisborach v'yishtabach", which (one might say) is simply an expanded version of "Yhei Shmei Raba". So I guess the real question on MB 56:2 is not why the leader says Yhei quietly instead of loudly, but perhaps we could ask whether the leader really needs to say Yhei at all. Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 20:59:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:59:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <54519ad6-5f2a-1c69-4e5f-2d8f0fa2f2a5@zahav.net.il> 1) Is the community as strong as it was back when Torah was transmitted orally? 2) Who is the rabbi who is going to overturn decisions made by the Ta'naim (as opposed to overturning decisions made by school administrators in the 50s)? On 4/15/2018 9:45 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es > laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. > KT From hankman at bell.net Sun Apr 15 18:13:32 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:13:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> R? Marty Bluke wrote: ?R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah.? My response to R? Marty makes a number of assumptions that may not be universally accepted but that I firmly believe. The times are different, the level of knowledge is different both in the physical sciences and in Torah hakedosha. Dare I say that these as a function of time seem to be moving on trajectories that are unfortunately inverse to each other ? particularly in the latter time frame that we live in ? most intensely over the last 10 to 12 decades but can already be clearly seen over the last 4 centuries. With each dor we can see an ongoing diminution in the level of our Torah havanah while a commensurate level of greater scientific understanding has come about (with perhaps the exception of a very few yechidei de?ah such as the Gra and a few others who may have achieved levels more common in much earlier times before them). While Chazal tell us ?haphoch v?haphoch d?kol bah? and that certainly for those who are capable of a great level of Torah understanding such as those of Chazal who were doresh all the essin or all the taggin in the Torah probably could have been able to find quantum mechanics or tensor analysis or molecular biology in the Torah if they so chose. Certainly if the scientists of our day were able to discover these facts, Chazal certainly were able to as well. But I would point out that there is no maimre in Chazal that relates to having discovered any of this knowledge through their pilpul and passing this on to us. Perhaps they did not feel it important enough to report. But this level of understanding in Torah in our times is sadly not available in our times. Given the level of limud for the average person (unlike for some of the gedolim of our times) in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics. The average person (maybe I am just giving away my matsav) will not find much yira or emuna from learning that which is typical of our yeshivos (say a sugia in shas say ?succa govoah m?esrim ama or a sugia on movuy or on tumas negaim ? of hilchos melicha or muktsa in shulchan aruch etc). For the average person these are not awe inspiring subjects and unfortunately only a true godol or great talmid chochom could extract yira and emunah from these cut and dry subjects. Such inspiration for the average yid are fewer and much further in between from most of his limud of Torah. This as a result of our sad diminution in our Torah learning ability. Today, given our greater abilities in understanding the Borei?s briah it is much easier for us to find yira and emuna from our hisbonenus in them. So ?of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none? is Torah, but a very solid adjunct in our times for a vehicle to further inspire yira and emunah would very effectively be math and scientific knowledge. Part of the mitsva of emuna, is not simply belief, but to go out and prove to your satisfaction (to be doresh v?choker) the truth of the Borei and his achdus and that he is the Borei olam and revealed Himself to us at matan Torah and so on. To the extent that science facilitates this search it is a MITSVA and not just mere secular studies at the cost of Torah studies. Clearly the experience our ancestors experienced at yetsias Mitzrayim, al hayam (ma sheroaso shifcha al hayam etc) and revelation on sinai etc was more than enough to inspire tremendous yira, awe and emunah without the need for any help from science (which was not great in their period in any case) and on through the period of the nevi?im and the batei mikadash and later Chazal inspiration was possible through there havana of Torah alone. But I do not see that to be the case in our generation and times. ?So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah?? Because in our day it may be another additional (I hesitate to say ?more? effective way b?avonoseinu harabim for most people) very effective way for most average people.? So today, for the yechidei olom the tried and true method of attaining great yira and emunah through limud Torah may be the best way to go as we have witnessed these great traits in our great gedolim, but that recipe may not work so well in our times for everybody else without additional help. I am also not comfortable with the notion that there are certain areas of knowledge that are off limits to even our gedolim. I feel quite confident to assert that in our time, non of even our gedolim come to discover the great advances in science through there limud hatorah. If they know these subjects it came from sources outside of their linudei kodesh. But Chazal was not constrained in their knowledge. They were required to know shivim loshonos, they studied kishuv and astrolgy and the chukos hagoyim and certainly the science of their day (sometimes even quoting chachmei ha?umos and cf the Rambam quoting Aristo often etc [I also imagine the Rambam learned his medicine in the conventional way mostly including sources outside of Torah]). I feel sad for many talmidei chachamim in our day who lack the background in (sometimes in even minimal) math and science to grasp that they are saying a peshat in a sugia that could not be, and to seek out another peshat therein or to at least realize there is a problem they need to deal with to get a proper havana. Also the chiyuv to teach a son an umnus, obviously means, other than the chiyuv to teach one?s son Torah. We do not assume that his limud haTorah will suffice to teach him an umnus as well. The conventional ?secular? methods of teaching an umnus are to be followed. If you want your son to be a carpenter, send him to carpentry school ? do not expect him to come from yeshiva a talmid chochom AND a carpenter just from his limud haTorah. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 16:30:43 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:30:43 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: Is it not likely that the prohibition is against non-Torah learning which serves no purpose other than engaging in those studies for their own interest and excitement? There is no prohibition against learning any skills for earning a livelihood. Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and research. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 18:06:13 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:06:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. It seems to me that there is indeed one very obvious exception, namely, the chometz which the Rav has not yet sold to the non-Jew. (I suppose that one could avoid this situation by delaying the bittul until the very end of the fifth hour, but the danger of missing that deadline scares me.) I have not seen any sifrei halacha, nor any pamphlets or bulletins or websites, that mention this point. Perhaps everyone just presumes that people have this exception in mind when they say the bittul? Here's a better way to phrase my question: Would a mental reservation be valid in this case? Perhaps halacha ignores the mental reservation, and only cares about the actual words of the bittul - which explicitly refers to ALL the chometz. If halacha does allow this exception - and people do have this exception in mind either explicitly or implicitly - then there is no problem. But I would like to hear that this is confirmed by the poskim. Some might say, "What's the problem? There is chometz in his house, but he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" No, I can see two very serious problems. But before I go further, I must reiterate that these problems would only arise in the case where one does his Bitul Chometz BEFORE the Rav transfers ownership to the non-Jew. (If the ownership transfer occurs first, then at the time of the Bitul, there is no problem, because the only chometz still in his possession is really and truly nothing more than the chometz that he is unaware of.) 1) If there is still chometz in his home, and he is expecting for it to be sold to a non-Jew several minutes or hours later, but the words of the bittul - "All the chometz in my possession, whether I know about it or not" - are to be taken a face value, doesn't this case aspersion on the sincerity/validity of the bittul? 2) Perhaps even worse: After Pesach, when it is time to re-acquire the chometz, he can no longer rely on "he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" Rather, a determination must be made. If he got rid of it via mechira (despite happening after the bittul), then the chometz may be eaten. But if, in the final analysis, he got rid of it via bitul, then it is assur b'hanaah (Mechaber 448:5, MB 448:25). So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? Akiva Miller From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Apr 16 06:35:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 23:35:36 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: I enjoy reading smatterings from the philosophical musings of the great scientists. But I suspect, that is the very reason they are banned. It is because they are NOT boring. And I suspect that unless it may assist me in my Parnassah even reading about new tech developments etc, is likely to be prohibited, not as a corrosive Hashkafa but simply as a time waster. But as the saying goes, Nobody's Perfect [which is sometimes followed by - I am a Nobody] Furthermore, the loud protests that I can already hear, are voiced by those who live in this world which is influenced by non-Torah energies. If we experience boredom when learning Torah - then is it not true that we are still far from the truth of Torah? Reb Avigdor M said - ever noticed how people yawn during Bentching? And would then wryly observe, They were not yawning a minute earlier during the ice cream. I have a friend, a Sefaradi Satmar Chossid, V Frum V Ehrlich, who asked R A Miller if he should learn ShaAr HaBechicnah in the ChHalevovos, R A asked him if he reads the newspapers, to which he replied, No - to which Reb Avigdor responded You need to learn it anyway because the streets are infiltrated with the HashpaAh of the newspapers. I apologise if I seemed to be dismissive of the scientists and their philosophical musings - and the truths that they may discuss Sure, I agree, truth is truth no matter the source. I was merely reflecting upon the reason for the ban on Alternative Wisdoms A] they are unnecessary - they are not required for Parnassah B] they waste time from Torah C] they may well harbour and cultivate life-concepts that are alien and contrary to Torah, amongst the granules of truth Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 06:51:02 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:51:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: <20EAE8A6498E468ABF14517EBCFFBC8A@hankPC> R' Meir G. Rabi wrote: > Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to > various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. > Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote > extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and > research. Do not ignore the truth of the message because you (and we all) do not like the like the lifestyle of the messenger. Pythagoras' theorem is a central truth to much of mathematics and science, and the truth of Einstein's science has withstood the test of time and been subject to much experimental verification. So what exactly is your point -- ignore the truth because you do not like its source? Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Apr 16 11:33:13 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:33:13 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <100f9bef-3e84-6df0-e91d-87b4c01ee3c7@zahav.net.il> Last year I read the document that one signs with the Rabbinate about the mechira. It was quite clear - you sell everything.? Everything includes things that you may have forgotten about? and even things that you have no idea if you own, like stocks in some company that deals in chameitz (even if your ownership is via your pension fund). Everything? means everything. I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". On 4/16/2018 3:06 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the > chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. > > > > So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? > > Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 16 11:07:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:07:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria In-Reply-To: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> References: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180416180705.GG23200@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:48:58AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical : but rather a spiritual disease. I like calling it spirito-somatic, coining a term to parallel "psychosomatic". Just as it stress can turn the presence of Helicobacter pulori in the stomach into having an ulcer. : The Rabbis comment: b'sorah tovah hee l'Yisroel -- : "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." : Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and : mortar to act as if it were alive... But they also say it's purely theoretical (Sanhedrin 71a). Although that's tied to R' Elazar b"R Shimon's side of a machloqes in the mishnah (Nega'im 12:3). R' Yishmael and R' Aqiva (the other two opinions in the mishnah) would apparently disagree. In any case, as with the rest of the cases in the gemara of laws that exist only for learning (ben soreir umoreh and ir hanidachas) it continues with tannaim saying they saw something local tradition said was evidence of one. Nowadays, house mold is known to be all too common. The actual physical side of tzara'as habayis needn't be miraculous. However, unlike tzara'as of the body, one can't invoke a soul - mind - brain causality. It would be pretty direct evidence of Divine Providence if tzra'as of the sort that would cause tum'ah struck only appropriate homes. Which is how I saw the quote. It requires people living on a level where blatant hashgachah peratis is approrpriate. As opposed to an era where even tzara'as of the body requires far more spirituality than people achieve. : Since in today's world we don't have the warning of leprosy attached to our : houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be : able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. There is a discussion of the role of learning Torah, and whether studying Torah that is non-applicabile is of value. Because of ideas like this one, it is hard to believe there can be Torah that is non-applicable. Even if the case isn't, "derosh vekabel sekhar" could refer to taking home lessons for the general principle. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 16th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Tifferes: What type of discipline Fax: (270) 514-1507 does harmony promote? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Apr 16 06:55:47 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:55:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzorah Message-ID: <672ECAA3-45E8-4B5C-A040-0A47C6B91FE2@cox.net> The second verse of this portion (14:2) states: "This shall be the law of the metzora on the day of his purification..." Since the Torah mentions that his purification takes place during the day, the Sages expound that the Kohen's declaration, which alone permits the metzora to begin his purification ritual, may be made only during the day (Rashi; Sifra). The observance of Taharat Hamishpacha has been a central feature of Jewish life for millennia. One finds Mikvehs in medieval Spain, in ancient Italy and in the famed desert outpost of Masada. This is consonant with Halacha which mandates that even before the town synagogue is built, a Mikveh must first be established. The source of the laws of Mikveh and family purity is found in this week's Torah portion. The Torah commands that when a woman has a menstrual flow, she and her husband must stay apart from one another. During this period she is "tameh," a Hebrew term that has been incorrectly translated as "unclean." In point of fact, the word tameh has nothing to do with uncleanness. When one is tameh it means that a person has had some contact with death. In the instance of a menstruating woman, it is the death of the ovum. Similarly, when a man has had physical relations (which inevitably involve the death of millions of sperm), he too is tameh. Implicit in this Biblical tradition is a great sensitivity and awareness of the natural life cycle. After a week has passed since the cessation of the woman's menstrual flow, the woman goes to the Mikveh where she undergoes a "spiritual rebirth." Various aspects of the Mikveh experience reinforce this notion of rebirth. The Mikveh itself must have 40 seah of water, the number 40 alluding to the 40th day after conception when the soul of a child enters the embryo. The woman must have no ornaments or barriers between herself and the water, for her emerging from the Mikveh is like that of the newborn leaving the waters of the womb with no ornaments or barriers. A child is the mirror of the family, he reflects the moral purity of his parents. Anonymous From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 16 08:34:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:34:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Kriyas HaTorah, Aseres Ha'dibros Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Rambam (Teshuvos HaRambam 60) writes that one who is seated should not stand up for the reading of the Aseres Ha'dibros (Ten Commandments). However, the general custom today is that the entire congregation does stand during this reading. Why is it that this ruling of the Rambam is not followed? A. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt"l pointed out that there are two versions of cantillation for the Aseres Ha'dibros. The first is called ta'am ha'tachton (lower cantillation) which punctuates the Aseres Ha'dibros into sentences in the same manner as the rest of the Torah. The second is called ta'am ha'elyon (higher cantillation), which punctuates following the order of the commandments, reconstructing the manner in which the Ten Commandments were received during matan Torah. There are two reasons why someone would wish to stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros. If one's intent is to show extra honor to this portion of the Torah, this is inappropriate. The entire Torah was given to Moshe on Har Sinai, and therefore all of Torah is equally precious. Standing for the Aseres Ha'dibros might lead some to the erroneous conclusion that only the Ten Commandments were received directly from Hashem. However, there is a second reason why one would stand during the Aseres Ha'dibros and that is to recreate the assembly at Har Sinai. We stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros in the same fashion that all of Israel stood during the original acceptance of the Torah. Today, the general custom is to always read the portion of the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'elyon. This indicates that this is not merely a reading of the Torah, but a recreation of matan Torah. Therefore, it is appropriate to stand. Rav Soloveitchik posits that the Rambam read the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'tachton, equating it to every other Torah reading, in which case, it would indeed be inappropriate to stand. The custom of Rav Chaim Soloveitchik, zt"l was to read the Aseres Ha'dibros both on Shavuos and during the weekly portion with ta'am ha'tachton, following the practice of the Rambam. Some, however, have the custom to read the Aseres Ha'dibros on Shavuos with ta'am ha'elyon, since this reading is a recreation of Sinai, but when parshas Yisro and parshas Va'eschanan are read on a regular Shabbos, the Aseres Ha'dibros are read with ta'am ha'tachton. In such a shul it would be best to stand from the beginning of the aliyah so as not to show more honor to one part of the Torah than another. From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 17:58:57 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 19:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: In my previous post responding R? Marty Bluke I wrote: ?in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics.? Upon reflection I wish to add to my previous thought about ?the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly? can lead to great awe and yiras harommeimus and emuna. I have no doubt that the pasuk jn Iyov (19:26) ?umibesori echezeh eloka? is a direct expression in Nach of this idea that my very tissues (biological systems) are great evidence and testimony to the the existence of the Borei Olam and His careful and intricate design and continuing hashgacha of the very smallest and finest, myriad intricate details of every living thing. It basically is the old argument that the existence of a complex system such as a clock implies that there must be a clock maker ? but ever so much in spades. Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 17 10:59:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:59:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> Message-ID: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a : bdieved. Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. The wave of rabbis coming in when the big drive for day school education started were predominantly a particular kind of Litvak. Look who the big voices were in the Agudas haRabbanim of the first half of the 20th century. RARakeffetR makes a strong case that one of the differences between RSRH and RYBS was just how lekhat-chilah secular studies are. RSRH held that our insulation from general culture and general knowledge was a tragic consequence of ghettoization. And that we never chose that life, it was forced upon us. The Emancipation was seen as a boon, allow the full expression of Judaism again. RYBS, in RARR's opionion (and of course, others vehemently disagree) only saw secular studies as the ideal way to live in a suboptimal situation. Secular knowledge in-and-of-itself as well as its ability to help one live in dignity is lekhat-chilah only within this bedi'eved world. But had we all been able to move back to Brisk, it would be all the better. Which gets us to the eis la'asos discussion. Shas too is lekhat-chilah and a great thing. What is bedi'eved is the reality that forced Rebbe, Rav Ashi, Ravinah to canonize official texts and (according to Tosafos) the geonim to write it down. But since we are still in that reality, we still publish TSBP -- lekhat-chilah. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? : Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, : "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of secular studies. Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. I would stick to discussing financial crimes: Yafeh Talmud Torah im Derekh Eretz sheyegi'as sheneihem mishkachas avon. VeKhol Torah she'ein imahh melakhah, sofahh beteilah vegoreres avon. - R' Gamliel beno shel R' Yehudah haNasi (Avos 2:2) But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the am hanivchar means. I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does not produce people less prone to these things. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 17th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Tifferes: What is the ultimate Fax: (270) 514-1507 state of harmony? From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 17 17:25:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 20:25:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz Message-ID: . I had asked: > On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat > before Biur Chametz? I thank those who responded. I still haven't found any poskim who deal with this exact question, but the Magen Avraham does mention something very close: "All melachos are assur once the time for burning has come, until he burns the chometz, just like above in Siman 431." - Magen Avraham 445:2, at the very end Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Apr 17 22:27:14 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 07:27:14 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Omer and Koolulam Message-ID: A Post by Rabbi Alex Israel. In this essay (originally posted on Facebook for public consumption), Rav Israel talks about his feelings about participating in a Koolulam sing along. If you don't know, Koolulam is an organization which gets hundreds, even thousands of people together to teach to sing one song in unison. They took this idea from the US with the twist of having regular folks and not just stars singing. For an example of what Koolulam does, here is their Yom Atzmaut video (described by many as a tefilla b'tzibbur): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxzR9Z-kG6Q (Al Kol Aleh by Naomi Shemer). Rav Israel's post is an excellent example about how people are dealing with inner conflicts of the Omer (and Three Weeks) mourning period and living in modern Israel. Note: There are rabbanim who wouldn't have allowed participation, during the Omer time or any other time. You can read the comments and discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/alexisrael1/posts/10157199448378942 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ If you have been following me on FB, you will know my obsession with Koolulam, especially their ??70th Yom Haatzmaut event. Prior to the event I was asked by 7 or 8 people, friends or talmidot/im, ?whether they could attend during the Omer. (If you watched the video, about half the participants ?were religious-looking.) ? I am generally halakhically conservative (small "c"!) and I try to keep halakha even if it disrupts my lifestyle. I ?am committed to halakhic practice and I don't knowingly contravene the law. So was it forbidden?? On the one hand this was a live event. So is it a problem? The Shulchan Arukh restricts weddings ?and haircuts as modes of marking the death of Rabbi Akiva?s 24,000 talmidim. Magen Avraham ?adds dancing and revelry to the list and I grew up not even going to movies in the Omer. Koolulam ?isn?t a wedding and did not include dancing, but was very much a public celebratory event. Could I ?go and allow others to go? I went to consult. One authoritative Posek said to me "It's not really assur (not dancing); it's not really muttar (public mass event). Go if it is ?important to you." ... But is that satisfactory?? The fundamental issue is deeper than the technical definition of ?music?, dancing? etc. In truth, ?I was going as part of my Yom Haatzmaut experience, as a celebration of life in Israel, of a people ?revived. This was not simple entertainment. Having participated in Koolulam, it was incredibly ?uplifting. My wife has described the evening as ?tefilla betzibur,? as the song?s words are essentially ?a prayer! - Just watch the "kavanna" in the video of the event! This was not merely a fun night out, although it was great fun. It was for us a Zionist ?expression, it touched a far deeper chord; it reflected faith, national unity, pride, hope, and so much ?more.? On the one hand, I see Halakha as embodying values which we aspire to imbibe. As such, I fully identify with the mourning of the ?Omer. It recalls Rabbi Akiva?s students who did not regard or interact with one another respectfully. In Israel ?today, we desperately need to be reminded annually about the need for a sensitive and respectful ?social environment and public discourse. The Omer contains a critical message. We wouldn't want to be without it. The mourning of the Omer, especially for Askenazi kehillot, also marks ?massacres and Crusades throughout the ages; another important feature, (although they may have tragically been eclipsed by the Shoah.?) But here is the problem. These practices totally fail to absorb the huge historic shift that is Medinat ?Yisrael. There is a gaping dissonance between the traditional Omer rhythm and our Israel lives. The ?traditional Omer rubric doesn't match the modern days of commemoration. For example, one ?does not recite Tachanun on Yom Hashoah because it falls in Nissan. If there is one day to say ?Tachanun, it is Yom Hashoah (I wrote about my struggle with this here ?http://thinkingtorah.blogspot.co.il/?/davening-on-yom-hasho?). And is Yom ?Haatzmaut merely a hiatus in a wider period of mourning? Moreover, in general, on a daily basis, ?as I read the Siddur, I wonder how we can ignore the huge chessed of HKBH in our generation of ?Jewish independence and the restoration of land and nationhood. How can my Siddur be the same ??(excluding the prayer for the State) as my great-grandfather? ? In this period of the year, we should be thanking God, celebrating our good fortune, revelling in ?the gifts that we feel as we move from Yom Haatzmaut to Yom Yerushalayim. Fundamentally, the ?Omer is a happy time; Ramban perceives it as a ?chol hamoed? of sorts between Pesach and ?Shavuot where we mark ?the love of our youth, our marriage with God, how we followed God ?through the wilderness? (Jeremiah 2) as we followed God from Egypt to Matan Torah at Mount ?Sinai. Where is the joy? ? So, I felt that this was a sort of Yom Haatzmaut event which yes, contravened the traditional Omer, ?but in some way lived up to our new reality. I keep the Omer - not shaving; watching how I speak ?to others and how I interact in a positive and respectful way - but we are not in the terrible era of ?Bar Kochba when the Romans massacred Rabbi Akiva's talmidim, and we are not in the period of ?the Crusades. We are in Medinat Yisrael, our thriving sovereign State, and I want to praise Hashem and celebrate my people for ?the ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ????, ?? ???????? ????? ?????? ??????? - and so I went to Kululam. ? I don't know how to square the two systems.? Later I saw a post by an amazing Rav, Rabbi David Menachem, whose post reflected similar sentiments, going even further than my thoughts. See his post here: ?https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=963243270498844&id=276752372481274 ?(h/t Yael Unterman) I?m sharing these thoughts without the ability to articulate a solution. Maybe time will change ?things. Maybe we need to push these questions to halakhic authorities and thinkers greater than ?myself.? From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 17 12:56:42 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 19:56:42 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> There have been many many posting recently about the desirability of secular education, but no one has, so far, mentioned an exceedingly important point. Bammaqom sh'eyn anashim hishtaddel lihyoth ish, so I have to step in and point it out. We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have. `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater". This is preposterous; someone who knows xokhma yvanith knows that "epi" means "above" and "tropos" means to move, or to act. An epitropos is someone who acts above someone else, i.e., a guardian, who acts above, and on behalf of, his ward. `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Posqim, especially, need to have a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages. Any poseq who is not willing to be `oqer a din in the Shulxan `Arukh is no poseq (you may attribute this quote to me). But ordinary Jews also need to know this. It is always dangerous to believe things that are untrue. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 17 15:00:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 18:00:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >: Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a >: bdieved. > >Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up by Shearith Israel in the 18th century taught secular as well as Torah subjects. The day school set up by Rabbi Avraham Rice did the same. While it is true that the level of Torah subjects taught was low, still there were secular subjects almost from the beginning. Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects and so did RJJ that was founded around1902. The high school that Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started in the second decade of the 20th century taught secular subjects as well as Torah subjects. The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. Please see my articles "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 "Bringing Torah Education to Baltimore" The Jewish Press, October 3, 2008, pages 57 & 75. >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? >: Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, >: "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." > >So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of >secular studies. The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. >Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of >secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. He knew in detail how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, he did value mathematics. Once he moved to NY he enrolled his children in yeshivas that gave its students a secular education. He received special permission not to send his eldest son to public school in Chelsea, MA, since there was no other alternative at the time. (His eldest daughter did attend public school in Chelsea, MA.) Lazar Miller, his eldest son, told me when he was sitting shiva for his mother that his mother used to help him with his math. However, she used Hebrew terminology for fraction, numerator, and denominator, since she had studied at two Yavneh schools in Lithuania where everything was learned in Ivrit. >: How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? > >Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat >haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. > >I would stick to discussing financial crimes: ... >But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding >of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the >am hanivchar means. What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal. I will take Erlichkeit with aberrance to mitzva practice over Frumkeit any time. >I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, >have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does >not produce people less prone to these things. I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to those who possess it. Originally, higher education in America was tied to religious education, and there was an attempt to instill morality in the students. Today, there is no such attempt. Indeed, if anything, higher education is in many cases anti-morality from a Torah standpoint. Parents contemplating sending their children to a secular collage should keep this in mind. YL From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 18 13:05:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:05:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:00:38PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: :> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a :> : bdieved. :> Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. : This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up : by Shearith Israel in the 18th century ... : Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects ... : The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. None of which led to the dayschool movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? .... :> So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of :> secular studies. : The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member : behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. But you haven't shown a connection between the lack of limudei chol and the extent by which people are not living according to some derekh's understanding of "true Torah values". :> Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of :> secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how : science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. ... And yet would have felt a student who studied science as a full time endevor to be a cause fo a cheshbon hanefesh. And consequently, due to his own lack of formal study, much of the science he uses in his examples is just plain wrong. (And similarly, someone who knew the then-latest theories of cosmogony, geology and evolution would not have found is arguments for Creationism very convincing. If you don't know what the other side of the debate believes, you end up knocking down strawmen.) : how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is : true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, : he did value mathematics. Leshitakha-- Why aren't you asking how R' Miller could ignore RSRH's paean to Schiller? :> But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding :> of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the :> am hanivchar means. : What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on : externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal... Frumkeit is about ritual and a drive to satisfy one's need to be holy. Ehlichkeit is about wanting to do G-d's Will. A frum "baal chessed" wants his gemach to be the biggest in town. An ehrlicher one is happy those in his town in need have so many sources of help. See Alei Shur vol II pp 152-155 A translation of an excetp by R' Ezra Goldschmiedt My blog post on the topic . And if that's not your definition, it's the one I intended when I said that the main cause of the chilulei hasheim you raised (and the mindset that least to them which is in-and-of-itself un-Jewish) is frumeit. :> I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, :> have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does :> not produce people less prone to these things. : I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to : those who possess it... So then why bring up immoral behavior as proof that there are problems with a lack of secular education? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 18th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 balance? From driceman at optimum.net Wed Apr 18 13:30:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:30:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > RAM: >> On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat >> before Biur Chametz? > Burning hametz is a b?dieved. In an ideal world we would eat all of our hametz before zman issuro. So Hazal gave us time to eat hametz in the morning, and instituted biur hametz soon enough before noon that we wouldn?t violate any issurim, but not much before that. Otherwise why not do the biur right after bedika? David Riceman From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 18 16:25:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:25:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95.6C.08474.004D7DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: None of which led to the day school movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Etz Cahim had secular studies in the late 1880s. see below. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started a high school with secular studies around 1915. . R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? This is not true. > From my article "The Founding of Yeshiva Etz Chaim" The Jewish Press, May 2, 2008, pages 48 - 49. From the amount of time allocated to secular subjects, it is clear that the directors of the yeshiva considered these far less important than the students? limudei kodesh studies. Abraham Cahan, who would eventually become the editor of the Jewish Daily Forward and a prominent figure in the Socialist movement in America, became one of the first teachers in the English department in 1887. Cahan records that the curriculum was loosely drawn to provide for the study of grammar, arithmetic, reading, and spelling ? all within the ?English Department.? But because the directors of the school had no clear idea of what should be taught, the English Department functioned haphazardly, more out of a perfunctory acknowledgement for these subjects than a sincere desire to ?provide the children with a modern education.? The English Department was divided into two classes. The first was taught by a boy about fourteen, who had just graduated from public school and the second was taught by Cahan, who was a little less than twenty-eight years old. The students ranged from the ages of nine or ten to fifteen and many were exposed to the formal study of secular subjects for the first time. One of the native students received his first lessons in the English language when he entered the Yeshiva after passing his thirteenth birthday. The young immigrants presented an immense challenge to their devoted teachers. The students drank up the instruction with a thirst centuries old. Cahan frequently remained long after the prescribed teaching hours to tutor his pupils, who were uniformly poor in reading and mathematics and who regarded grammar as an exquisite form of torture. On these occasions, the directors would ask Cahan why he ?worked so hard,? saying that the students ?already knew enough English.? And from my article "The Founding of the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School" The Jewish Press, September 5, 2008, pages 26 & 66. Setting The Pattern For Future Yeshivas The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was unique in that it was the first elementary parochial school that taught basic Jewish studies as well as Talmud. Yeshiva Etz Chaim, founded in 1886, was an intermediate school that enrolled boys at least nine years old who already were somewhat proficient in Chumash and Rashi. Yeshiva Etz Chaim?s goal was to give its students a thorough grounding in Gemara and Shulchan Aruch. In addition, it provided some limited secular studies in the late afternoon. The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was different in that in addition to providing a first rate religious education, it sought to provide its students with an excellent secular education at least equivalent to that offered by the public schools of the time. Nonetheless, limudei chol (secular or ?English? studies) was considered much less important than limudei kodesh (religious studies), and this attitude was clearly displayed in the constitution of the school. It required that there be two principals, one for each department. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 18 17:35:48 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:35:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> R? Jay F, Shachter wrote: ?We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have.? To this I respond: First, I certainly would not wish to set myself up as one who is capable ?to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us,? despite having some modern math and scientific knowledge. I think such a broad statement goes much too far. Not having any significant knowledge of Greek, I will refrain from commenting on your second example. However the first example you cite regarding Pi and the Rambam is one that I am willing to challenge. You are of course correct about the dating of the formal proof[s] (there are more than one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_%CF%80_is_irrational), date to modern, post Rambam times. However, it is very possible and probably likely that the Rambam intuited this on his own, even if without the benefit of a formal proof, that Pi had to be or was most likely to be irrational. I know I did so and probably most reasonably good students of math do so as well, long before they are aware of any formal proof for that fact. One reason for this is the well known method to approximate the value of Pi to any precision desired (even if very slow to converge) that requires little more than the knowledge of how to analyze a triangle. Simply inscribe a polygon of N equal isosceles triangles in a circle and calculate its perimeter and then divide by twice the length of the long side (= diameter of the circle). then do the same for N+1, and N+2 etc. a process in theory you could do infinitely many times for greater precision. So to intuit irrationality is very plausible even if not proven in our modern sense. Practically, note, that no matter how far you carry this exercise you will not get a repeating decimal that is the mark of the rational number. So I think you are far from ?judging the credibility? of the Rambam based on this example you cited. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 18 15:33:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:33:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . R' Ben Waxman wrote: > I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth > of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real > need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know > about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." > > The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika > anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant was that once you sell your chameitz there is no *d'Oraisa* need to do a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, and that's why we say the bracha. This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the only reason. Mishneh Brurah 431:2 writes: "Also: Because people are used to chometz all year long, if there is still some in his house and his possession, they made a gezera because he might forget and eat it." Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of the chometz that we found. But this is an error, in my opinion, because the concern raised by the MB was that one might happen to come across some chometz, and thoughtlessly eat it. Mechira will NOT prevent this. Mechira will ONLY remove the chometz from one's ownership, but it will not help against forgetfullness. I would like to close by showing that Bedikah and Mechira BOTH have strengths that the other lacks, and that is why people should do both: Mechira removes all chometz from ownership, regardless of where it might be, and (I think) regardless of my sincerity, but if I didn't clean the house well enough I may have left some around. Bedika removes (or greatly reduces) the chance that I might come across some chometz accidentally, but the chometz that I didn't find is still in my ownership. A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had intended to type!) Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 00:09:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 03:09:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> Message-ID: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day. In his day it was considered acceptable to say "Look, pi is obviously an irrational number", and nobody would lift an eyebrow, because it *is* obvious. Only later did mathematicians start to say, well, yes, it is obvious, but let's see if we can actually prove it. And eventually they did so, and guess what, they confirmed what everyone including the Rambam already knew. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 18 23:13:45 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 08:13:45 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Ben On 4/19/2018 12:33 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant > was that once you sell your chameitz there is no*d'Oraisa* need to do > a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, > and that's why we say the bracha. > > This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do > Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 03:27:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:27:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam and Pi In-Reply-To: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180419102714.GA11722@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:09:29AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a : rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state : it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day... I fully agree. But there is an irony here. When it comes to theolgy, the Rambam holds the chiyuv is to know, ie to believe because they had proof -- not tradition, not pur faith, etc... I think the Rambam believed he had a proof that pi was irrational. However, he had a differnt definition of the word proof. Continuing on this tangent... I think the definition of "proof" and therefore of "Rationalism" changed so much since the Rambam's day, the Rambam really wouldn't qualify as a "Rationalist" in our sense of the word. For example, science wasn't invented yet. The things the Rambam believed about Natural Philosophy were not backed by anything comparable to the rigor of scientific process. (Which itself is only rigorous at narrowing down the search space. Actual theories are constructed inductively, patterns found from a number of examples, and only have Bayesian levels of certainty. There can always be a black swan out there that, once found, requires replacing the theory with a new one. But *disproving* theories? That black swan does with certainty. Jumping back to before this parenthetic digression...) Similarly in math. The Rambam didn't have a modern mathemetician's definition of proof in mind. Even though he knew Euclid. But he did and always expected knowledge to be backed by some kind of proof. Archimedes spent a lot of time trying to "square the circle", i.e. come up with a geometric way of constructing a square with the same area as a circle. Numerous people tried since. This is the same thing as failing to find the rational number that is pi. Say the square they were looking for had sides of length s. So, the are of the square would be s^2. To "square the circle" would mean to find a square whose sides, s, are such that the ratio between s^2 and r^2 is pi, so that the areas s^2 (the square) and pi * r^2 (the circle) are equal. Repeatedly failing to find s by geometric construction eventually led people to conclude it was a fool's errand. By the Rambam's day, it was taken as a given that geometric construction could not find an s, and therefore that the ratio between them, pi, was irrational. (Weirdly, there still could have been a "black swan", the geometric construction that hadn't yet been found. The level of confidence the Rambam had would parellel that of a scientist believing the results of repeated experiment, but not that of a modern methematician.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Apr 19 08:04:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:04:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day >schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a >post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied >began, but initially, it didn't have to. I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was never separate from the study of Torah. He emphasized the importance of unifying Judaism and secular studies. Often speaking of the, "harmonious union of culture and spirituality," he believed that knowledge of the liberal arts would broaden one's understanding of Torah. However, Revel's dedication to Orthodox Jewry was undisputed. For instance, he forbade the use of a female vocalist in the 1926 Music Festival, as a female singer is a violation of Orthodox Jewish law. He did not allow Reform Jews to serve on Yeshiva College's national board of directors. He was also staunchly opposed to mixed seating in synagogues. "He wrote: 'Yeshiva aims at unity, at the creation of a synthesis between the Jewish conception of life, our spiritual and moral teaching and ideals, and the present-day humanities, the scientific conscience and spirit to help develop the complete harmonious Jewish personality, once again to enrich and bless our lives, to revitalize the true spirit and genius of historic Judaism.'" From https://goo.gl/hbRw8S "Rabbi Revel's first step as the new head of RIETS was the creation of an affi liated high school. The high school, Talmudical Academy, had its fi rst entering class in September 1916." Regarding Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin please see "Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin, Torah Education Pioneer in America" The Jewish Press, April 4, 2008, pages 42 & 91. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 03:19:45 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:19:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> References: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <81715a05-f9f9-f57e-95b1-03dc5240cb96@sero.name> On 19/04/18 02:13, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there > is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Nor is there an issur in having hefker chametz sitting in your property, but you have to search for it and put it away or get rid of it, for fear that if you come across it during Pesach you may absentmindedly eat it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Apr 19 07:45:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:45:48 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . I just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this permission? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:33:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:33:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180419153325.GA3724@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:04:09AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. : : From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b : : "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was ... Before the wave in question, but not the cause of the day school explosion. I do not know why this is so hard of a point to get across. Being around first but not starting a trend does not make something the source of the eventual trend. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is flawed reasoning. In fact, he didn't run a day school. And for that matter TA wasn't fully seperate from REITS. It wasn't a HS model that caught on anywhere. The model of day school and HS that actually catches on across American O through the middle of the 20th cent was the product of compromises between R ("Mr") SF Mendolovitch and his parent body. When TA evolved into MTA and BTA, it was because other schools have already created different expectations of what a HS was. Being in the same track as the eventual college degree, so that going from TA to any other college but YC was more like a transfer, was not sellable. (Although it did make AP courses moot; just take a college course in your 3rd year, if you were ready to.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Apr 19 04:25:17 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:25:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach Message-ID: The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately precedes the Amidah. I gave the following response: Soncino gives a very poignant explantion. ?O Lord, open Thou my lips; and my mouth shall declare Thy praise.? David?s lips had been sealed by wrongdoing, because praise of God would then have been blasphemy. If, then, God opened his lips and he was again enabled to offer Him praise, it was a sign that he had been granted pardon. What a profound thought before one of the most prominent and central prayers of our entire liturgy. We are all sinners and hope for the same pardon that King David was granted. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:59:45 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:59:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180419155945.GA30717@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:25:17AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately : precedes the Amidah. Technically, it is part of the Amidah. That's why we say it between ge'ulah and tefillah in Shacharis and Maariv. Unlike "Ki sheim H' eqra", which is only said before the Amidah of Minchah and Mussaf, because there is no Birkhas Ge'ulah, and therefore no problem of interruption. This is particularly relevant to a Chazan, as Chazaras haShatz should begin with "H' Sefasai Tiftach", not Birkhas Avos. Tangent, since we're looking at what the pasuq is about. Safah is at the edge. The word is not only used for a lip, but also for the seashore (sefas hayam). The peh is what stands behind the sefasayim. So, when I say this pasuq, and when I have the time and yishuv hadaas to think about what I am saying, my thoughts are about Hashem removing the externalities that block me from expressing my real inner self. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 09:23:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20180419162328.GB30717@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:56:42PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: : We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct : judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. : ... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. : He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although : he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater"... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge to that we know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon am? Mind you, I believe in the value of secular knowledge in-and-of-itself. Not just what you need to increase the likelihood of paying the bills. But I just don't see this particular argument. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 09:25:22 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> On 19/04/18 10:45, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I? just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, > then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no > longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). > > But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I > MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is > no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not > destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this > permission? It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 11:55:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahMusings] The Best Charity Message-ID: <20180419185537.GA11736@aishdas.org> People who both know my own proclivities and read this to the end will understand why I just HAD to share this post by RGS. >From https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/04/the-best-charity/ Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings The Best Charity Apr 19, 18 by R. Gil Student My friend, Rav Shlomo Einhorn, is once again attempting a superhuman feat of Torah teaching. A little over two years ago, he taught Torah for 18 live-streamed hours to raise money for the yeshiva he heads. This year, on Lag Ba-Omer, he will be attempting to break that record by teaching for 19 straight hours. This is a cause worth supporting -- or is it? I. Which Charity? Many people in the Jewish community have achieved varieties of financial success, allowing them the privilege of supporting many charities. This raises questions of communal and philanthropic priorities. Others have limited charity funds but still want to allocate them effectively. The issue is a blessing but also a complex problem, with multiple angles. Rav Hershel Schachter discussed this with me a few years ago in [48]Jewish Action. I would like to explore a specific subject that I have seen discussed in the responsa literature -- what is the best charity if you have to choose only one? In mid-sixteenth century Turkey, a wealthy man passed away without leaving instructions for the disposal of his charity funds. The local rabbis decided that some of that charity money should be given to the deceased's poor brother but the sons of the deceased objected that they should inherit the money and decide what to do with it. The question was brought to the Maharshdam, Rav Shmuel Di Medina of Salonica (Responsa Maharshdam, Yoreh De'ah 158). Maharshdam says that we have to try to determine the deceased's desires for the charity fund. Since in this case we do not know his intentions, we should give the money to the highest level of charity. The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 259) quotes his father, the Rosh, as saying that a town may reallocate to a study hall money that was donated to a synagogue or cemetery. Maharshdam argues that if in a case in which we know with certainty that the donor intended for the money to go to a synagogue we can use it for a study hall, then certainly when we do not know the donor's intention we can use the money to support Torah study. If we give the money to a lesser charity, we risk misusing the donation. II. Higher Torah The question then becomes which Torah study organization receives higher priority. Maharshdam quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 119b) that the world survives because of the Torah study of children, who due to their age are free of responsibility from sin. Additionally, more people doing a mitzvah together has greater merit than fewer people. Therefore, concludes Maharshdam, the money should be given to ththe highest charity -- a large elementary school. Similarly, Rav Ephraim Navon in early eighteenth century Turkey addresses a related question (Machaneh Ephraim (Hilkhos Tzedakah 11). A man donated money to establish in a small town a part-time kollel of ten men studying Torah. However, the town could not find ten men willing to enroll. The donor wished to change the endowment from a kollel to a full-time elementary school teacher. Rav Navon permitted this reallocation for technical reasons but adds that this new purpose is higher than the original because the Torah study of children sustains the world. III. God's Place However, Rav Yosef Eliyahu Chazzan challenges this argument (Ma'arkhei Lev vol. 1 no. 25). He quotes the Gemara (Berakhos 8a) which states that nowadays God only has the four cubits of halakhah. Therefore, He loves the distinguished gates of halakhah more than all the synagogues and other study halls. According to this passage, high-level Torah study merits higher priority than any other study. This seems to contradict the earlier passage, which gives priority to children's Torah study. This question gains greater strength when we note that the priority of high-level Torah has practical implications. Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Tefillah 8:3) rules, based on the above Gemara, that it is better to pray in a study hall than a synagogue. Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 90:18) rules likewise. Since the two passages seem to contradict and the latter is quoted authoritatively, it would seem that an elementary school should not be given priority over adult Torah study. Rav Chaim Palaggi (Chaim Be-Yad nos. 64-65) favors the interpretation of Rav Chazzan. However, he struggles with the many authorities who side with the Maharshdam. Rather than taking a minority view against the majority, in an impressive act of intellectual humility Rav Palaggi adopts a middle position that gives due weight to the majority with which he disagrees. IV. Jewish Behavior Perhaps a reconciliation of the two passages lies in the Rambam's interpretation. Rav Chazzan and Rav Palaggi follow Maharsha's interpretation that the Gemara is praising high-level study of halakhah. In the introduction to his commentary to the Mishnah (ed. Kafach, vol. 1, p. 21), Rambam sees the passage about the four cubits of halakhah as a general declaration about the uniqueness of true loyalty to the letter and spirit of halakhah. Synagogues and study halls may be full of people studying Torah but not enough of those students apply these teachings properly to develop a faithful Torah personality. Only someone who internalizes the messages of halakhah can reach out fully to God. If so, the distinguished gates of halakhah may overlap with elementary schools. Schools that teach proper character traits seem to qualify as remaining within the four cubits of halakhah, whether for adults or children. An elementary school that trains its students to follow the law, to embrace and internalize the messages of Judaism regarding behavior and thought, serves in the same capacity as a high-level kollel. Both types of institutions are distinguished gates of halakhah. Elementary schools have the additional benefit of purity, discussed above. If this is correct, the highest charity would be an elementary school that emphasizes proper behavior and attitudes, a mussar-focused cheder that directs pure children on the proper path. About Gil Student Rabbi Gil Student is the founder, publisher and editor-in-chief of Torah Musings. From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Thu Apr 19 18:08:35 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 01:08:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> ?When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah?? One thing I learned in my years as an attorney is that a rhetorical question is not an argument. I, of course, do not know what Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue to be observant in a work environment. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Fri Apr 20 11:40:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:40:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> References: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20180420184026.GA7707@aishdas.org> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 01:08:35AM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : I, of course, do not know what : Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very : proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates : and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue : to be observant in a work environment. Historical (and hagiographical) accounts portray the request for secular education that would make college and professions possible options came from the target audience, a majority of the parents of Brooklyn, not R "Mr." Mendlowitz. His launching of the HS was by convincing 8th grade parents to keep their sons in TvD "just one more year", as the parents wanted their boys to go to Public HS. That was the importance of getting a real American education had to his customer base. Then, it was another "just one more year" into 10th grade, until he had his first graduating class. There wasn't an issue for him of getting secular education into TvD, it was an issue of getting parents to agree to commit time to limudei qodesh! So of course TvD made a big deal about the quality of their secular studies. The whole point their marketing had to make was that the son can learn Torah without parents feeling afraid their boys would be held back. Getting back to the main conversation: What R-"Mr"-SFM thought is more of a historical issue. My point was that the push for limudei chol in day schools at the time the movement (not the first day school!) was getting started came from the parents, not the idealogues. There is no indication the decision was lechat-khilah, as this wasn't a lechat-khilah situation. Limudei qodesh without a guarantee of pre-college quality education wasn't a vaiable option in most communities, not a choice on the table. Meanwhile, the big voice in American O Rabbinate of the time was the East European Rabbi, and not an ideological immigrant who had a pull to America, but someone who came fleeing either progroms or Nazism. We know the majority of them considered limudei chol an assimilationist force. Or is that too under question? (I used the name "R 'Mr.' SF Mendlowitz" [or misspelled as per the usual pronounciation "-olovitch"] because he asked people to call him "Mr." and therefore I thought it respectful to acknowledge it. Even though here, "R" is the default title for men. Then I was afraid people who didn't know the history would think insult was intended, so I am adding this parenthetic explanation.) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 20th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Tifferes: What role does harmony Fax: (270) 514-1507 play in maintaining relationships? From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:54:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:54:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Some thoughts on the passing of a teacher and friend Message-ID: <5f552137ab7f4015af43f057f925c5ae@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> With the greatest trepidation I will share a few thoughts. I knew (to the extent one can know someone) R'Ozer Yeshaya Glickman Hacohain Z"L for 40 years. In the early years we learned together. He certainly was far more able than I but we did discuss many tum issues over the years. I don't think he would be happy being held up as a unicorn even though his blending of both worlds was the reason he felt he was asked by the Yeshiva to be "on the road" so much. I believe he felt that anyone could do what he did at their own level. When the hurley burleys done the question the yeshiva needs to ask itself imho is have they encouraged (or perhaps should they-my uninformed sense is that RIETS looks at the separate mountain approach as a vision -a la r'ybs) broad lives( a la r'hutner) in any of their best and brightest? do they seek out role models of that nature or only exceptional examples in specific accomplishments (e.g big TC or big $ but not a balancer)? Balancing priorities is a big challenge in life, if one wants to honor R'OYG Z"L imho one might start with some cheshbon hanefesh looking at his balance and its message for us (no two of us will likely reach the same conclusions but that's what is to be expected-it's the process not the results) yhi zichro baruch KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:53:20 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:53:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?R=92YBS-Feminist/Talit_Story?= Message-ID: <9fc9dd88e16649d48fc183b298bbfe74@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I believe this version of the story told by R? S Mandel in Jewish Action-not the ?gotcha? version I?ve heard. When a group of feminists visited him and demanded that he permit them to wear tallitot, he listened to them, showed he understood their reasoning, and proposed that there first be a trial period during which they would wear colored cloaks as tallitot, but without tzitzit and without reciting a berachah. He asked them to note how they feel wearing them and to come back after two weeks and confer with them again. After two weeks, they reconvened, and when the Rav asked these women how they felt, they told him how inspired they felt when wearing the cloaks. The Rav replied that that was excellent, that they should definitely continue wearing the cloaks and praying with kavannah, and that there was no need to wear the tallitot with tzitzit that men wore. Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 22 11:27:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:27:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah is Not Religion Message-ID: We are counting towards Shevuous which commemorates the giving of the Torah. The question is "What is Torah?' The following is from RSRH's essay Sivan I that I have posted at Sivan I (Collected Writings I) The Torah, however, did not spring from the breast of mortal man; it is the message of the God of Heaven and Earth to Man; and it was from the very beginning so high above the cultural level of the people to which it was given, that during the three thousand years of its existence there was never a time yet during which Israel was quite abreast of the Torah, when the Torah could be said to have been completely translated into practice. The Torah is rather the highest aim, the ultimate goal towards which the Jewish nation was to be guided through all its fated wanderings among the nations of the world. This imperfection of the Jewish people and its need of education is presupposed and clearly expressed in the Torah from the very beginning. There is, therefore, no stronger evidence for the Divine origin and uniqueness of the Torah than the continuous backsliding, the continuous rebellion against it on the part of the Jewish people, whose first generation perished because of this very rebellion. But the Torah has outlived all the generations of Israel and is still awaiting that coming age which "at the end of days" will be fully ripe for it. Thus, the Torah manifests from the very beginning its superhuman origin. It has no development and no history; it is rather the people of the Torah which has a history. And this history is nothing else but its continuous training and striving to rise to the unchangeable, eternal height on which the Torah is set, this Torah that has nothing in common with what is commonly called "religion." How hopelessly false is it, therefore, to call this Torah "religion," and thus drag it by this name into the circle of other phenomena in the history of human civilization, to which it does not belong. This is a fundamentally wrong starting point, and it is small wonder that it gives rise to questions such as the following, which have no meaning so far as the Torah is concerned: "You want Judaism to remain the same for ever?" "All religions rejuvenate themselves and advance with the progress of the nations, and only the Jewish 'Religion' wants to remain rigid, always the same, and refuses to yield to the views of an enlightened age?" See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 22 04:12:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 07:12:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav Message-ID: . Tumas meis and sheretz, for example, are supernatural phenomena. If someone has been in contact with tumah, and is infected with that tumah, there is no physical evidence of this infection. We are aware of the tumah if and only if we know about the events that took place, and the status of the things in those events. Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses. But they are spiritual illnesses, not medical ones. And in fact, Torah Sheb'al Peh is chock full of spiritual reasons why a person would become a metzora - Lashon Hara being the most famous of these, miserliness and others being mentioned less frequently. My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve myself in general." (Please note: This post is NOT an attempt to categorize all the many kinds of tumah. The first two paragraphs are designed only to show a similarity between tzaraas and zav, and then to highlight a difference.) Akiva Miller From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:02:03 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:02:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Re: R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 RYL quoted R? Yonasan Eybeshutz: --quote-- For all the sciences are condiments and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impure and how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. ?end quote-- >>>>> ? Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual, or even for every member of the Sanhedrin, to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry.? It is not necessary for all these subjects to be part of the standard yeshiva high school curriculum.? It is only necessary that there be in the world mathematicians, zoologists, chemists, doctors, astronomers and so on.? It is not even necessary that they be Jewish.? It is only necessary that their expertise be accessible when needed.? It is not uncommon that poskim confer with physicians, for example, when they need certain medical information in order to posken shailos in specific situations.? The poskim don?t first have to go to medical school.? ? Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. ?It is necessary that they exist in the world. ?It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies. ? If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:55:19 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:55:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> ? In a message dated 4/9/2018 RYL wrote: ? >> ?There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf --quote-- R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. Hayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, ?through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash?. By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy?. R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): ?. It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. ?.He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. ?. ? --end quote-- To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw from this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL ? >>>>? ? ? To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn: ? [1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ? [2] If you can master the ?seven branches of secular wisdom? before your bar mitzvah, that?s fabulous!? Because after your bar mitzvah you have to be mindful of ?vehagisa bo yomam velayla.???But before your bar mitzvah, you can play ball, roller-skate, and memorize the encyclopedia to your heart?s content. ? [3] Funny you should quote R? Chaim of Volozhin.? The famous Yeshiva of Volozhin did not include any of these seven branches of wisdom in its curriculum.? Anyone happen to remember why and when the Yeshiva of Volozhin closed its doors? ? Let me add a passage written by Rabbi Dr. David Berger (who, BTW, was my Jewish history professor for four wonderful semesters in Brooklyn College): ? --quote? ? Although various Geonim were favorably inclined toward the study of philosophy, it is clear that the curriculum of the advanced yeshivot was devoted to the study of Torah alone?.The private nature of philosophical instruction in the society at large [early medieval intellectual Islamic society] made it perfectly natural for Jews to follow the same course; more important, the curriculum of these venerable institutions [the yeshivot] went back to pre-Islamic days, and any effort to introduce? a curricular revolution into their hallowed halls would surely have elicited vigorous opposition.? ? --end quote? ? [Above is from R? Berger?s essay ?Judaism and General Culture in Medieval Times,? in the book *Judaism?s Encounter with Other Cultures* edited by Jacob J. Schachter.] ? Please note these words:? ?the private nature of philosophical instruction.?? The Vilna Gaon studied secular subjects on his own, as many yeshiva students have done over the years. ? Elsewhere RYL has indicated his desire that the NY govt require chassidishe schools to provide a good secular education to their students. ? You don?t have to impose your preferences on others, or get the government involved to force changes in school curricula. ? I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 01:06:16 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:06:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <6b2084c852a745458c68c6f7836e4477@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn:[1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ================================== IIUC, the Gaon?s theory of limud torah was that there was no such thing as spare time (any time one does not have to be doing something else must be spent learning) Thus assumedly he felt time spent on secular studies was required. Unless one posits that he had a need for ?recreation? which was study of secular studies or that he really only studied them when Torah learning of any sort was forbidden. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 23 05:39:50 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:39:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halacha Yomis - Hafrashas Challah, At Large Factories Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. How does the OU separate Challah at Jewish owned factories that manufacture bread and related items that require Challah separation? Is there a mashgiach separating a piece of dough from every batch? Isn?t that impractical? A. For OU-certified restaurants and caterers, the mashgiach separates Challah from every batch of dough. However, in factories it is not practical to have a mashgiach present each time a batch of dough is made. Instead the OU uses what we call the ?Tevel Matzah system.? Open boxes of matzah that did not have Challah separated from them (i.e. tevel) are placed in these factories next to the mixers. The mashgiach declares that each time a batch of dough is made, a designated piece of the matzah should become Challah and exempt that batch of dough. Even though the matzos have already been baked and the mixer contains unbaked dough, we have already seen that one can separate from baked matzah on raw dough when both are obligated in Challah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Mon Apr 23 06:34:22 2018 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 13:34:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. On Sunday, April 22, 2018, 11:29:56 PM CDT, Toby Katz wrote: > Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. It is necessary that they > exist in the world. It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student > take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. > I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female > physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. How > fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn > Torah day and night that men have! ... > If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") > are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and > potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. Not that this is optimal, Those that have the ability, and desire should spend as much time as they want/need to achieve the Torah knowledge we all rely on to live our lives. We all need Gedolim that these kinds of people become to naser the difficult Shaylos that constantly arise as we progress through time. For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah. This that misdirect those strengths - being urged to use their strengths to learn Torah are in my view shortchanging them. They are discouraging Jews from serving God and his people in the best way they can. Where their strengths where they really lie. More to say - no time. HM Want Emes and Emunah in your life? Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/ From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Mon Apr 23 01:26:05 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:26:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 From: Micha Berger > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us > they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon > am? What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, and what they are teaching us, whilst simultaneously utilising our understanding of the era's terms and sciences to better probe the intentions of the original statements. Dovid Rubin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 08:15:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 11:15:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423151544.GD1065@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 08:26:05AM +0000, D Rubin wrote: : > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, ... : > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon : > am? : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) ... Just to clear up the word, I meant non-posqim. I needed something that meant someone who wasn't "from LOR on up", and therefore shouldn't be pasqening for themselves. : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper : understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, : and what they are teaching us... Yes, as I said, I too believe in a role for limudei chol beyond the utilitarian study of things that will eventually help you pay the bills. I was addressing what I thought was a flaw in a particular argument. There is enough Torah to keep one busy for a lifetime without topics that require a formal secular education. The question is what to do when "Mah shelibo chafeitz" is something like hil' qidush hachodesh. Which brings me to a totally new aspect of this discussion: formal vs informal education. Secular study in one's spare time was the norm in places like Volozhin and Slabodka. (Although Slabodka students were more likely to be reading Freud...) To the extent that RSRH thought Volozhin were "fellow travelers on the path of Torah im Derekh Eretz" and described them as such to his followers when fundraisers for the yeshiva approched Frankfurt aM. And yet the same Litvisher rabbanim and RY would campaign against university and formal education. Perhaps their primary concern was leaving the bubble prematurely leading to assimilation, rather than expecting their talmidim to define away the concept of "free time" or afraid of which ideas their students might be exposed to. Although the Alter of Slabodka would make a case-by-case diagnosis and give each student different guidelines, at least we could say there were stduents for whom he thought secular study on one's own was appropriate. And apparently the norm. Remember, these are the same bachurim for whom the leading pass-time when not learnig was chess. Yeshiva wasn't for everyone; the guys who went were a bunch of intellecturals. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From t613k at aol.com Mon Apr 23 09:33:07 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:33:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <162f35a0504-c8b-11ca6@webjas-vab001.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Mon Apr 23 12:43:36 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:43:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: << I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies.>> And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of science the women should pasken the question -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:00:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:00:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423210037.GA8959@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:43:36PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of : science the women should pasken the question Except that it's arguable that pro forma women can't pasqen. It means a poseiq needs to know enough to ask intelligent questions of the expert. Even if the experts would end up being women, BTs who studied the subject before accepting ol mitzvos, unobservant Jews or non-Jews. Which is a good deal of knowledge, but doesn't require years of formal education. When I brought this thread over from Areivim to Avodah, my intent was not to have a bunch of pro-secular education posts. Rather, my focus was on the eilu va'eilu of saying that even though I believe in the value of secular education, I cannot say it's the One True Derekh. For example, the gemara only says that many tried to follow Rashbi's Torah-only derekh and failed. Not that R Yishmael was right. But that pragmatically, one worked for the masses and the didn't. And if the context changes, so that the welfare state makes it possible for more to succeed toing things Rashbi's way? The gemara says nothing against it. Assuming they don't bankrupt the state that way or other Modern Israeli political, governmental and economic issues, but again, that's the balebatishe problem of the system failing. Even if it were chilul hasheim issues (just to pre-empt that line of reasoning), that's not about eschewing secular studies. I would say the gemara leaves both options open. And for today... For every kid who leaves chareidi life going OTD because they feel hobbled by the lack of secular education, or the lack of worldliness in general, or just plain constricted by the paucity of their choices of how to live as adults there is a Mod-O kid who leaves because of too much opennees, a lack of structure, an attraction to the other lifestyles they're exposed to, a feeling that their parents are fooling themselves with compromise... To survive, we need all our options. That said, I find it interesting that none of the arguments in favor of limudei chol actually involved what I consider their real value: There is too much we can't learn from Torah. Not that it's not there, just that we don't know how to extract it. Like when RALichtenstein saw the Chevra Qadisha try to rush the aveilim at one levayah through so that they could begin another, he commented that had they read Hamlet they never could have acted that way. Not that such middos aren't in Torah sources, but they're more accessible sometimes in literature. And for all the awe one may get from the Wisdom of the Author when learning Torah, it hits harder when you see Chokhmas haBorei in the physical world, outside the context of "religious studies". Also, by studying other topics one learns other modes of thought, and becomes more able to think in other ways, reach other conclusions. Mathemeticians, programmers and lawyers all learn a precision of thought and attention to detail that helps in real-life problem solving as well as learning. Vekhulu for other displines. In short... The value I find in limudei chol only starts with knowing more and having more data to put into the Torah and the parnasah mills. They change how one thinks in ways that improve both Torah and life skills. Simply by having more tools in the toolbox. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 11:08:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. When I was a kid, it was a big deal that we couldn't buy chameitz from Walbaum's, including the supermarket whose parking lot was directly across the street. It means that for a couple of months, I couldn't be sent to the store on Fri for many of those last-minute purchases. I presume (given who my parents would have asked in that era) that was R' Fabian Schoenfeld's pesaq. But as the broohaha over beer this year indicates, there is a machloqes. We could view the sale as valid, and the Jew wrongfully selling merchandise that belongs to someone else. Theft, rather than chameitz she'avar alav es haPesach. Which would imply that in our case, where bi'ur chameitz is done later than the rav's mechirah, we would view it as wrongfully destroying someone else's chameitz. Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? I would think the latter. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 14:07:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:07:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> On 23/04/18 14:08, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. > > With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim > who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) > that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to > treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But here your actions show that you were completely serious about the mechira, but you didn't intend this to be included in it. The shtar you signed doesn't specifically say this *is* included. Its description of what's included very much depends on your intentions as revealed by your actions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend to include ANY item? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 23 14:51:13 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:51:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <07.CD.29097.DC55EDA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:31 AM 4/23/2018, RN Toby Katz wrote: >I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a >reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I >never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would >never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the >option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? >? >? >? >--Toby Katz I find your terminology "normal Orthodox schools" somewhat surprising in the context of Chassidic yeshivas. What exactly do you mean by this terminology when contrasted with Chassidic schools? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 21:57:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:57:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/04/18 17:49, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be > : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from > : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a > : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. > > But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when > the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions > showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or > burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend > to include ANY item? Again, you are conflating two questions, one of which depends on your intentions and one which does not: 1) Is the mechira valid? Yes, regardless of your intentions. 2) What is included in the mechira. Certainly anything explicitly included in the shtar. But the shtar's language is vague; does it apply to *this* piece of bread? Only if you meant it to. That which you've set aside for breakfast is clearly not included, even if the mechira happened early in the morning. Ditto for that which you set aside to burn. Did it include an item on your store shelves, which you ended up selling just 20 minutes later? We can approach this two ways: a) It did, because you intended it to. Your intention was that your inventory should not become treif; this is inventory, you don't want it to be treif, therefore it's included. b) I bo'is eima, fine, let it be as you say, and the act of selling an item -- whether 20 minutes after the zman or 20 minutes before the end of Achron Shel Pesach -- shows that it was not included. Even if we were to accept this proposition (which I do not), whatever remains on the shelves that you did *not* sell remains included. Not only did you do nothing to indicate an intention to exclude it, you clearly did intend to include it, since your whole purpose was that it should not become treif. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 22:18:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:18:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name>, <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore > guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is > still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between > chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or > moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? > > I would think the latter. > ?????- Iiuc they sold the whole business, not just the stock Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 24 04:53:01 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 07:53:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira. There have been conjectures that the person's actions might reveal his intentions, or maybe not. But it seems to me that the starting point should be that which has been mentioned in writing. And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser degree of detail. In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this thread. But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other details. It seems to me that the "stam daas" of this person would be that he is selling only what is on the list, and the bittul is on everything else. Akiva Miller From hankman at bell.net Tue Apr 24 06:15:47 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:15:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: <0401042908D24434A2102FDD03A26A7A@hankPC> R?n T. Katz wrote: In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz I would go well beyond that and possibly suggest that when done ?the right way? that certain limudei chol? (read math and natural sciences) could be a better and more efficient way of attaining emunah including drosh vachakor and yiras harommeimus and the goal of understanding ?beHai? boro osom, or the gevuros of masseh bereishis, the intricacies of the olam koton and the actual vast olom not to mention the numerous sugios in shas and halacha that require knowledge of the real world and it science (its understanding). I propose a thought for consideration, that while for some yechidim their level of Torah learning is sufficiently high that Torah is the best and most efficient path to attain these goals. Unfortunately for many (most) of us, our level of Torah havanah is not even close to that level and as a practical fact a more direct path to getting a start on these Torah goals is through studying the briah and its science put there by G-d in the maseh beraishis. Someone like the GRA whose level of Torah study most of us can not even begin to imagine would relegate his study of science to only when it was not in opposition to his limud of Torah (such as the B?HK etc) as the best manner (for him) of achieving this goal was through his limud of Torah. But for most of us to take this as also applying to our situation is wishful thinking. As many times as I learn parshs Bereishis, my havana of ?beHai? boro osom has not really grown very much nor my level derosh vachakor. For us it may be a lekatchila outside the B?HK to set times for scientific study if done with the appropriate approach in support of our Torah understanding and growth in yira and emunah even when not just for parnasa. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 24 08:12:26 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:12:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Some_FAQs_about_the_OU=92s_=93Tevel_Mat?= =?windows-1252?q?zah_system=94?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Here are some FAQs about the OU?s ?Tevel Matzah system? that were described in yesterday?s Halacha Yomis. Q1. What would happen if the box of tevel matzos that was left in the factory was accidentally discarded? A1. If the matzo is discarded, the Tevel Matzah system becomes in-operative. Because of the concern that the tevel matzos might be lost, the OU also arranges a backup Hafrashas Challah each day in the OU offices to cover any factory that did not have a proper Hafrashas Challah done on premises. Q2. Is there any special reason that the OU chooses to use matzos for their tevel system? Couldn?t plain dough or bread be used instead for this purpose? A2. The main advantage of using matzos for Hafrashas Challah is that they have a very long shelf-life. A matzah can easily last from one year to the next and still be edible. Another obvious advantage of using matzah is that it can remain in the factories on Pesach. Q3. From how many batches of dough can one separate Challah using one box of tevel matzos? A3. When the mashgiach places the box of matzos in the factory, he declares that 1/5 of a gram of matzah should become Challah for each subsequent batter that will be produced. Considering that a box of matzos contains approximately one pound of matzos (454 grams), this means that a box of matzos will cover the Challah for more than 2,200 batches of dough. Even if a factory makes ten batches a day, a single box of matzos will last for over 6 months! Q4. Given that a box of matzah can be used to separate Challah for over 2,000 batches of dough, if a factory only makes one or two batches of dough a day, could a single box of matzos be used for several years? A4. No. One cannot take Challah from dough made from wheat that grew in one year on a batch of dough made from wheat that grew in a different year. The cutoff for determining which year the wheat grew is Rosh Hashanah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 24 08:24:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:33pm EDT, R Akiva Miller wrote: : This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do : Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer : to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the : only reason. I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? The MB's other reason (gezeira) and discussion thereof, elided. : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of : the chometz that we found... "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? ... : A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my : chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already : removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for : me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had : intended to type!) Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? A shade over 6 days later, on Tue, Apr 24 at 7:53am EDT, RAM wrote: : I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone : referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira... : And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two : major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person : who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller : must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser : degree of detail. I thought there are so many versions, referencing "the text" or even "a text" is meaningless. I therefore viewed the issue when you raised it last week (?) morein terms of: Does your LOR address this issue, and if so, how? : In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, : I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must : take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual : intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this : thread. Bitul and "all my chameitz" are mutually exclusive sets. It it's hefqeir, it's not mine. (BTW, in Israeli Aramaic the word was "hevqer", which I kept on reading as though it was "the cattle.") Espectially is we allow later actions as evidence of what was intent at the time of the sale. : But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that : he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", : and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other : details... Without "and any other chameitz which may be"? That version would solve all your problems, but affords less protection against issur. Since all the mechirah is belt-n-suspenders with bitul anyway, no big deal. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony? From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 24 09:03:23 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:03:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> References: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1df6ecc6-8417-7966-0620-412e6633fa66@sero.name> On 24/04/18 11:24, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of > hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? Yes, I think it is. Hefker, especially when the item is still in your property, depends on your willing renunciation. If you still regard it as yours then it's not hefker, regardless of your declaration. Either because the insincere declaration is defective, or because the moment you think of it as yours you regain it through kinyan chatzer. > : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point > : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) > : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of > : the chometz that we found... > > "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? Bedika != Bittul. By definition Bedika cannot get rid of what is not found. > Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? I don't see why not. If you inherited an unspecified estate you can surely sell it as a lot, sight unseen, and leave it to the buyer to discover what exactly is included in it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Tue Apr 24 23:26:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 06:26:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hand washing Message-ID: The gemara (Shabbat 62b) states that being derogatory (mzalzel) concerning ntilat yadaim(hand washing) causes poverty. Rava then clarifies that this is only talking about the case where one doesn't wash at all. The gemara then rejects Rava's interpretation based on R' Chisda saying that he had washed his hands with a lot of water and got a lot of good (in return?). As part of a broader shiur, I was wondering : 1. Is it possible that water was not as readily available then and so this focus on the amount of water might not be applicable today? 2. Why would the gemara accept a rejection of Rava without a more specific refutation source? 3. How is R' Chisda's statement a source of rejection? (Rava could well agree that using more than the minimum is praiseworthy but still hold poverty only comes for those who don't wash at all) That's enough to start :) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Tue Apr 24 10:57:13 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:57:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed during the Rav?s lifetime. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 24 05:30:39 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Apr 22, 2018 09:28:10 pm Message-ID: <15245910390.9bBE36.37982@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge [s]o that we > know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto > explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we > question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with > emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? > > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the > metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) > that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such > things. But the hamon am? > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- correction. At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that requires supernatural explanation. Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass them. There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 06:05:39 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:05:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <23688d43-325f-1109-9d85-fcb94a75b7e7@aishdas.org> On 4/24/2018 1:57 PM, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit > and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav's talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav's lifetime. The one that Rabbi Mayer Twersky quotes is in the name of an impeccable source, Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, who was personally involved. KT, YGB From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 07:25:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:25:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425142550.GB15047@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:57:13PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit : and others tell a different version. He believes one... Actually, you can go see RSM's version for yourself. No need to mix RJR into this. From the current Jewish Action: https://jewishaction.com/the-rav/observing-the-rav > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav?s lifetime. Actually, the "a woman" version was. I remember the discussion in shul, because I thought that the story as told belittled the woman too much. (Unlike RSM's impression, "Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances.") Tamar Ross (2004) records R' Meiselman and the Frimer Brothers telling the story https://books.google.com/books?id=vkvNNioH--4C&lpg=PA91&pg=PA91#v=onepage I found R' Meiselman (published Fall 1998) here (near the bottom of pg 9 [5th page of the PDF]): http://bit.ly/2HQBwHm And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 They say they were told the story by Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, former rabbi of the YI of Brokline, and that it happened in the mid-70s. Remember (unlike RSM) your "several of the Rav's talmidim knew the NY RY, not the Rabbi of Boston. There is really enough detail in R' Meiselman and R's Frimer version to rule out the story being legend. I would attribute RSM's version to memory drift; it has been some 40 years since the events, after all. 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? From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Apr 25 07:37:22 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:37:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Translation of Makkos / Binfol oyivcha al tismach In-Reply-To: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> References: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> Message-ID: Revisiting an issue that comes up repeatedly--do classical sources support the approach that we should feel sorrow for / not rejoice over, the suffering of our persecuting enemies. Yeshayahu (15:5) declares, ?My heart cries out? over the destruction of Israel?s wicked enemy, Moab. TargumYonason (and Radak and Metsudos) take this as the prophet quoting the enemy. But Rashi takes it as the prophet expressing his own heart?s thoughts, and he writes, ?The prophets of Israel are unlike the prophets of the umos ha-olom. Bilaam sought to uproot Israel for no reason. But the prophets of Israel [who had good cause to wish for their persecutors? destruction, nevertheless] mourn over the punishments coming upon the nations (miss-o-ninnim al pur-annos ha-ba-ah al ha-umos).?? (Artscroll cites both explanations, but adds a commentary by ''Sod Yesharim (I could not find it on HebrewBooks.org) who, like Rashi, takes the prophet to be referring to his own grief, but contra Rashi declares, ''The prophet had no cause to grieve over the downfall of the wicked nation of Moab, or of other unworthy nations. However, every nation had its own type of impurity that tempted the righteous and was a challenge that they had to overcome. When they did so successfully, they grew in stature. Now, with the demise of Moab, that particular challenge disappeared, and with it the potential for growth.) Also, I did have occasion to directly ask Rav Dovid Feinstein what he meant in the Kol Dodi Hagadah by ''shofchim l'eebud ha-makos and we don't drink them.'' Did he mean we pour out the wine out of sympathy for the Egyptians' suffering the makkos (as I had translated it), or did he mean that after taking the drops of wine out of the cups, we throw them (the drops of wine representing the makkos) out as waste, rather than drinking them (as R. Zev Sero insisted). And how that relates to the issue of ''al tismach.'' Sorry, but he did not commit to either way, comfortable with both approaches towards rejoicing over the downfall of Israel's enemies. Nevertheless, by my request, the next printing of the Kol Dodi Haggadah should have the translation changed to R. Zev's. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 08:32:13 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:32:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". Does _anybody_ here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? Perhaps a bar mitzvah boy the first time his tefillin "counts", or, perhaps the first time one dons a tallis at shul after marriage, or the first time one does birchas hachama? (As a baal teshuva, I have had a plethora of opportunities to do a mitzvah for the first time, and sometimes I get a spiritual high. And it's quite possible that I didn't do all of them correctly the first time, and that sometimes I wasn't even yotzie b'deived. No, I don't check my tzitzis every time I put on my tallis). Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce inappropriate? The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an inappropriate thought? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 25 13:03:11 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 16:03:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages Message-ID: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:26 AM 4/25/2018, Jay F. Shachter wrote: Let me begin with Daas Torah. Some years ago Rav Zelig Epstein, ZT"L was describing how the Mir Yeshiva left Vilna and got to Japan. He pointed out that almost all of the yeshivas were at this time located in Vilna and that almost all of the hanhalla of the yeshivas were opposed to leaving Vilna, because they feared that the Russians would arrest the yeshiva boys for trying to leave the "Communist paradise." However, several yeshivas boys were strongly in favor of leaving. The following is from my article Rabbi Aryeh Leib Malin And The Mir Yeshiva Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 154 The Jewish Press, February 2, 2018. "Rabbi Malin [a top Mir student] felt it was a matter of life and death that the Mir Yeshiva students leave Vilna. He is reported to have said, "I will get a gun and shoot anybody who tries to stop us from leaving!" (This was verified for me by Reb Zalman Alpert, who served as a librarian at Yeshiva University for many years and told me he heard it from two former Mir Yeshiva students.) " When one of the boys heard that the yeshiva students went against what the hanhalla said, he asked, "But what about Daas Torah?" Reb Zelig replied (and I do not know if he was serious or kidding), "This was before Daas Torah was invented." I was told that Reb Chaim Shmuelevitz, who was against the yeshiva leaving, later apologized to Reb Leib with tears in his eyes. The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. Regarding asking and following what a rov tells you, I am convinced that when they ask in the World to Come "Why did you do this or that?" and someone replies, "I asked a Rov and he told me to do this." the response will be, "You were given free will and expected to exercise it." Certainly one needs to ask a rov difficult halachic questions, but need one ask about most things in daily life? A friend of mine who is a therapist told me that some of his patients are afraid to do almost anything on their own. How sad. Even the Avos were not perfect and RSRH points this out. See his essay Lessons From Jacob and Esau (Collected Writings VII) where he points out that Yitzchok and Rivka made errors in educating Eisav. See also his commentary on what Avraham did when he said that Sarah was his sister. He follows the RAMBAN who says Avraham made a "big" mistake when he did this. Sadly there are some who do believe that whatever scientific assertions Chazal made must be valid. Rabbi Moshe Meiselman is one such person. His book Torah, Chazal and Science takes this position. It is hard for me to understand how a nephew of RYBS can hold this view. Regarding believing things that are not true, see my article "My Mind Is Made Up. Do Not Confuse Me With The Facts!" The Jewish Press, August 25, 2004 pages 7 & 77. YL >It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > >Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what >you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when >you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages >have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same >moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- >correction. > >At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the >moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the >dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on >yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, >the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and >advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly >caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). > >Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this >mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still >we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on >our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in >matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, >even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in >Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit >when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must >rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. >If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will >increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where >the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same >reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. > >That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know >already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, >and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, >and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take >literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and >you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that >requires supernatural explanation. > >Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, >and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes >you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like >them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a >Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your >abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is >a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some >of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. > >You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different >species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that >every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid >Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all >scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a >vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us >closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different >species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you >will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are >different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do >is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass >them. > >There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original >topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than >bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, >that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education >inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for >all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and >progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some >people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the >Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded >innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There >is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he >is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will >never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that >he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. > > > Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter > 6424 N Whipple St > Chicago IL 60645-4111 > (1-773)7613784 landline > (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice > jay at m5.chicago.il.us -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 14:03:32 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish Message-ID: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> >From The Jewish Press , by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev [literally, "the fish of the sword"] is kasher. Why is it widely considered to be not kosher, then? Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different consistency - or something like that - from those of other fish. So he decided it was a treife fish. But that's absolutely not correct. The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag hacherev is kasher. Professor [Shlomo] Sternberg, a big genius in learning and math, published an essay maybe 20 years ago in which he writes that Rabbi Soloveitchik asked him to conduct research on the status of swordfish. He did. He showed Rabbi Soloveitchik the scales of a swordfish and Rav Soloveitchik said, "It's a kashere fish!" Professsor Sternberg writes that he still has the envelope with the scales he showed Rav Soloveitchik in his Gemara Chullin. If the commentaries on the Shuchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev is kosher, how can Rabbi Tendler claim it isn't? Rabbi Tendler claims "dag hacherev" is a different fish. It's not true. But Rabbi Tendler did a service to the Orthodox Jewish community because at the time there were Conservative rabbis who were giving hashgachas, so he laughed them out of existence and said they don't know what they're talking because [they were giving swordfish a hechsher when] swordfish is really treif. So the Orthodox realized you can't rely on the Conservatives. L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue, but Rabbi Tendler accomplished his goal. Well, that's a lot of egg (roe?) on my face after what I said repeatedly in the 1990s in soc.culture.jewish[.moderated] O/C/R Wars... But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. "L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! There is a tie in here to what R JFSchachter posted here yesterday (? no time zone) at 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) under the subject line "Judging The Credibility Of The Sages": > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what > you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when > you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages > have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same > moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- > correction. I was okay attributing ignorance to Chazal, but not violating epstemic virtue like "making up an answer". I would think that by the end of the period, subconsious biases wouldn't have made it into the final result. > At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the > moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the > dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah... Except that daas Torah only requires belief that one is obligated to listen to halachic leadership on social and personal issues where the unknowns are not halachic (or even aggadic). Not that they are necessarily right, nor even that they are more likely to be right. (Infallibility was never Agudah doctrine; but you do find it among the population.) And I am not sure that when it comes to halakhah Chazal *can* be wrong. It's like saying that the house john built is inconsistent with the house John built. Pesaq is constitutive, not truth finding; expecially when you are the nation's authoritative halachic source (eg the Sanhedrin or shas as keSanhedrin, depending on when you think the Sanhedrin actually closed its doors). A pesaq made by CHazal based on incorrect science may still be correct halakhah because they define correctness. We would need to revisit our recurring tereifos discussion. But in any case: 1- I refuse to believe Chazal "made up answers" of had other epistemic moral failings (as a group, including peer review, what made it into shas, etc...) And I wonder how emunas chakhamim would work without that kind of assertion. 2- And yet, that may have happened here, among our contemporary posqim. No one is interested in fixing the science error (among those who believe it is in error) because C loses this way. 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? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 12:49:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 15:49:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425194944.GC6722@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:32:13AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 : > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 : : Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav : concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of : 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" : and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". ... : The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is : *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is : doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an : inappropriate thought? I think it's more that the high isn't from the halachic aspect of what they're doing. Rather than it having to be halkhah qua halakhah. I am not sure that "one is doing ratzon H'" is different than "being mequyam a mitzvah" anyway. As for "getting closer to H'", Litvaks would talk more about sheleimus than deveiqus. IMHO this is part of RYBS being, fundamentally, a Brisker. Here's a quote I feel is on a similar theme, from "The Rav: The World of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik", starting on pg 54: Judaism must be explained and expounded on a proper level. I have read many pamphlets that have been published in the United States with the purpose of bringing people closer to Judaism. There is much foolishness and narrishkeit in some of these publications. For instance, a recent booklet on the Sabbath stressed the importance of a white tablecloth. A woman recently told me that the Sabbath is wonderful, and that it enhances her spiritual joy when she places a snow-white tablecloth on her table. Such pamphlets also speak about a sparkling candelabra. Is this true Judaism? You cannot imbue real and basic Judaism by utilizing cheap sentimentalism and stressing empty ceremonies. Whoever attempts such an approach underestimates the intelligence of the American Jew. If you reduce Judaism to religious sentiments and ceremonies, then there is no role for rabbis to discharge. Religious sentiments and ceremonies are not solely posessed by Orthodox Jewry. All the branches of Judaism have ceremonies and rituals. This is not the only reason why we must negate such a superficial approach. Today in the United States, American Jewish laymen are achieving intellectual and metaphysical maturity. They wish to discover their roots in depth. We will soon reach a point in time where the majority of our congregants will have academic degrees. Through the mediums of white tablecloths and polished candelabras, you will not bring these people back to Judaism. It is forbidden to publish pamphlets of this nature, which emphasize the emotional and ceremonial approaches. There is another reason why ceremony will not influence the American Jew. In the Unitesd States today, the greatest master of ceremony is Hollywood. If a Jew wants ceremony, all he has to do is turn on the television set. If our approach stresses the ceremonial side of Judaism rather than its moral, ethical, and religious teachings, then our viewpoint will soon become bankrupt. The only proper course is that of Ezekiel's program for the priests: "And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and the common, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean" [Ezekiel 44:23] The rabbi must teach his congregants. He must deepen their appreciation of Judaism and not water it down. If we neutralize and compromise our teachings, then we are no different than the other branches of Judaism. By RYBS's standards, being moved by music at a kumzitz is "ceremony". Meanwhile, Chassidus, Mussar, RSRH, Qabbalah-influenced Sepharadim (following the Chida and Ben Ish Hai) and numerous other derakhim have no problem with ceremony. For that matter, before it became minhag, specifying specific patterns of hand washing (RLRLRL or RRLL) was also ritual once. And many of those Academics that RYBS foresaw want their Nesivos Shalom, Tish, kumzitz.... Neochassidus is a big thing in YU. This idea that ceremonies that aren't defined by halakhah are inherently empty and its sentimentalism is cheap rather than reinforcing the cognitive and halachic, is, as I said, only something a Brisker would write. Even within Brisk... RYBS went further in this direction than did the Brisker Rav (R Velvel, his uncle). The BR holds that one makes berakhos on minhagim that have a cheftzah shel mitzvah (eg lighting a Chanukah menorah in shul), and that the Rambam and Rabbeinu Tam don't argue about that. What they do argue about is whether Chatzi Hallel is close enough to Hallel to qualify for a berakhah. This is a non-started for RYBS, who requires minhagim have a cheftzah shel mitzvah or else they're ceremoial. RYBS even fit the minhagim of the 3 Weeks and 9 Days to fit this shitah by insisting they must follow what was already established aveilus and sheloshim, respectively. Oops. I just notied I'm repeating something I worte a decade ago. See . At least the berkhah-in-minhag part was posted in 2011, so that this post had the value of combining the two earlier ones. Beqitzur, I don't know of two many people (aside from our mutual rebbe-chaver) who would agree with RYBS on this one. 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? From zev at sero.name Wed Apr 25 14:37:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:37:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish In-Reply-To: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 25/04/18 17:03, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish > because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with > scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is > young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are > elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) > So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question > seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify > as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. There can be no question that a fish does *not* have to keep its scales to remain kosher. The posuk says fish only have to have their scales in the water, not when they leave the water. A fish that sheds its scales when caught is kosher, and no rabbi has the right to say otherwise. And I don't see a difference between shedding when caught and shedding on reaching adulthood. As I understand R Tendler's claim, it was that swordfish never have true scales, that even the ones they have as juveniles are not kaskasim. And this seems not to be true. BTW R Ari G and R Ari Z dispute the claim that adults swordfish (or landed swordfish) lose all their scales. They claim that this is the result of not examining adult landed fish closely enough, and that if one does one finds kosher scales still attached to the skin. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Apr 25 16:33:33 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 23:33:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: <06705270-E689-4937-BAAF-0C7AE035E469@tenzerlunin.com> I simply note that (a) all the stories were published after the Rav died and (b) all appear to be least first degree if not more hearsay. (It?s unclear how R. Mandel knows the story. His article doesn?t say if he saw it, heard it from the Rav, or heard it from someone else.) But the difference between the two ways the story is told is striking and, I believe, calls it into question. But I guess we?ll never know. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 26 05:25:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:25:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sifrei torah Message-ID: <6fef9ae673744a11a2ede85a210fb782@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Can anyone point me to information concerning the history of the difference between the physical element of Ashkenazi (atzei chaim) and Eidot Hamizrach (containers) Sifrei Torah? The differences in the timing and physics of hagba and glila ? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Apr 26 10:06:01 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 17:06:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Unknown Days of the Jewish Calender Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NZ9BN1 This coming week, an unsuspecting person wishing to catch a minyan, who walks into a random shul in many places around the world, might be in for a surprise. After the Shemoneh Esrei prayer on Sunday there will be no Tachanun. On Monday there will be Selichos; and on Thursday there again won?t be Tachanun! Why would this be? No Tachanun generally signifies that it is a festive day[1]; yet, no other observances are readily noticeable. As for the reciting of Selichos on Monday, they are usually reserved for a fast day; yet no one seems to be fasting! What is going on? See the above URL for more about this. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 19:43:43 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 22:43:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> On 4/25/2018 11:32 AM, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: >> And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at >> (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav > concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense > of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something > else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". > Does anybody here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? ... > Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah > was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce > inappropriate? > The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he > is thinking that he is being mekayum a mitzvah?... For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a problem. KT, YGB From meirabi at gmail.com Thu Apr 26 15:58:32 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 08:58:32 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach Message-ID: Yeshayahu (15:5) My heart cries out over the destruction of Israels wicked enemy, Moab. Rashi understands, the prophet is expressing his own agony - The prophets of Israel, unlike the prophets of the world, like Bilaam, seek to destroy us without provocation. Our prophets however, mourn for our persecutors when they suffer Divine punishments. As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness, that is certainly more of an intense and personal loss than the millions of Egyptians who perished - but we mourn them all from the perspective of lost potential, lost opportunity to be loyal to HKBH, and HKBH's failure to successfully persuade them to open their eyes and do what is right. That is why we spill wine from the cup we use for Hallel - HKBH's praise is incomplete, He was not fully successful - the gift He gave humanity, free choice, can, and was, used against Him. Obviously the cup should not be topped up. Each plague was a lesson and a plea from HKBH to all who witnessed these astonishing events - do the right thing, reconise that I am the King of all kings, The Master of the universe. Every Yid deserves 600,000 to attend his funeral. The Gemara explains - As it was given So it is taken away. Every Y, even the most Poshut or unlearned, is a potential recipient of the entire Torah and we must visualise their departure as the loss of that tremendous potential. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 26 18:35:26 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:35:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2499630f-df1d-04ef-9897-ef18103da093@sero.name> On 26/04/18 18:58, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of > descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness Where is this written? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri Apr 27 01:04:10 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 10:04:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> References: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> Message-ID: When I was in yeshiva, one of my rabbanim told us that we should dance when we "get" a Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Ben On 4/26/2018 4:43 AM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: > For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a > problem. > > KT, > YGB From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 29 07:49:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 17:49:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: A while ago we had a discussion about farfetched ukimtas. In yesterday's daf (Zevachim 15) the Gemara made a very startling statement about farfetched ukimtas. The Gemara has a question about whether Holachah without walking is Pasul or not. The Gemara brought a proof from a braisa If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher (even though when it spills, some if it spreads out towards the Mizbeach, i.e. Holachah without walking). The Gemara answered that none of the blood spread towards the Mizbeach.The Gemara then asked, surely, it spreads in all directions! The Gemara gave 3 answers 1: It fell on an incline. 2: It fell in a crevice. 3: The blood was very thick, and almost congealed. It did not spread at all. Then the Gemara made the following startling statement to reject these answers: It is UNREASONABLE to say that the Tana taught about such unusual cases The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? I brought an example from Bava Basra 19-20 which had at least as farfetched ukimtas and yet the Gemara didn't think they were unreasonable. Here is the example that I quoted from Bava Basra A Baraisa states that the following block Tumah, grass that was detached and placed in a window, or grew there by itself; rags smaller than three fingers by three fingers; a dangling limb or flesh of an animal; a bird that rested there; a Nochri who sat there, a (i.e. stillborn) baby born in the eighth month; salt; earthenware Kelim; and a Sefer Torah. The Gemara then proceeds to ask questions on each one that it is only there temporarily and the Gemara gives ukimtas, qualifications, for each thing to explain why it is not there temporarily. 1. Grass The grass is poisonous. The wall is ruined (so the grass will not destory it) The grass is 3 tefachim from the wall and does not harm the wall but bends into the window 2. Rags The material is too thick to be used for a patch It's sackcloth which is rough and would scratch the skin. It's not sackcloth, it's just rough like sacklocth 3. Dangling limb of an animal The animal is tied up and can't move. It's a non-kosher animal. It's a weak animal. 3. Bird The bird is tied down. It's a non-kosher bird. It's a Kalanisa (a very lean bird). It's not really a kalanisa, it's just lean like a kalanisa. 4. A non-Jew He is tied up. He is a ?????. He is a prisoner of the king 5. Salt The salt is bitter. There are thorns in it. It's resting on earthernware so it does not harm the wall. 5. Sefer Torah It's worn out. It's burial will be in the window. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 29 22:24:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 05:24:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? -/////---- One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the already known outcome. Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon Apr 30 01:22:56 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:22:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched >> ukimtas? ...` > One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition > as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the > already known outcome. It doesn't sound that way from the Gemara, The Gemara goes as follows: 1. Ula makes a statement that Holachah without walking is Pasul. 2. The Gemara brings a proof against him from a Mishna (where the blood spills, etc.) 3. The Gemara answers for Ula with an ukimta for the Mishna which doesn't contradict his din 4. The gemara says the ukimta is unreasonable Nowehere does it sound like we are reconciling sources with a known outcome. It sounds like a typical give and take found all over shas where ukimtas are simply accepted. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 29 18:59:29 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 21:59:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Question from the Book of Yechezqeil Message-ID: In Yechezqeil, 44:31, he writes that a Kohen shall not eat nevayla (or T?refah). Nobody can eat it so why is there a prohibition for just the Kohen? I?m aware of what Kimchi and Rashi say, but it seems to be a weak explanation. To say the Kohen needed a special warning is stretching it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:55:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:55:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:24:19AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition : as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with : the already known outcome. I don't know if that works here. I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and there are no counterveiling issues involved. Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish case. Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the floor of the azarah and not spread. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:51:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:51:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215105.GB12997@aishdas.org> My first thought was somewhat off topic but feel like it should be related... R' Yirmiyah's banishment from Bavel was over his habit of checking shiurim by posing implausible edge cases. He ends up in EY, and succeeds in the Y-mi. The final question (BB 23b) before his expulsion was whether we assume owned a bird that had one leg within 50 amos of the dovecote (ie within the shiur for the chazaqah for assuming that's its origin) and one leg outside? But there is also when he questions tevu'ah growing at least 1/3 before RH if harvested on Sukkos. Veqim lehu lerabbanan? How can you measure such a thing? (RH 13a) And his question on hashavas aveidah of 1/2 qav in 2 amos, or 2 qav in 8 amos? We assume yi'ush if we find less than 1 qas scattered across 3 amos. Is that a ratio? (BM 2a) How can you say that a revi'is is the amount of mayim chayim that the blood of a metzorah's birds would be niqar within? Wouldn't it depend on the size of the bird? (Sotah 16b) What if a kohein becomes a baal mum while the dam is in the air between his hazayah and it landing on the mizveiach? (Zevachim 15a) According to R' Meir, a miscarriage that was developed enough to have the shape of a beheimah causes tum'as leidah. (As opposed to saying it must be human shaped.) So, R Yirmiyah asked R Zeira, according to R Meir, what if a woman gives birth to such a baby, a girl and the father was meqadeish her to a man? R' Zeira points out that the child wouldn't live 3 years anyway, so bi'ah isn't an issue. R Meir asks: but what about marrying her sister? This one may or may not count, as R' Acha bar Yaaqov says that R Yirmiyah's point was to get R Zeira to laugh. (Niddar 23a) But it does reflect what kind of thing would come to his mind. (Tangent: There are a number of stories that indicate R Zeira needed chearing up. Like the golam Rava sent him. RMMS tied this to "Rav shachat lei leR Zeira".) But when he gets to EY, the Y-mi accepts his question. (Not that the Y-mi ever answers questions that involve guessing what the tanna / amora would have said...) A picker can eat a snack (quantity discussed) before tu"m was taken from the crop. As long as he is holing them. R Yirmiyah asked whether a picker can eat an olive he was juggling -- and thus didn't put down but also isn't just picked. (Maaseros 3:4, vilna daf 17b) Maybe the issue in the OP is about this time rejecting an absurd -- R Yirmiyahu-like -- oqimta is just the difference in styles in different batei medrash? Too haskala-ish to be satisfying? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Mon Apr 30 20:47:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:47:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tuesday, May 1, 2018, Micha Berger wrote: > > > I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is > the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and > there are no counterveiling issues involved. > > Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish > cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish > case. > > Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's > that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the > floor of the azarah and not spread. And it?s easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn?t seem more unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 06:47:36AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is :> the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and :> there are no counterveiling issues involved. :> Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish :> cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish :> case. : And it's easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a : prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn't seem more : unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. I suggest exploring if the distinction is between a din that could only apply in the farfetched case and dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from the distcussion. This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See . (He offered to send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. In a different post, I suggested another line to explore, if you prefer it. Diffierent batei medrash had different tolerances for R Yirmiyahu's questions, and those too also used farfetched cases. And if so, maybe there was one beis medrash during the course of the ccenturies of amoraim that simply had no patience for odd oqimtos; even though they were atypical that way. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 31st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Hod: What level of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 results in harmony and balance? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 1 03:34:33 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 13:34:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > > But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. > > I suggest exploring if the distinction is between > a din that could only apply in the farfetched case > and > dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated > in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from > the distcussion. > > This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought > in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See > . (He offered to > send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta > serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in > this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. > The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without walking from the equation. It would seem to be a perfect example to apply R' Michel Avraham's thesis and yet the Gemara rejects the ukimta as being unreasonable -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue May 1 04:40:42 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 11:40:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: Please see https://goo.gl/ESJERH for two links to a talk given by Rabbi Dr. Shnyer Leiman titled The Strange History of Lag B'Omer. Please see https://goo.gl/s2KHAVfor [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] The Spreading Fires Of Lag Baomer: Tempting Quick & Easy ?Spirituality? vs. Enduring Ruchnius goo.gl In the past we have discussed at length (5771, 5772, 5773A, 5773B, and 5773C) how Lag Baomer is marked in minhag Ashkenaz, and contrasted it with other, more recent customs, that have become popula? See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) No less an authority than Chasam Sofer was strongly opposed to Lag B'Omer celebrations. He argued that one should not make a new Yom Tov that is not based on a miraculous event, that has no basis in Shas and Poskim, and that is based on the death of someone. (See here for links.) See https://goo.gl/Zma8pS [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] No ? No ? No ? No ? No ? Minhag Ashkenaz & Recent Lag Ba?omer Innovations ? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ?????, ??? ?????, ??????, ?????, ??? ???? goo.gl Yes, it is that time of the year again. Lag ba?omer is almost here. And with it, all the hype and solicitations for trips to Meron, Chai Rotel Mashkeh donations, upsherin, bonfires, and the l? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:54:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:54:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:34:33PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter : (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that : blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The : ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without : walking from the equation... I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Tue May 1 04:25:47 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 14:25:47 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the > stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. > And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's > not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. The Gemara starts with Ula stating a din that holacha without walikng is pasul. The Gemara then brings down the following statment from a Mishna If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher. The Gemara then asks on Ula from this Mishna, namely that the blood must have moved towards the Mizbeach, e.g. holacha without walking and it is kosher. The Gemara then answers with the implausible ukimtos to explain the Mishna. In other words, it seems that the ukimtos are there to explain the Mishna namely that the Mishna provides a principle that blood that falls on the floor is kosher and the ukimtas are there to remove any extraneous factors such as holacha without walking. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 1 15:57:50 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 18:57:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ahava Eternal Message-ID: <2060439B-6A01-4D14-AC06-6D6675AC6381@cox.net> I heard a beautiful d?rash by Rabbi Yosef Shusterman (Chabad of Beverly Hills). He said the following: If you ask 20 people the definition of ?LOVE,? you will get 20 different responses. However, the best definition of love is the Jewish definition. He uses gematria. The gematria of Ahava is 13 and the gematria of Echod is 13. ?Love" is when you are at ?one? with whomever or whatever. Theologically, the love of God is when you are at one with God. Sometimes it takes an entire lifetime to reach that madreiga. I am in you and you in me, mutual in divine love. William Blake (18th c. poet, painter and printmaker) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 2 01:33:44 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 08:33:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of?= =?windows-1252?q?_Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/W49XHX Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. See the above URL for more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 07:10:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 10:10:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <64a22eb4-af1e-fab5-373f-889b1083cd08@sero.name> On 02/05/18 04:33, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From https://goo.gl/W49XHX > > > Toras Aba ?just put up an interesting post > discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to > similarity with ancient practice of idolators. > > See the above URL for more. And yet your precious Minhag Ashkenaz was to (have a nochri) make a bonfire and dance before it (or around it) on Simchas Torah. R Wosner was asked about doing so in camp, stam on a Wednesday, not on Lag Bo'omer when it is, at least in Meron, Chevron, and a few other places in Eretz Yisroel, a long-established minhog practiced by tzadikim and chachomim who were much greater than R Wosner or anyone else you can cite. I don't believe it occurred to him that someone might apply this teshuvah to those fires, and it's dishonest to do so. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 09:04:58 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:04:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:33:44AM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : From https://goo.gl/W49XHX : Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. Most of us have little problem with Israel's Moment of Silence on Yom haZikaron and Yom haSho'ah, at least not Derekh Emori problems. And we wear ties. There are limits to invoking Derekh Emori. To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last days too. And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah kekhol hayom". At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled later than the norm, this evening.) I don't know the origin. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 09:45:50 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:45:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> On 02/05/18 12:04, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag > baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) > and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas > simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo > velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than > waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the > Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last > days too. > > And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo > you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I > have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah > kekhol hayom". > > At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I > know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled > later than the norm, this evening.) > > I don't know the origin. The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. A cessation of mourning, such as the last day of shiva, obviously begins in the morning. Nor is it an occasion for joy; when one gets up from shiva one doesn't go dancing and singing. Thus the restrictions are lifted only after daybreak, and tachanun is said at mincha on the previous day, just as it is on the other three days whose observance begins in the morning, viz Pesach Sheni, Erev Rosh Hashana, and Erev Yom Kippur. But the celebration of Rashbi is a positively happy occasion, so it starts immediately at nightfall, and no tachanun is said at the previous mincha. The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and relies heavily on the Magen Avraham. (He later expressed regret over his over-reliance on the MA, which is one reason why he wrote a second edition, only a few chapters of which are extant.) So it's not surprising that this is the psak found there, however it is not the psak that was followed in Chabad, which means in practice he paskened differently. (Sometimes it means he changed his mind, but sometimes he never paskened in practice as he wrote in the SA, for the reasons I mentioned above.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 10:53:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 13:53:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : >I don't know the origin. : : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain how or when the older minhag was changed. And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. ... : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 11:25:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 14:25:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> On 02/05/18 13:53, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : >I don't know the origin. > : > : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the > : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of > : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the > : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. > > That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain > how or when the older minhag was changed. It follows that the minhag changed when the significance of the day changed. In other words, the minhogim of the day when R Akiva's talmidim stopped dying did not change, but on top of them came a whole new layer of minhogim for the new holiday that occupies the same day on the calendar. For a similar example, the significance of 3 Tammuz in Lubavitch changed dramatically in 5754. The earlier significance of that day and whatever practices it had did not go away, e.g. those who did not say tachanun on 3 Tammuz before 5754 still don't say it, while those who did still do, but the new significance, and the host of practices that came with it, overwhelmed the earlier significance and observance. > And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" > is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. Doesn't the Idra Zuta say that Rashbi asked for his hilula to be celebrated rather than mourned? > You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, > after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, > in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) > that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, > Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. Whether it's the correct explanation of the Pri Etz Chaim or not, it is the one held by the people actually doing the celebrating, and thus fully explains their practices. > ... > : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which > : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and > : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... > > I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to suppose they didn't exist in his day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 15:57:53 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 18:57:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> Message-ID: <4b464085-efab-7164-2d33-7726eba6a069@sero.name> On 02/05/18 14:25, Zev Sero wrote: >> >> : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which >> : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and >> : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... >> I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. > They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to > suppose they didn't exist in his day. PS: Indirect evidence that in the AR's day the night of Lag Baomer was already considered part of the simcha is that in his siddur (as opposed to his SA) he wrote that tachanun is not said at mincha of erev Lag Baomer. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 3 07:01:56 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 03 May 2018 10:01:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?iso-8859-1?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= References: Message-ID: At 12:04 PM 5/2/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag >baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) >and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas >simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo >velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than >waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the >Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last >days too. > >And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo >you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I >have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah >kekhol hayom". > >At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of Aveilus on the 34th day? If so, how can Sefardim go to Meron on the night of the 33rd? I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at Tzeis and who started it. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 3 06:04:34 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:04:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tzedaka priorities Message-ID: The S"A in O"C 152:1 codifies a prohibition against tearing down a synagogue before building a new one (one must build the new one first). The M"B (4) gives the reason for this prohibition as a concern that if one had not built the new one first, a case of pidyon shvuyim(captive's redemption) might arise requiring funds to be diverted from the new construction. 1. Why couldn't the chachamim make a takana in that case? 2. Why would the chachamim work around required priorities? 3. Doesn't 152:6 says you would sell a synagogue anyway in a case of pidyon shvuyim? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 09:03:10 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 12:03:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on the > night of the 33rd? The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve either of those things. (There is no issur on music during sefirah; that seems to be a modern invention, presumably because in modern times we've become lenient on the prohibition against music at any time, so we need to impose a restriction during sefirah, whereas earlier generations who were strict with the general prohibition didn't feel a need to strengthen it now.) > I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at > Tzeis and who started it. As I wrote earlier, it seems associated with the adoption of the Rashbi's celebration on top of the earlier marking of the end of the plague among R Akiva's students. Thus it would probably have started in Tzfas in the late 16th century and spread into Europe in the 18th century together with the AriZal's kabbalah. (Note that according to the AriZal, not cutting hair is not connected to avelus, and applies on Lag Ba`omer as well, except for upsherenishen. But not having weddings is because of avelus, so if we're celebrating Yom Simchas Rashbi they should be permitted.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 10:13:07 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:13:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on : >the night of the 33rd? : : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve : either of those things... An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 10:17:41 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:17:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> On 03/05/18 13:13, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on > : >the night of the 33rd? > : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are > : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve > : either of those things... > An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. For children, who are not obligated in aveilus anyway. But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and the answer is the same way they go by day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 11:56:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 14:56:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and : the answer is the same way they go by day. The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both Ashk and Seph? Yes, if the party happened to be during the day, I would have the same question WRT Sepharadim (only). So how does pointing out that fact help me any in answering it? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 33rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total Fax: (270) 514-1507 submission to truth, and what results? From simon.montagu at gmail.com Thu May 3 16:36:11 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 02:36:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 > > > Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is > > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did that before the 16th century. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 12:08:37 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 15:08:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> On 03/05/18 14:56, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and > : the answer is the same way they go by day. > > The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > Ashk and Seph? And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do so from nightfall. (b) The Meron celebrations, which the question was about, don't violate the sefira observances anyway. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 05:04:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 08:04:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer Message-ID: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:24 AM 5/4/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > > > >I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings >Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did >that before the 16th century. In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to show that it was not really part of the davening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 05:14:32 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:14:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Bow_and_Arrow_on_Lag_B=92Omer?= Message-ID: >From http://www.collive.com/show_news.rtx?id=50532 A 4-year-old son of a Shliach in Florida was hit in his eye by an arrow on Lag BaOmer. Please pray for Baruch Shmuel ben Chana. I do hope he has a refuah shleima. This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. >From https://goo.gl/kumYeX One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn?t even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a break from their Torah studies. It is also surprising that they should pass the time with such a martial activity, seemingly out of character with the day devoted to the man of peace. Rav Menachem Mendel of Rimanov, one of the early Hasidic Rebbes, explained that the custom is based on the Midrash which states that all the days of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, the rainbow didn?t appear in the sky. (Ketubot 77b the same is said there of Rebbe Yehoshua ben Levi.) Rashi explains that the rainbow is the sign of the covenant that the world will not be destroyed, and if there is a perfect tzaddik in the world there is no need of such a sign. (Cited by B?nei Yissachar on Lag BaOmer.) See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 07:58:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:58:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both :> Ashk and Seph? : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do : so from nightfall... You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something aggadic. But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from what I was raised to believe on that. I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and rishonim couldn't have known about? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 07:05:58 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:05:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Mysterious Origin of Lag Ba-Omer Message-ID: Please see http://www.hakirah.org/Vol20First.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 4 09:57:47 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 18:57:47 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Bottom line: They do it or they don't? Ben On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time,? and I > was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to > show that it was not really part of the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:41:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:41:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Let me begin with Daas Torah. ... : The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a : result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this : was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. So what are those formulations? Here are 3 I know of: 1- Given how the gadol's mind is shapeds by his learning, he is a useful resource for advice. He could be wrong, but aren't your odds better by asking? 2- Asking a gadol will get you the answer Hashem wants you to act on, whether it is the truth or not. E.g. the error of advising agaisnt fleeing the Nazis was because that was what Hashem wanted of us. But it was still pragmatically in error. I also see hints of this model in RALichtenstein's "Im Ein Daas, Manhigut Minayin?" but with the added caveat that RAL didn't expect to find daas Torah in practice. (Not since RSZA.) Again, just implications; I could be reading too much into the essay. 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, they are supposed to lead. RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like the same model. Notice that all advocate listening to gedolim even on non-halachic matters, but not because of any guarantees about accuracy. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:52:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:52:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180504165212.GC13247@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 07:12:36AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They : have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye : (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so : much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses.... The relationship to a kohein is trickier than that, as their is no tum'ah until after the declaration. He is more parallel to an eid qiyum than an eid birur. For example, Vayiqra 14:36 tells a person to remove all the items from his home before the kohein comes to inspect a potential nega in it. Even even if the kohein sees the same unchanged splotch and declares it a nega, those itsems are not tamei. It wasn't a nega until the declaration. ... : My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would : become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate : some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just : another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve : myself in general." Tum'as leidah isn't because something is spiritually awry with the mother. So I am not sure we have to assume that zivah is like tzara'as. Lefi RSRH, tum'ah comes from things that could make us overly identify with our bodies -- death, birth, the kinds of sheratzim that share our homes (in EY), niddah... Zivah and leidah would fit that pattern. So would tzara'as, because it too feels like the body is rebelling against the will. The difference is that chazal is saying the body really is rebelling (or made to show rebellion) against a tainted will. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From zev at sero.name Fri May 4 11:15:17 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:15:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 04/05/18 10:58, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > :> Ashk and Seph? > > : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in > : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus > : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't > : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do > : so from nightfall... > > You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, > nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new > information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. Nothing is being uprooted. Something new has come. Just as when a local "Purim" or lehavdil a fast is declared. > If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a > comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something > aggadic. > > But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind > the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous > revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from > what I was raised to believe on that. > > I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence > of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation > anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take > over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in > this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and > rishonim couldn't have known about? They didn't know about the Zohar, let alone the Idra Zuta and R Shimon's request that people rejoice at his "hilula". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 11:51:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 14:51:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:57 PM 5/4/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >Bottom line: They do it or they don't? > >Ben >On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >>Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and >>I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it >>to show that it was not really part of the davening. > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the beginning are said responsively. The Shatz stands at the table where leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 12:06:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 15:06:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <7E.8C.04381.0DFACEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:41 PM 5/4/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Let me begin with Daas Torah. >... >: The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a >: result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this >: was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. > >It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the >popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues >speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are >infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. Please see the article To Flee Or To Stay? at http://www.hakirah.org/vol%209%20bobker.pdf At the end of the article it says, "This article is excerpted from Joe Bobker's "The Rabbis and the Holocaust," to be published by Geffen Books in the summer of 2010." However, to the best of my knowledge this book was never published, and I have always wondered why. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 5 11:45:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 05 May 2018 20:45:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1ed3f3d3-7cb6-927c-da0f-e22d19aa3a4e@zahav.net.il> Bseder. We are all agreed that even Frankfurt changed their seider Tefilla sometime in the last few hundred years. Many shuls have someone, even a child, say (sing) the tehillim from the bimah. Ben On 5/4/2018 8:51 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the > beginning are said responsively.? The Shatz stands at the table where > leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over > he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun May 6 01:53:37 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 11:53:37 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: Yesterday's daf (Zevachim 22) has another wild ukimta that seems to just be there to answer a question on an amora and not provide a sterile environment to learn out a new principle. Here is the gist of the Gemara: R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina states if the Kiyor does not contain enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim, it is invalid - "v'Rachatzu Mimenu Moshe v'Aharon u'Vanav." The Gemara asks a question from the following Baraisa: One may be Mekadesh from any Keli Shares, whether or not it contains a Revi'is of water (this is much less then the water needed for 4 people) Rav Ada bar Acha answers: The case is, the Keli Shares was carved into the Kiyor (so the water comes from the Kiyor, which contains enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim). I don't see any way that you can say here that the ukimta is to remove extraneous dinim etc. The ukimta here seems to serve one and only one purpose, explain the Barisa that it is not a question on an Amora. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From saul.mashbaum at gmail.com Sun May 6 06:41:09 2018 From: saul.mashbaum at gmail.com (Saul Mashbaum) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 16:41:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: RYL >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. Saul Mashbaum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 05:28:41 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 15:28:41 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire Message-ID: << And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. >> Fore details about the printing error to give rise to the idead that Lag Baomer is Rashbi's yahrzeit see http://seforim.blogspot.co.il/2011/05/ changing subjects one of the weirdest experiences I had was a bunch of black coated Chevra kadisha dancing about a grave in Bet Shemesh at 12 midnight with just a flashlight for light -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 07:21:11 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 17:21:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: <> OTOH there is the gemara that when there was the dispute in Yavneh between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. This story took place many years before talmidim of R. Akiva (who was junior at that time) died. If so Rashbi was a known talmid many years before R. Akiva revived Torah . As an aside other taananim survived the bar kochba wars including talmidim of R, Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at mail.aol.com Sun May 6 11:22:13 2018 From: t613k at mail.aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 14:22:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bow and Arrow on Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16336b09884-c88-1c19@webjas-vaa039.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 5/6/2018 7:51:35 AM EST, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org writes: From: "Professor L. Levine" > This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. > From https://goo.gl/kumYeX >> One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is >> less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows >> and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe >> Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn't >> even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a >> break from their Torah studies..... Torah sages and their students learned Torah secretly in the woods, hiding from the Roman soldiers. They took bows and arrows with them and if they were found in the woods, they would say they were out hunting. That's what I was told when I was a little girl. I don't know if this is associated with R' Akiva and his talmidim, or with R' ShBY. As a child I thought the story was about young children and didn't realize until later that it must have been adult students with bows and arrows in the woods. (Yes I know Jews don't hunt for food or for sport, but maybe the Romans didn't know that. Or the Jews could plausibly say they hunted for hides and fur.) PS All my Areivims and Avodahs lately are deformed by great quantities of question marks. If anyone knows how to stop this from happening, please let me know. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com -- From driceman at optimum.net Sun May 6 17:58:21 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 19:58:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> RMB: > 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus > stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the > Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act > as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make > gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on > personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, > they are supposed to lead. > > RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before > RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who > carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the > names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked > questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like > the same model. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? David Riceman From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sat May 5 12:17:25 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 5 May 2018 22:17:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Sacrificies Message-ID: Question: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat had to bring the animal to as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result in hundreds -- Eli Turkel From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 7 04:19:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 14:19:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices Message-ID: R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he was permanently a Kohen; From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:37:00 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:37:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 06/05/18 10:21, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > This story took place many years before talmidim?of R. Akiva (who was > junior at that time) died. On the contrary, R Akiva was very senior at the time of these disputes. In the mishna in Rosh Hashana he was one of the two who counseled R Yehoshua to obey R Gamliel's order, and in Berachos when R Gamliel was deposed he was one of only three candidates considered to replace him. > If so Rashbi was a known talmid?many years before R. Akiva revived Torah > .?As an aside other taananim?survived the bar kochba?wars including > talmidim?of R, Yishmael What have Bar Kochva or his wars got to do with any of this? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:45:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:45:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> References: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> Message-ID: <44c411ba-2fee-9ae7-82d6-de3850c6417a@sero.name> On 06/05/18 20:58, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus >> stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the >> Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act >> as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make >> gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on >> personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, >> they are supposed to lead. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim who are to guide them. There need to be askanim because the chachamim have no time for klal work; they're busy learning and will neglect it. So those who lack either the head or the bottom for full-time learning can be the administrators, and when they need guidance they will consult the chachamim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Wed Apr 25 14:17:16 2018 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:17:16 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5AEFEEE1.1030601@biu.ac.il> Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: >>From The Jewish Press >, >by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): ... > Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if > he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi > Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called > up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different... ... >"L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! The attached has lots of relevant information. [Attachment stored at -micha] From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 08:00:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 11:00:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 07/05/18 07:19, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen > even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes > in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was > considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen > only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); > others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he > was permanently a Kohen; Thank you. Note the context: Rav stated outright that Moshe was a cohen gadol, and the gemara cites this braisa to show his source, that he was ruling like the Yesh Omrim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 8 12:40:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 15:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 3000 Year Old Mansion Implies a Sizable Malkhus Beis David Message-ID: <20180508194052.GA19392@aishdas.org> >From . What struck me is what appears to be the weakness of the objection -- some of the results are from a poor source, and even though they converge with other results, we'll question the whole thing? Does This 3,000-Year-Old House Confirm King David's Lost Biblical Kingdom? By Owen Jarus, Live Science Contributor | May 3, 2018 02:50pm ET Archaeologists have discovered a sprawling, possibly 3,000-year-old house that suggests a biblical kingdom called the United Monarchy, ruled by King David and later Solomon according to the Hebrew Bible, actually existed. The archaeologists who excavated the house, at a site now called Tel Eton, in Israel, said in an article published online March 13 in the journal Radiocarbon that the date, design and size of the house indicates that a strong organized government existed at Tel Eton around 3,000 years ago. They added that this government may be the United Monarchy. The site is located in the central part of Israel in a region called the Shephalah. ... In their paper, Faust and Sapir argue that evidence supporting the existence of the United Monarchy is often not studied because of a problem they call the "old house effect." The site of Tel Eton, including the massive house, was destroyed by the Assyrians during the eighth century B.C. As such, the house held a vast amount of remains dating to that century, but relatively few remains that date to 3,000 years ago when the house was first built. This "old house effect" is a problem commonly seen in Israel and at archaeological sites in other countries, the archaeologists said. "Buildings and strata can exist for a few centuries, until they are destroyed, but almost all the finds will reflect this latter event," wrote Faust and Sapir, noting that archaeologists need to be careful to dig down and find the oldest remains of the structures they are excavating so they don't miss remains that could provide clues to the United Monarchy. Israel Finkelstein, a professor at Tel Aviv University who has written extensively about the United Monarchy debate, expressed skepticism about the results. Two of the four samples used for radiocarbon dating are olive pits, which pose a problem, he said. "The single olive pits come from fills [material that accumulated on the surface of the floor before the floor broke apart]. They have no importance whatsoever [for] dating the building. At Megiddo, my dig, samples like this, single items/fills, are not being sent to the lab to be dated, because they enter bias into the dating system," Finkelstein said. "There is no connection whatsoever between the finds at Tel Eton and the biblical description of the United Monarchy." Faust told Live Science he expects that some archaeologists would be critical of the use of material found in the remains of the floors for radiocarbon dating. He noted that all the radiocarbon dates, those from the olive pits and from the charcoal, converge around 3,000 years. "The convergence of the dates suggest that we are on safe grounds," Faust said. He also noted that one of the charcoal samples is not from the floor but from the foundation deposit (the chalice), strengthening the conclusion that the house was built around 3,000 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 38th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Yesod: How does reliability Fax: (270) 514-1507 promote harmony in life and relationships? From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue May 8 13:05:25 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 23:05:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer Message-ID: >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag in the places I have seen -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Tue May 8 15:31:28 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 01:31:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 11:05 PM, Eli Turkel via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > >>> > In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some > places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is > leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. > This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. > >>>> > > This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> > > Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. > In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag > in the places I have seen > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Tue May 8 17:28:19 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 20:28:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Me > >> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? RZS: > > Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those > doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim > who are to guide them. Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. David Riceman From eliturkel at gmail.com Wed May 9 00:33:02 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:33:02 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: A while ago there was a debate about gebrochs while some condemned the minhag others defended it. I suggest reading an article by Brown https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 (4th on the list) It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those practices that can be traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a select few don't count. He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of elitism that only gedolim count. OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at most) His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in terms of protecting their communities from modernism. I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. Again see the above article for more details -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Tue May 8 21:46:46 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 14:46:46 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer & Rashbi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2700442c-cb3b-4267-b4bc-7e47e0d3efc8@yypwn-sl-yzhq-hkhn-blbyn> See also From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 02:53:57 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 05:53:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 01:31:28AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but : parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or : by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and : acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only : at Kaddish before Barechu At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night (in the US, mostly Syrian), everyone chants everything together. No shatz, and no one taking the lead even section by section. As per the first clause above. Somoene takes the lead for Bameh Madliqin from their seat. Chazan starts at pre-Qaddish material for Arbit. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:12:47 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:12:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 18:31, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: > > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but > parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together > or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing > up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame > Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu In other words, the same as pesukei dezimra, or the ashre and uva letzion before mincha. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed May 9 10:59:33 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 19:59:33 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> References: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At the Yemenite place I go to Friday night, everyone chants Kabbalat Shabbat together (same tune, every week, for the whole thing). An elderly person will get the kavod of saying the first line of Lecha Dodi out loud, but the rest is sung together. After Lecha Dodi, they say four lines from Shir HaShirim and then one person leads them in a "Bar Yochai" song (this kavod is auctioned off). After that, all together for BeMah Madlilin and Mizmor L'yom Hashabbat. On 5/9/2018 11:53 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night . . . From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:21:40 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:21:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 20:28, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: >> Me >> >>> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? > > RZS: >> >> Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those >> doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim >> who are to guide them. > > Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not the rav who guided him. Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. But at any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to do their job properly they can't be learning all day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:27:09 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 03:33, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 9 12:54:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 19:54:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation Message-ID: Many years ago when my two oldest grandsons were in elementary school in yeshiva, they began to speak in a derogatory manner abut non-Jews. They had heard these things from their fellow students. Their father, my oldest son, and I made it clear to them that this was not the appropriate way to speak about human beings who were created by Ha Shem with a neshama. Fortunately, they listened to us and changed their attitude. No one is saying that one must be "buddy buddy" with gentiles, but they are to be treated with proper respect. I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/letter_11.pdf While I suggest that everyone read the entire letter, below are some excerpts from it. MISHPATIM. All these insights, however, are of value only if you truly live your life according to what you, as man and Yisraelite in God's world, with your God-given powers, have recognized. The first requirement is, therefore, that you practice justice: -Respect every being in your surroundings, as well as everything within yourself, as a creation of your God, -Respect whatever is theirs as given to them by God or as having been acquired according to Divinely sanctioned law. Let them keep, or have, whatever they are entitled by right to call their own; do not be a source of harm to -others! -Respect every human being as your equal. Respect him, his inner self as well as his outer garment-his body-and his life) Respect his property, too, as a legal extension of his body. Respect his claim to property or services that you have to render to him, 1 properly measured or counted, as well as his claim to compensation for harm done to his body or property. -Respect his right to know the truth and his right to freedom, happiness, peace of mind,P honor and a peaceful existence. -Never abuse the frailty of his body, mind or heart/ and never misuse your legal power over him. The Chukkim require of you: -respect for all that exists, as God's property: do not destroy anything! do not misuse it! do not waste! use everything wisely -respect for all the species: their order was established by God-do not intermingle them;u respect for all creatures: they are servants in the household of Creation; v respect for the feelings and instincts of animals;w respect for the human body, even after the soul has departed;x respect for your own body: maintain it, as it is the repository, messenger and instrument of the spirit; -limitation of your own instincts and animal-like actions: subordinate them to God's Law, so that, truly human and sanctified, they can help you attain the holy goal of mankind and will not turn you into a mere animal; -respect for your soul, when you nourish its tool, the body: supply the body only with such nourishment that will enable it to act as a pure and willing messenger of the world to the spirit, and of the spirit to the world, rather than giving it food that will induce sluggishness and sensuality; -concealment and sublimation of the animal in you, rather than according it too much respect and attention: only thus will the conflict within you ultimately be resolved, and the animal in you will also aspire only to the truly human; -lastly, respect for your own person in its purest expression-your power of speech. In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources can express a derogatory view of gentiles. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 19:50:36 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 22:50:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 15:54, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters [...] > [...] > In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources > can express a [contrary view] How about because they are Torah sources, and are therefore not required to agree with your favorite 19th-century writer. On the contrary, you should ask how he could contradict Torah sources. (The answer being that he found some contrary sources which appealed more to him, so he adopted their view; that was his right, but nobody else is required to do the same.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From sholom at aishdas.org Wed May 9 08:15:51 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:15:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 20:09:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 23:09:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180510030910.GB2931@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 11:15:51AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : We know Rashi's famous question and answer: that shmita eitzel har sinai : here is to show us that this, too, and all the details, were also given at : har sinai. See my vertl at . That's the Sifra that Rashi is quoting. : My question, however, is: why davka _this_ mitzvah (shmita/yovel)? Other : mitzvos could have been used to demonstrate the point that Rashi mentions. Rashi mentions that shemittah isn't taught in Devarim. The Malbim explains that this is unexpected, since shemittah didn't apply until entering EY, and such mitzvos tend to be the ones introduced in Devarim. : Thoughts? I ran with it... Suggesting that the whole point is that the reductionist approach doesn't work to understanding Torah. This was brought to light bedavqa with a mitzvah that isn't needed to be known yet for its own sake. But the whole picture was given at Sinai, even shemittah, so that we can understand any of the picture. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 39th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliable person? From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 01:57:15 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:57:15 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? >> My apologies. See https://www.academia.edu/36530833/A_translated_chapter_from_The_Hazon_Ish_Halakhist_Believer_and_Leader_of_the_Haredi_Revolution_The_Gaon_of_Vilna_the_Hatam_Sofer_and_the_Hazon_Ish_-_Minhag_and_the_Crisis_of_Modernity_English_?auto=download&campaign=weekly_digest which has several articles besides the one by Brown, Alternatively, send an email to eliturkel at gmail.com and I can send the article -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 02:43:30 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:43:30 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya 3rd line in the widest lines near the bottom and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about 130-135 CE. Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died about 20 years earlier (see eg wikipedia on Gamliel II) It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 07:51:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 10:51:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Me: >> >> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. RZS: > > Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every > Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not > the rav who guided him. No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. > Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a > yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. Again the Reish Galusa determined public policy, the hachamim determined halacha. > But at > any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the > full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to > do their job properly they can't be learning all day. The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his role? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 10 09:08:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:08:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:51:16AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : The claim that "da'as Torah" is derived from din melech is precisely the : claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise : in other fields... That's NOT the way I understood R' Dovid [haLevi] Cohen at all. We want a melekh, separate from the beis din hagadol. Although one person can be in both roles, like when Chazal refer to "Shelomo uveis dino." However, ba'avoseinu harabbim we lost the melukhah. The obligation of obeying the melekh devolved into obeyind the Sanhedrin. (This would have to have been some time between Gedaliah and Ezra, inclusive.) Obeying the melekh wasn't based on the melekh's comptenecy, but the need for order in running a society. (And, I guess some reason(s) why HQBH advised monarchy in particular as the means of getting that order, except according to some readings of RAYK. But RAYK didn't hold of the shitah we're looking at, so ein kan hamaqom leha'rikh.) Then, we lost the Sanhedrin. Today's rabbanim fill in -- either as their shelichim, or . The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. And just as the melekh might not be the expert across all of society, the Sanhedrin or today's rabbanim might not be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 40th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Yesod: When does Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliability/self-control mean submitting to others? From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 10 06:30:06 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93normal_practice=94?= Message-ID: <4ee8a413f67f49da89acceed596b8f72@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I was bothered by the gemara-Megilla 26a where it says Jerusalem apartment ?owners? took ?gifts? by force as ?rental? from olei regal. The Beit Mordechai (2:16), who lived in the early 20th century, raises the same question and says since the normal practice in Israel was for renters to leave something for the innkeeper in addition to the rental payment, so innkeepers in Jerusalem would take it by force since they could not charge rent. He admits that it?s possible that this would be considered stealing but because of this ?normal practice? of leaving something, it?s almost like they had a legal claim and therefore they felt they could take the items. Interesting that I couldn?t find earlier authorities bothered by this but maybe I missed something. Any thoughts appreciated. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 08:15:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:15:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6f2cda5f-ce57-a7a3-36af-3cc0b767dc9f@sero.name> On 10/05/18 05:43, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh >> between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it wasRashbithat was involved. > > I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, > and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > > > Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya?3rd line in the widest > lines near the bottom > and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Thank you. > Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about > 130-135 CE. Why do you suppose he was killed around that time rather than much later? If he was killed then, then he would have been born around 10-15 CE, have started learning Torah around 15-20 years before the churban, and have come back home with all those talmidim 4-9 years after it. Doesn't it seem more likely that his Torah learning started after the churban, and after Kalba Savua had resettled somewhere and reestablished himself, which would mean his death was also several decades after Bar Kochva? > Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died?about 20 years earlier (see eg > wikipedia?on Gamliel II) > > It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the > story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. Why is this at all difficult to believe? What makes it difficult? > So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of > the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant If you assume both that the students died then and that he himself died then, then when did he have time to teach his five new students? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 10 05:57:21 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 08:57:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim Message-ID: At 10:44 PM 5/9/2018, R Eli Turkel wrote: >I suggest reading an article by Brown >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2Fu%2F0%2F%23search%2Fhillel%2F1633fd7c1ed2a4a7&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce7f2ed89c0b04a153b9008d5b61fe896%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C1%7C636615170523842613&sdata=KHDvBEGhAvUsiq8oxUjnwZDX%2Bt0hzpo7D25XR2o0CPA%3D&reserved=0 > > >It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish > >Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent >past >basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those >practices that can be >traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a >select few don't count. >He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that >the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even >communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of >elitism that only gedolim count. > >OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of >the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In >fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their >unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at >most) > >His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in >terms of protecting their communities from modernism. >I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between >litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. I believe you are referring to an article that recently appeared in Hakirah that is at https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjyg6mKmfvaAhVCuVkKHeutBeYQFggtMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hakirah.org%2FVol24Shandelman.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3XZQch0OGem-hvrLpivEHB (I cannot access the link you give above, because I do not have a google account.) I found this article most disappointing and sent the email below to the Editors of Hakirah Subject: The Gaon of Vilna, the Hatam Sofer, and the Hazon Ish: Minhag and the Crisis of Modernity To the Editor: I must admit that the title of this article truly attracted my attention. However, after reading it I was sorely disappointed. The author writes at the beginning of the article, "We have seen that from the 1930's to the 1950's at least, the position of the Hazon Ish remained consistent and unyielding: A minhag has no normative status of its own, and at best can only be adduced as evidence for an actual halakhic ruling, which in turn derives its authority strictly from corroboration by qualified halakhists." He then goes on to point out that both the GRA and the Hazon Ish did not observe many minhagim that most people do observe. However, he does not give us a list of the minhagim they did not observe nor does he give us a list of the minhagim that they did observe. Surely these should have been included in detail in this article. Later in the article the author writes, "These two Orthodox groups [the Hungarian Orthodox and the latter-day hasidic] turned minhag into an endless opportunity for the creation of new humrot. And this only goes to show that it is not always a broken connection with the 'living tradition' that facilitates the creation of a dynamic of humrot. Again, I think that the article should have included a detailed list of these Chumras. In my opinion, this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much substance. What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about nothing." Dr. Yitzchok Levine -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 10 06:58:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:58:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Wild Wild State of Kashrus Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/2bPRtq It was an innovative way of saving money. The municipality worked it out that they would outsource the financial cost of the Department of Health inspectors. From now on, it would be the restaurants themselves that would hire the health inspectors. The restaurants would pay them, they would take out the FICA taxes, the worker?s comp ?? the restaurant would handle it all. The move ?worked wonders? for the state of health in the restaurants. Eateries that were previously designated with a C minus rating were now rated A plus and health violation write ups were down too. The astute reader will detect an obvious problem here. This is what is called a classic conflict of interest. The upgraded rating and lowered violations are probably due to the unique financial arrangement. When an inspector is paid by the people he supervises there is a risk that his judgment and actions will be unduly influenced. The safety of the restaurant consumers has been placed at risk. Indeed, the general public has also been placed in danger. SAME FOR KASHRUS The same should be true in the field of Kashrus. The mashgiach is there to protect the public from eating non-kosher or questionable items just as the health inspector is there to protect the public from anything that can compromise their health and safety. RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN ZT?L Indeed, last generation?s Gadol haDor, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, in his Igros Moshe (YD Vol. IV #1:8) writes that the Mashgiach should not be paid by the facility receiving the hashgacha, but rather should only be paid by the Vaad HaKashrus itself. Indeed, he should have no direct monetary business dealings with the company. See the above URL for more. Keep in mind that when it comes to private hashgachos the person giving the supervision is always paid by the person or organization being supervised. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 09:28:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:28:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <2dd3576d-2d8e-762e-5afc-570ef2dbaa9c@sero.name> On 10/05/18 10:51, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Me: >>> >>> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. > > RZS: > >> >> Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every >> Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not >> the rav who guided him. > > No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert > on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted > on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. But if the rav paskened that they were wrong they had to obey him. >> But at >> any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the >> full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to >> do their job properly they can't be learning all day. > The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the > claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. And indeed it does; how do you see a contradiction from R Akiva? He didn't say TCh don't have the knowledge to run the town, but that they don't have the time. > Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at > all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his > role? Same story: He is qualified, but he has no time, so he will neglect the work and the town will suffer. That's why we need and have askanim to run things, but they have to know that they are not in charge but must defer to the chachamim. Note that not even the biggest haredi calls for the gedolei hatorah to sit in the knesset themselves, let alone to be mayors and city councillors. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 12:43:38 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 15:43:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: RMB: > > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. I already raised the objection of R Akiva?s advice to his son; RZS?s response is conceptually clean, but (a) it doesn?t fit the words of the text, and (b) according to you it is internally contradictory - - if the rabbis who run the city have a din melech how can they be supervised by others? There?s also the sugya of b'nei ha'ir kofin zeh et zeh ?. Naively the authority of the kehilla comes from din melech, but then why b'nei ha'ir, why not the town rabbi? David Riceman From saulguberman at gmail.com Thu May 10 11:51:40 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 14:51:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > RMWillig has a kezayis of 22.5cc, and writes that Middos veShiurei > haTorah pg 277 reports matzah has half the weight of an equivalent > volume of water. So, RMW says a kezayi matzah weighs 11.25gm. (1cc of > water weighs 1gm, by definition. So, the weight of 2cc of matzah is 1gm.) > We buy matzah by the pound, so you can estimate a kazayis pretty > accurately if you know how many matzos are in a 1lb box. (2lb boxes, > divide by 2, naturally.) There are 40.3 or so kezeisim in a pound. > > matzos / lb -> kezayis matzah > 6 -> 2/13 of a matzah > 7 -> 1/6 > 8 -> 1/5 > 9 -> 2/9 > 10 -> 1/4 > > :-)BBii! > -Micha I wish I had remembered to use this at the seder. My rabbi tells me that he got an electric scale this year and had the grandkids make shiurim bags for the sedorim on erev pesach. Has the benefit of having something for the kids to do and moves the seder along. When I mentioned to my Rabbi that I was looking into smaller shiurim,that are smaller than the plastic sheet that is so popular, he was not interested in continuing the conversation. My daughter informed me that one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in the base of their calculation. Saul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:13:50 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:13:50 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1be6e645-8a41-f71b-3d11-7c7d0823c398@zahav.net.il> IIRC the Ramban writes that David took a census because he made a mistake, he thought that the issur didn't apply anymore. I found that Ramban to be shocking. How is it that no one, no rav, no navi, came to David and said "No, you can't do that"?? Answer - David never bothered to ask and no one had the job of being his poseik. Similarly, there are certain acts that the chachamim praised Hezkiyahu for doing and others that they disagreed with him. I read that as meaning "after he made the decisions, the rabbanim weighed in". I don't get the feeling from any navi that they stood by the sides of the kings and told them "yes you? can do this, no, you can't do that". They only weighed in when society or the melucha was totally out of sync. or when they were specifically consulted or when God told them "Go to the king". I admit that there is an incredible tension between even the good kings, the ones trying to rule according to the Torah, and the prophets (forget the evil kings). The former? were not able to live up to the expectations of the latter. From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 11 03:50:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180511105019.GA17192@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:43:38PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : RMB: : > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took : > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. : : The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give : commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us : what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. Not "implies", we are talking about R Dovid [haLevi] Cohen's explanation of Da'as Torah -- it's the thesis he is trying to justify! However, unlike some other versions of DT, it only speaks of rabbis as communal leadership. Not as advisors on personal matters (whose open questions are not halachic in nature). It has this in common with [pre-Mizrachi] RYBS's version of DT, "hatzitz vehachoshen". : I already raised the objection of R Akiva's advice to his son... There is also the historical precedent of the leadership of the Vaad Dalet Aratzos. There is no record of rabbinic leadership on civil issues. They dealt with halachic matters, eg shochetim, batei din, a law to require haskamos on all published sefarim... :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 41st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Yesod: What is the ultimate measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 of self-control and reliability? From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:02:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:02:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The article is one chapter from an entire book. You walked into the middle of a movie, that's all. Ben On 5/10/2018 2:57 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > In my opinion,? this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much > substance.? What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about > nothing." From isaac at balb.in Thu May 10 21:23:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 14:23:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Eli Turkel asked: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, > from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult > for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat > had to bring the animal as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the > cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of > whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result > in hundreds I suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim. [The Ramban in the 3rd Shoresh there isn't happy with this] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 11 01:40:10 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 08:40:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Shiluach Hakein, Performance of Message-ID: >From yesterday's OU Halacha Yomis Q. How is the mitzvah of Shiluach Hakein performed? A. Before sending away the mother, one should have the intent to fulfill a mitzvah. There is a difference of opinion as to how one should send away the mother. According to the Rambam (Hilchos Shechita 13:5), one should grab the mother bird by the wings and send her away. Though the Torah prohibits capturing the mother-bird when she sits on the nest, when the intention of grabbing the mother is to send her away, this is not considered an act of capturing. However, Shulchan Aruch (YD 292:4) rules in accordance with the Rosh and the Tur that one need not grab the mother bird. Rather, one may use a stick or the back of one?s hand to send away the mother. According to these Rishonim, the important factor is not that you grab the mother but that you cause her to fly away. The Binyan Tziyon (Chadashos 14) writes that some Rishonim disagree with the Rambam on two points. They maintain that if one grabs the mother and sends her away, a) the mitzvah is not fulfilled, and b) one transgresses the prohibition of taking the mother-bird (even though the intent is to send the bird away). It is therefore best to use a stick or, as Rav Belsky, zt?l advised, to push the mother bird off the nest with an open hand, the palm facing upwards so that the mother bird is not accidentally caught. Once the mother bird is chased away, one should pick up the eggs or chicks and take possession of them. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Fri May 11 02:25:19 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 12:25:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: Instead of answering Zev's questions directly let me try and describe how I see the events. I fully admit that the sources of dates for Taananim seem very sparse and I welcome any more information >From the chabad site R Yochanan be Zakai dies in 74 The Sanhedrin under Rabban Gamliel moved about 86 Bat Kochba Rebbelion ended in 133 R Akiva put in prison 134 Mishna completed 189 ------------------------------------------ First most historians take the story that R Akiva (along with several others) lived for 120 years as an exaggeration. Typical dates given are 50-135. This also implies that magic split into 3 sections of 40 years each is also an exaggeration This would give his learning under Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua as after the death of R Yochanan ben zakai about the year 75 when he would be 25 years old I again stress that all dates are speculation. It seems unlikely that R Akiva would have 24000 students when so many older teachers were around. Hence, extremely unlikely that this happened while the yeshiva was in Yavne under Rabban Gamliel. The one date I saw for the death of Rashbi was 150. What seems to be clear is that Rebbe compiled the Mishna after the death of all 5 talmidim of R Akiva (of course we know that the compilation was done over a period of time beginning at least with R. Meir and probably R. Akiva and earlier). Pushing off the death of R. Akiva decades later would give little time for the activities of his talmildim after his death before the time of Rebbe who is the next generation. One date I have seen for Rebbe is 135-220 (again approximately) R Sherira Gaon lists the year 219 as the year Rav moved to Bavel The gemara (Kiddushin 72b) states that Rebbe was born when R Akiva died which gives the birth of Rebba as about 135 assuming he died as part of the Bar Kochba revolt (which the Chabad site seems to also assume) As an aside the dates of Rebbe would seem to be connected with the debate over who was Antoninus see Hebrew Wikipedia on Reeb Yehuda HaNasi This post started with my claim that Rashbi was a student in Yavneh years before the plague that kille3d the 24000 students and so he became a student of R Akiva later in life. I note that the other talmidim also had other teachers. Thus, the gemara notes that R Meir also learned with R. Yishmael and certainly with R. Elisha ben Avuyah though R. Akivah was his main teacher 'The students were given semicha by R Yehudah be Buba R Benny Lau claims that R. Yehuda bar Ilai was mainly a talmid of his father and R Tarfon and only secondary by R. Akiva. R Yisi ben Chalfta also learned mainly from his father and then R. Yochanan ben Nuri both of whom stressed the traditions if the Galil. We have no statements of R. Elazar ben Shanua in the name of R. Akiva. R Benny Lau concludes that the two "talmidim muvhakim" of R. Akiva are R. Meir and Rashbi but both of these also had other teachers besides R. Akiva. Hence, we cannot take the story literally that R. Akiva went to the south and found 5 youngsters who became his students. Rather all 5 were already serious talmidei chachamim before R. Akiva. In addition even later many kept up relations with R. Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 14 09:54:07 2018 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 12:54:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel Message-ID: I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential chillul shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:19:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 02:51:40PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : My daughter informed me that : one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even : smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook : It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in : the base of their calculation. But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be invalid anyway? We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more binding than historical reality? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 44th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Malchus: What type of justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 does unity demand? From saulguberman at gmail.com Mon May 14 12:28:24 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:28:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, > the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis > is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does > that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual > olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be > invalid anyway? > > We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai > and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people > causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more > binding than historical reality? > I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:06:21 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:06:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514190620.GC7492@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:33:02AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent : past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those : practices that can be : traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable... So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 15 04:05:47 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 07:05:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . Shemos 12:39 teaches us: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. Various meforshim deal with halachic problems of this pasuk. For example, they were commanded to eat matzah, and being rushed out had nothing to do with it. Or, chometz was forbidden, and being rushed had nothing to do with it. This thread WILL NOT discuss those issues. If you want to discuss those issues, please start a new thread. My questions have nothing to do with halacha. They relate to the sequence and timing of the events of that night. They relate to "lir'os es atzmo" - I try to imagine myself in Mitzrayim that night, and certain parts of the story don't make sense to me. I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: 1) When was that dough made? 2) When was that dough baked? We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for the trip. I find it difficult to imagine that the flour and water were not mixed until the last 17 minutes before morning. Another problem: Given that they DID take unbaked dough out of Mitzrayim, what happened when they finally decided to bake it? Obviously, if they were able to bake it, it must be that they were not hurrying out of Egypt any more. So why didn't they just wait a little longer, and allow the dough to rise? (Someone might suggest that it was only in Egypt that "it did not become chametz", and that they did let it rise after getting out, but the pasuk disproves that, by telling us that "they baked it into matzah", i.e. that the dough never rose at all, at any point.) There are other questions that could ask, in addition to those, but I'll stop here for now. advTHANKSance Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 15 05:11:46 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:11:46 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Issac Balbin wrote: " suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim." There is a fundamental difference between carrying the aron and the avoda in the mishkan. The Rambam writes explicitly there in the sefer hamitzvos that the mitzva of carrying the aron, was given to the leviim in the midbar "v'af al pi shezeh hatzivuy ba laleviim baet hahe". We do not find any such commandment in the Torah regarding avoda in the mishkan. The Torah ONLY commands/allows Aharon and his sons to do Avoda in the mishkan. Therefore there is no room to say that leviim did avoda in the mishkan in the midbar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at yahoo.com Tue May 15 09:53:47 2018 From: gershonseif at yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 16:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know.TIA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 12:31:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:31:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas In-Reply-To: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20180515193110.GB20847@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 04:53:47PM +0000, Gershon Seif via Avodah wrote: : Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked : many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know. The oldest usage Bar Ilan and I could find was the one I had initially thought of -- the AhS. In OC 494:7, RYME gives 3 reasons for not fasting on that day. #2: And more: On that day, Moshe told them to becom qadosh. Uregilin liqroso "Yom haMyuchas" because of this. Which makes me think the AhS was saying it's just mimetic. Otherwise, I would have expected "uregilin le-" to have been replaced by a source. More than that, his vanilla "uregilin" is more typical of his description of accepted Litvisher practice. He tends to report others' practices by saying whom, even if it's a recent import to Litta. For example, se'if 3 mentions that the Chassidim haQadmonim were up all night on Shavuos, as per the Zohar, "vegam agah harbeih osin kein" and in the morning they go to miqvah, all as a zeikher leMatan Torah. Staying up all night gets a "they", not a "we", and is labeled as lower-case-c chassidic / Zoharic custom. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 15 12:39:06 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:39:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bamidbar Message-ID: <24722D2C-AAFF-48C2-A4B0-144A6165528A@cox.net> THEY DID; SO DID THEY DO According to the Sages, not a single letter is superfluous in the Torah. Anything repeated is repeated for a definite reason and with additional meaning. We may not always comprehend the reason or meaning but that doesn't detract from its significance. Also, there may be various interpretations and reasons given by commentators but that is what makes the Torah so profound. This Shabbos we begin the fourth Book of the Torah, Bamidbar. This portion is read the Shabbat before Shavuot, with rare exception. This year it is read immediately before Shavuot. The reason it usually is read the Shabbat prior to Shavuot is because there is a connection between the subject matter of this portion and the theme of Shavuot. There is a verse in Bamidbar in which appears a seeming redundancy. I grappled with it for a while and came up with an interesting chiddush. The verse states (1:54) "The Children of Israel did everything that God commanded Moses, so did they do." The first part of the verse already says "they did everything," etc. Then at the end it again says: "so did they do." Why is it repeated? First, the Children of Israel did "everything that God commanded Moses" because that was what God commanded and they did it as it was a mitzvah. But then, when it states at the end of the pasuk "so did they do," it already had become part of them. In other words, the initial motivation for performing a mitzvah is because God has commanded it, but then after doing it, one does it automatically and out of love and joy (as opposed to being mandatory). It becomes part of the person -- ("so did they do)." Similarly, when the Jewish people accepted the Torah they said "Naaseh v'nishma" (Exodus 24:7) which means "We will DO and (then) we will understand." In other words, we first will do out of duty and obligation since we are accepting the commandments of the Almighty, and afterwards, we will be doing (observing the mitzvot) out of love and joy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 15:45:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 18:45:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos Message-ID: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> R' Mordechai Torczyner (CC-ed) gave 3 shiurim (chaburos?) on koseiv and mocheiq this past march. Including #2, available here . He raises an interesting (to me, at least) question: Catan, formerly The Settlers of Catan, is a game with a board that changes with each play. The board is tiled from hexagons (and played on the edges and corners between them), where each hexagon has a picture on it denoting a kind of terrain, and by implication the reasources one can get from that terrain. This honeycomb is then held in place by a hexagonal frame, which is assembled from 6 pieces, each of which has jigsaw-puzzle-like edges at the join to hold the whole thing together. See RMT cited in shiur SSJ 16:23 (source #5 on the resource page attached to the YUTorah recording). He says you can play a game with letters or pictures IFF one is placing letters or pieces of letters or pictures or their pieces next to eachother. But not if they are made qeva or put in a frame. And only if they do not attach or stick to one another. So, here is RMT's question... Catan's hexagons do not combine to make one picture, but they do combine to make one "message" -- a usable game board. Is assembling a Catan board mutar on Shabbos? And if not, I wish to add: What if the game is played on a pillow, making it hard to keep the pieces interlocked, and the players agree to end the game before Shabbos? If the assembly is neither made to last nor is there intent for it to last, would it then be mutar? Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:11:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:11:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos In-Reply-To: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> References: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> Message-ID: The frame that comes with the newer editions of Settlers is quite flimsy so I don't believe it can be regarded as "fixing" the hexes together in a way that could even raise this shayla. But leravcha demilsa one can simply lay out the board without the frame, as one does with the older editions (my set is close to 20 years old and therefore doesn't have this problem. From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:30:27 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:30:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Further to your question, we've discussed the time of yetzias mitzrayim before, and some have asserted that it was early in the morning, but the Torah says "be'etzem hayom", and Rashi explicitly says this means high noon. At the time of the discussion I couldn't find this Rashi, but it's in Devarim 32:48. So not only did they have all night to prepare food for the journey, they also had all morning. And yet we're to believe they didn't get around to it until just before noon. However, leaving aside the improbability of this timing, my understanding of the actual event is that they started making dough to bake bread, and would have left it to rise but immediately they got the announcement that they were leaving, so they shoved it straight into the oven and baked it there and then, as matzos. Alternatively, given that they had already been commanded not to bake chametz, we can say that because of this commandment they always intended to bake it immediately, but as it happened the command became irrelevant because the announcement came just as they finished kneading it and were about to put it in the oven, so even had they *not* been commanded they would still have had to bake it as matzos. Which of course is why the commandment was given in the first place. Either way, though, my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the perspective of before it was baked. From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 05:55:56 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 12:55:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? A. The Gemara (Avoda Zara 30a) discusses the laws of giluy (beverages left uncovered). Chazal forbade drinking certain beverages that were left uncovered, due to concerns that venomous creatures, such as snakes or scorpions, might drink from the beverage and leave behind some of their venom. Tosfos (Avoda Zara 35a: Chada) writes that in the countries where we live, this concern does not exist, and beverages left uncovered may be drunk. Ordinarily, once Chazal issue a gezeira (decree), the gezeira remains in force even if the reasoning no longer applies. This case is different since the original gezeira was only enacted for places where snakes were common. Accordingly, Shulchan Aruch (YD 116:1) rules that one may drink a beverage that was left uncovered. However, the Pischei Teshuva (116:1) writes that the position of the Vilna Gaon and the Shelah Hakadosh is not to leave drinks unattended. The commentaries to the Maaseh Rav explain that the Vilna Gaon held that there are secondary reasons for Rabbinic decrees that apply even when the primary reason is no longer relevant. Common practice is to follow the position of the Shulchan Aruch, though some adhere to the more stringent opinion -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:26:24 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:26:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me - perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:27:40 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:27:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Designer Babies? Message-ID: Assume that gene editing technology reaches the point that "designer babies" are possible to an extent. Assume that "intellectual acuity" genes can be identified and screened for. Would a Desslerian philosophy allow (require?) mass screening and eventual genetic tinkering to provide a gadol hador material baby? What if there was a clear tradeoff that this gene also resulted in a materially shorter life expectancy? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Thu May 17 08:29:01 2018 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (M Cohen) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 11:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <09af01d3edf3$c8a0bed0$59e23c70$@com> I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul Shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential Chillul Shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before Shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on Shabbos. ..at least 2 major differences between the two. A. the electricity you use is generated in real time, as you demand it (by turning on the switch) B. but the water you use was made and treated in the past, and now simply stored in water towers until you demand it (by opening your tap) (as the water is used, new water is pumped into the tower at intervals. only a gramma). No melacha is done when you use your water C. electricity production in EY typically involves d'orisa issurim of burning fossil fuels, boiling water to create steam etc D. but water production may only be an rabbinic prohibition (electric pumps and filters, adding chemicals, etc) ======= Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2894, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.22240) http://free.pctools.com/ ======= From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Thu May 17 09:00:40 2018 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:00:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: RMB wrote: 'So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here.' I think the point was there was a tendency not to value or keep minhagim, not an absolute rule. And they possibly gave different status to minhagim which clearly originated with gedolim not un-named masses, eg kabalas shabbos. As for the yamulka example, that's got a makor in shas and is mentioned by rishonim, no? Perhaps another example would be Shir hamaalos before bentching which was innovated by the Chida I think. You'd need a whole range of example and a list of who kept what in order to be more certain, I haven't read the rest of Dr Brown's book to know if he does that. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 12:48:18 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 19:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? Message-ID: The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of externalities at all. YL Unfortunately, the term "chasid," meaning a pious person, has become misunderstood because of misconceptions foisted upon us from without. A "chasid" is a person who totally gives himself in love, does not look out for himself but relinquishes his own claims on the world in order to live only for others, through acts of loving kindness. Far from retiring from the world, he lives in it, with it and for it. For himself, the chasid wants nothing; but for the world around him, everything. Thus we find the term applied to David, a man who, from his earliest youth, labored ceaselessly for the spiritual and material welfare of his people and left the shaping of his own destiny, including redress of the wrong done to him by Sha'ul, entirely to God. No doubt you are familiar with the saying shelach shelach v'sheli shelach - -"He who says 'That which is yours is yours and that which is mine also is yours' is called a chasid." Again, a life of seclusion, of only meditation and prayer, is not Judaism. Torah and Avodah (study and worship) are but pathways meant to lead to deeds. Our Sages say, Talmud Torah gadol she'mavi l'y'day maaseh- "Great is study, for it leads to action" - the practical fulfillment of the precepts. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com Thu May 17 13:03:16 2018 From: gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 20:03:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <306356533.2453717.1526587396833@mail.yahoo.com> On Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:48 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that > there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, > speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of > externalities at all. YL Indeed! See Hirsch's commentary to Beraishis 5:24 where he writes very strong words about this. He says that Chanoch lived a life of seclusion after giving up on his generation. Hashem removed him from the earth because "what use is he here" (or something to that effect). From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 17 20:24:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 05:24:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. At one time calling a child a girl did not mean that you were assuming the child's gender? (girl meant a young person of either sex). Ben On 5/17/2018 9:48 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters? I note > that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of > dress,? speaking a particular language,? etc.? Indeed,? there is no > mention of externalities at all. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu May 17 20:51:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 23:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . I had cited Shemos 12:39: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. R' Zev Sero suggested: > ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked > dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. > I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it > has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the > perspective of before it was baked. It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words to have that meaning, that's okay. But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, > their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Fri May 18 14:41:25 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:41:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: See Malbim, who suggests that according to R Yose Haglili, who says that the issur chometz that year was only for one day, that one day was the 14th, not the 15th, but since with kodshim the night follows the day it was from the morning of the 14th till the morning of the 15th. Therefore they started baking bread at daybreak, intending to let it rise, but they were immediately ordered to leave and had no time. Alternatively, since most meforshim understand the one day to be the 15th, he suggests that they mixed the dough intending to bake matzos, but they didn't even have time to do that and had to take the unbaked dough, which would naturally have become chometz during their journey, but miraculously it did not rise and when they got where they were going they baked it as matzos (or, according to pseudo-Yonasan, the sun baked it, which presents halachic problems of its own, since sun-baked bread doesn't have the status of bread). On 17 May 2018 at 23:51, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I had cited Shemos 12:39: > >> They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves >> of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were >> driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare >> any provisions for themselves. > > R' Zev Sero suggested: > >> ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked >> dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. >> I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it >> has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the >> perspective of before it was baked. > > It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the > pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words > to have that meaning, that's okay. > > But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > >> They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, >> their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. > > This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of > Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is > unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff > they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that > the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. > > Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS > for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why > didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. > > The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not > make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then > they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just > before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to > departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water > together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. > > Akiva Miller > _______________________________________________ > Avodah mailing list > Avodah at lists.aishdas.org > http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org -- Zev Sero zev at sero.name From doniels at gmail.com Mon May 21 03:55:24 2018 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 13:55:24 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Generators_on_Shabbos_in_Israel?= Message-ID: R' Ben Rothke wrote: > I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, > AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. Also, apparently, as a form of protest. > With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is > automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the > potential chillul shabbos? R' Israel Meir Morgenstern put out an entire Sefer on this - http://www.virtualgeula.com/Stock/Books/Show/11160 - and regular updates as booklets. According to him, it's not nearly as automated as they pretend. IIRC he did on-site research, not relying on what the Electric Company wants people to believe. > Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before > shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. There are those who do that too. Check the roofs in Charedi neighborhoods - those with huge black reservoirs are doing just that. That said, I asked his father, R' D. A. Morgenstern shlita about getting one of those water reservoirs and he said it wasn't necessary. (I didn't ask him about electricity.) - Danny From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 20 14:10:28 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 00:10:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance Message-ID: <> What effect does this have on shabbat -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon May 21 23:19:20 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 02:19:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 17/05/18 09:26, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) > one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? > What is the source of this practice? (Me ? perhaps the original practice > of only one person saying Kaddish). I assume you mean in a shul where most of the kadeishim are said by multiple people. If so, I have never seen or heard of such a practise until you described it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 03:52:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:52:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Please see Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part I at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FCT8ohf&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=CAO%2FIULzGszY4Io1E7bD7BDzBnrECxpPQX6SlNtHF%2BU%3D&reserved=0 and Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part II at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FKVjQ16&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=RY%2FzL7M3vLMiFdh1MlJcdiMfMVPVPkRXx%2FtVGOhRiWk%3D&reserved=0 If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 05:04:49 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 08:04:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on > a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking > their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me ? > perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). In all the shuls in Elizabeth NJ, the practice is as follows: If no one has yahrzeit, then there are no restrictions on Kaddish. If someone does have a yahrzeit that day, then the Kaddish after Aleinu is said only by him/them (including anyone still in shloshim). As RJR guessed, this is in deference to the original minhag (still practiced in German shuls) that no Kaddish is ever said by more than one person. [A gabbai usually calls out "Yahrzeit!" in addition to the table-banging.] In Shacharis, the other kaddishes (such as after Shir Shel Yom) are said by all kaddish-sayers. After mincha, an additional Tehillim (usually #24) is recited, so that the other kaddish-sayers will have the opportunity to say kaddish. This is done at maariv too, except for situations (such as in Elul) when there's another Tehillim anyway. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:12:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:12:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 06:52:26AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly : going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. But it could still not be worth the learning missed. There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more "nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. micha at aishdas.org Thus excellence is not an event, http://www.aishdas.org but a habit. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aristotle From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 04:01:35 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:01:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Birkat Kohanim Message-ID: 1) The Priestly Threefold Benediction had the following: The first blessing has three words, the second five, the third seven. They remind us of the foundation for all blessings: The tree Patriarchs, the five books of the Torah, and the seven Heavens. Bachya 2) Israel said to God: "Why do you tell the priests to bless us? We desire Your blessing alone!" Said the Holy One: "Although I have told the priests to bless you, I shall stand in their company to give effect to the benediction." Therefore, at the end of the section it states explicitly (verse 27): "I will bless them." Midrash Numbers R. (11:2, 8, end). 3) Why do we ask God first to bless us and then keep or guard us? Because, if He does give us material blessings, we need to be protected from the evil results such prosperity may bring. The Hasidic Anthology P.359 quoting the Tzechiver Rebbe. 4) There is an interesting connection between Parshat Naso, which is the longest parsha in the Torah, comprising 176 verses, and the 119th Psalm (of Tehillim), which also contains 176 verses and is the longest in the book of Psalms. This psalm carries the distinct title, "Torah, the Way of Life." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 03:57:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:57:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Who Sings In This World Will Sing Also In The Next." Joshua b. Levi, Sanhedrin, 91b Message-ID: <37067FE1-055D-4504-A143-8FB433E508DE@cox.net> LA'AVOD AVODAT AVODA VA'AVODAT MASA 4:47... Note the four words in a row with the same root. (Probably the only place in the Torah with four words in a row with the same root). Rashi says the Avodat Avoda (kind of a strange phrase) refers to playing musical instruments. As far as Avodat Masa (Work of burden) is concerned ? the Gemara in Chulin comments that only when there is heavy manual labor involved, then there is an age limit for the Leviyim (as with the others). And it seems that the age limit of 50 was only for the carrying. In other words, a Levi was able to continue serving in the Mishkan after 50, but only for SHIRA and SH'MIRA. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 04:29:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:29:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor Message-ID: We are told that Hashem spoke the words Shamor and Zachor together, and I have presumed that we heard them together as well. But the Ramban (Devarim 5:12) suggests that "He (Moshe) is the one who heard Zachor, and they (heard) Shamor." The ArtScroll Chumash (page 969) quotes Rav Gedalya Shorr as explaining: <<< At the highest spiritual level - the one occupied by Moses - the awesome holiness of the Sabbath is such a totally positive phenomenon that one who understands its significance could not desecrate it. Thus, the positive remembrance of the Sabbath contains within itself the impossibility of violating it, just as one who loves another person need not be warned not to harm that person. This was the commandment that Moses "heard." Lesser people, however, do not grasp this exalted nature of the Sabbath. They had to be told that it is forbidden to desecrate the sacred day; when they absorbed the Ten Commandments, they "heard" primarily the negative commandment *safeguard*. >>> Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue May 22 08:19:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 11:19:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 22/05/18 06:52, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going > there and seeing the falls is not nothing. Not at all. One says a bracha on many things that one would much rather *not* see, and that one would certainly not go out of ones way to see. Also consider the rainbow. If one happens to see it one says a bracha, and quite a positive one, but one still should not tell others to go outside and see it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:27:43 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:27:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet : he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. But AGAIN, no one obligated RAMiller to hold like RSRH. Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim around, etc... : R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or : taken a plane and learned on the plane. : Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the : world as it is, namely, mostly gray. But this isn't about how RAMiller lived now about life in general. It's advice to a school, an institution dedicated to learning. What I am actually taken by is the importance RAM is giving girls' education. Contrast that to the number of seminaries today that are so exclusively focused on inspiring that textual education is limited. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When we are no longer able to change a situation micha at aishdas.org -- just think of an incurable disease such as http://www.aishdas.org inoperable cancer -- we are challenged to change Fax: (270) 514-1507 ourselves. - Victor Frankl (MSfM) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:54:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:54:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522135452.GC14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 07:29:51AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be : understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so : supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", : I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Except that the Rambam believes the Qol had nothing to do with accoustics or physical sound to begin with. That the term is just being used as a metaphor to help those of us who never experienced such things. (Moreh 2:48) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 06:52:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:52:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:12 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >But it could still not be worth the learning missed. > >There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples >of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at >the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. >And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more >"nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. I know that Rav Schwab also went to Switzerland. Many gedolim in Europe went in the summer to vacation resorts, and there are pictures of Mir students at summer camp. See http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rkimble/Mirweb/YeshivaStudents2.html R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or taken a plane and learned on the plane. Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the world as it is, namely, mostly gray. I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:08:39 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:08:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522140839.GD14915@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 05:24:24AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. ... With that in mind as a caveat, let's look at Chazal's chassidim harishonim. Aside from famously spending 9 hours a day (12 on days when Mussaf is said?) on tefillah, Our sages repeated [in a beraisa]: The early Chassidim would hide their thorns and broken pieces of glass in the middle of their fields 3 tefachim [roughly one foot] deep, so that it would not [even] stop the plowing. Rav Sheishes would put them to the fire, Ravan would place them in the Tigres [the large river alongside which his home city of Pumbedisa was built]. Rav Yehudah said: The person who wants to be a chassid [he should take care] to follow the words of [the tractates on] damages. Ravina said: The words of [Pirqei] Avos. Others say in response [that Ravina said]: the words of [the tractate] Berakhos [blessings]. - Bava Qama 30a "Amrei leih" as the end is most ocnsistent with what we normally discuss about them. However, notice everyone else assumes a BALC definition of chassidus. They come up in Seifer Hakabiim I as among the bravest of warriors, and among the last to accept the permissibility of fighting on Shabbos. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:22:35 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:22:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522142235.GE14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:05:47AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about : the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: : 1) When was that dough made? : 2) When was that dough baked? We are talking about 600,000 or so homes. I assume there are a range of answers. And when the Torah says they didn't have time for it to become chameitz, it means that in many or most of those homes... enough that the haste came to characterize how we left. Just trying to aid the imagination by three-dimensionalizing the peopl involved. : We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally : irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as : Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the : Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to : leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for : the trip... Already in this discussion it was raised that in Shemos we're told we left "be'etzem hayom". And yet, in yesterday's leining, we're told "hotziakha H' E-lokekha loylah" (Devarim 16:1) Rashi ad loc (based on Sifrei Devarim 128:5, Barakhos 9a) says that we got permission from Par'oh at night (Shemos 12:31). So there was, as you write, PLENTY of warning. But they also had get their neighbors' valutables, pack, get the animals in hand, find Yanky's favorite bottle, figure out who was getting custody of those kids wandering around that neighborhood that choshekh obliterated... So, little things like what to pack for lunch was rushed, and in most cases, that meant they were left with matzah. (Despite likely promising themselves that if they ever got out of Egypt, they would never eat lechem oni again!) Your 1 mil assumption, BTW, might come from the matzah of the seder they were commanded to make, and that this matzah was not necessarily KLP. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 11:02:42 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:02:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <24.27.04381.9FB540B5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:27 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls >will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. >It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim >around, etc... The question was asked about girls' high schools, not yeshiva boys! Do you really think he was concerned about the reduction in learning for the girls! I think not! He held that Niagara is "nothing" something that makes no sense to me in light of the fact the Falls are one of Hashem's wonders. [Email #2.] Here is what R. Miller actually said in response to a question about going to Niagara Falls. the question was asked about high schools taking girls to the Falls. As you can see, his statement about Niagara Falls being "nothing " had nothing to do with bitul Torah. I find his response baffling to say the least. YL Rav Avigdor Miller on Niagara Falls Q: What is your opinion of the importance of a high school taking their students on a trip to Niagara Falls? A: My opinion is that it's nothing at all. You have to travel so far, and spend so much money to see Niagara Falls?! Let's say, here's a frum girls' school. So they have the day off, or the week off, whatever it is. And where do they go? To Niagara Falls. What's in Niagara Falls?! A lot of water falling off a cliff. Nothing at all. Nothing at all! It's the yetzer harah. The yetzer harah makes everyone dissatisfied. People who are really happy with what they have are almost impossible to find. They may say, "We're happy," but they're not. And therefore, they're always seeking something else. And so, they travel to Niagara Falls. You might say differently, but I'm telling you, that's the reason why people travel to Niagara Falls. It's the yetzer harah that is making you dissatisfied. So you have to go to see water falling off a cliff. But really it's nothing at all. Of course, you yield a little bit to the yetzer harah in order that more girls should come to your school. You have an outing every year to get new talmidos, new students. But really it's nothing at all. TAPE # E-193 (June 1999) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:41:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522184112.GC16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 03:28:24PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to : be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to : area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume : measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they : were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. >From what I posted in the past from the AhS (OC 373:34), is seems the definitions themselves were not constants. A person is supposed to be using their own thumb, fist or forearm when the din is only about them. And standardized numbers are only invoked for things like eiruv where one has to serve many people and "ameru chakhamim denimdod lechumerah" -- use an ammah that covers a very high percentile of the people relying on it. And I tried to discuss what this would mean for shiurim like kezayis, where a person isn't using his own body or something he could only own one of, as a measure. But the discussion went in its own direction. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, micha at aishdas.org if only because it offers us the opportunity of http://www.aishdas.org self-fulfilling prophecy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:33:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:33:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:10:28AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : > By 2025, 10,000 satellites will provide constant Israeli video : > surveillance of the Middle East sufficient to carry out targeted killings ... : What effect does this have on shabbat How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space that has security camteras? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue May 22 16:41:12 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 19:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> References: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 22, 2018, 2:33 PM Micha Berger wrote: > How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space > that has security camteras? No major difference except that some people still avoid security cameras. As they become more common it will be harder to do. It is already difficult to go to many hotels over shabbat. As these devices appear everywhere some argue that poskim will be forced to accept some minority opinions or else we all stay home From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 23 07:53:38 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 14:53:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: From today's Hakhel email bulletin. THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 23 10:12:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:12:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:53:38PM +0000, Professor L. Levine forwarded (from Hakhel, who were forwarding as well): :> THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted :> at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. :> http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg It's very al-menas-leqabel-peras collecting a list of havtachos and segulos.. There is the stretch from the Rambam onward talking about how davening haneitz is better, or how one should daven as soon after as possible. (Which implies kevasiqin is superior, but not actually saying that.) But the general tenor of the list is about mystical rewards; even the references to the gemara. I didn't think it would be your speed. Also, Hakhel pushed my button on a pet peeve. Whomever at Hakhel writes titles knows diqduq better than whomever sent in about the poster. (Compare the subject line of this thread'S "K'Vosikin" with the quoted text's "VASIKIN".) "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. The words are "kevasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. No "the" there to remove; omitting the "ha-" is just wrong. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The meaning of life is to find your gift. micha at aishdas.org The purpose of life http://www.aishdas.org is to give it away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Pablo Picasso From zev at sero.name Wed May 23 10:21:31 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:21:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2f7061f4-8f98-52f7-67af-3204e6dd8b76@sero.name> On 23/05/18 13:12, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. That would be davening *laneitz*. I'm not sure what "davening neitz" might mean, but whatever it is, it's not AZ. I wonder about those who, on a plane going directly to or from EY, daven out the side windows. Are they davening to the Great Penguin Spirit at the South Pole? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed May 23 10:23:14 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 17:23:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <0A36D278-B7B9-4326-9245-B993DE48CB97@tenzerlunin.com> ?I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you?? I am certainly no chassid if Rav Miller. But criticizing anyone, and certainty not criticizing a Talmid chacham, for personal feelings about a family matter, seems to me to be in poor taste. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed May 23 12:42:02 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:42:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin References: Message-ID: At 01:12 PM 5/23/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >The words are "KEvasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, >and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. I use the terminology K'Vosikin, but Hakhel used Vasikin so I left it. I have often quipped that the only people who know Dikduk are maskilim! >:-} (Note the wicked grin.) Regrading segulos, I found the following of interest. From a footnote to letter 15 of the 19 Letters of RSRH "Segulah" denotes a property belonging permanently to an owner, to which no one else has any right or claim (cf. Bava Kamma 87b). YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 05:59:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 12:59:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? Message-ID: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 06:01:44 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 13:01:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life by a community. Do you agree? It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit and then no more rain falls. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 24 10:39:09 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 17:39:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Does_Ru=92ach_Ra=92ah_=28negative_spiri?= =?windows-1252?q?ts=29_still_exist_today=3F?= Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru?ach Ra?ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra?ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra?ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye. Scientists have revealed the presence of numerous invisible forces in the universe, such as gravity and electromagnetic waves. In fact, scientists today theorize that dark matter, which no one has ever seen, accounts for 80% of the matter in the universe. Just as G-d created indiscernible physical forces in the universe which physicists have shown to exist, Chazal identified invisible spiritual forces that potentially impact negatively on both the body and soul (see Teshuvos Vihanhogos 1:8). The Gemara (Shabbos 109a) states that when awakening in the morning, a person must wash his or her hands (three times) to remove Ru?ach Ra?ah. Until one does so, one must be careful not to touch the mouth, nose, eyes or ears so as not to allow the Ru?ach Ra?ah to enter into the body. Also, one may not touch food, since the Ru?ach Ra?ah will spread to the food. Although the Maharshal (Chulin 8:12) questions whether any form of Ru?ach Ra?ah still exists today, the consensus of most poskim is that this is still a concern. The Halachos of removing Ru?ach Ra?ah from one?s hands are codified in Shulchan Aruch (OC 4:2-5). If one touched food before washing in the morning, the Mishnah Berurah (4:14) writes that bedieved (after the fact) the food may be eaten, but if possible the food should be rinsed three times. The Gemara warns us about other forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah (damaging spirits). However, the Magen Avrohom (173:1) writes that there are some forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah that no longer pose a danger. For example, the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru?ach Ra?ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru?ach ra?ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one?s hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Fri May 25 00:10:22 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:10:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were > all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, > a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype > (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and I cringe every time I go past. But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 04:51:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 07:51:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 03:10 AM 5/25/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: >This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards >went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing >towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and >I cringe every time I go past. > >But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" >from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun >"netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There >certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 >in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not found in TANACH, so why not this one? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 06:49:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 09:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 07:51:45AM EDT, Prof. Levine wrote: : Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not : found in TANACH, so why not this one? Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different topic. People are trying to "do halakhah" without understanding the language the categories they're trying to implements are labeled in. Without understanding the language of Chazal, we are missing a lot of subtlety about what they meant. With bigger problems (if less about din) if you don't know the workings of the language of Tefillah, Tehillim or Chumash. Judaism without diqduq is a paler, less nuanced, thing. I expect you have a LOT from RSRH in your cut-n-paste library on this. Earlier, at 10:10:22AM IDT, Simon Montagu wrote the post that Prof Levine was replying to: : But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from : the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the : root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word : meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's : description of his dream and in Hazal. Nitzotz. Yeshaiah 1:31 uses it to refer to a spark, as it's something that starts a fire. Comes up a number of times in Chazal. Most famously to people who daven Ashkenaz, Shabbos 3:6: nosenin keli sachas haneir leqabeil nitzotzos. There is a beis hanitzotz in the BHMQ. Libun requires nitzotzos coming out of the keli. "Nitzotzos ein bahen mamash". (Shabbos 47b) BUT... getting back to that nuance theme... Haneitz is when there is enough light to make things like that sparkle. It's before alos, which is when the first spark of the sun is visible. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, micha at aishdas.org Our greatest fear is that we're powerful http://www.aishdas.org beyond measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anonymous From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 07:38:32 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:38:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:49 AM 5/25/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This >is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. >There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh >and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from >English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different >topic. Sadly, with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and texting, the English language is, IMO, going down the drain. People do not spell properly, write things that are not words, etc. This is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 08:22:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:22:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525152241.GC9702@aishdas.org> This isn't an MO issue, even if the subject line mentions the affiliation of the mechaneikh. For many people in yeshivish minyanim I attend, davening with a tzibbur is something one does between gaps in looking at a seifer. And among the yeshivish-lite (Shababnikim?), minyan is an excuse to get together for the qiddush. We really don't know how to daven. And all the time we spend teaching how to learn contributes to that. Defining religious inspiration in terms of learning, new knowledge, makes it hard to find what the point is in saying the same words yet again. When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. We define it those terms, tefillah won't get anywhere. On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:01:44PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have : the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community : and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that : did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their : prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life : by a community. Do you agree? I think so, because gap year subtlely teaches the message that true spirituality is incompatible with "reeal life". And that's why they need to go to a 1 year religious experience, with no job, no secular studies, no other concerns, not even the usual setting, in order to get inspiration that is supposed to last year the rest of your life. I believe it's an underdiscussed factor (among the many others) as to why so many MO youth go yeshivish during gap year or upon return. That implied message is not fully compatible with TuM or TiDE. That said... There are other factors. Telecom means you can hear from a famous rosh yeshiva regularly, and don't need to "settle" for someone local as a role model. Never mind that you can regularly connect with the LOR, so that he is actually in a position to better model the role. Also, the whole universal post-HS yeshiva thing feeds the RY-centric view (outside of chassidishe admorim) of religious leadership now prevalent, rather than the rabbinate. The shift from Agudas haRabbanim to the Agudah's (or in Israel, Degel's) Mo'etzes haRabbanim. Secondary effects: There is less tie and sense of belonging to a particular qehillah. More and more people daven in a handful of places, because this one is more convenient Fri night, another Shabbos morning, a third for Shabbos afternoon, Sunday, weekdays... Qehillah could be a source of positive peer pressure when inspiration is running low. But only if you feel attached to one. (An LOR mentioned to me this effect as a factor in OTD rates...) As per the famous machgich line: It's chazaras hasha"tz, not chazaras haSha"s! : It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately : go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit : and then no more rain falls. Although it's less that no more rain falls as much as the crops no longer accept irrigation water. Okay, the metaphor doesn't really work. A good rav who one can interact with regularly may be more useful :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals micha at aishdas.org is not as important as http://www.aishdas.org what you become by achieving your goals. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Henry David Thoreau From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 25 08:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos Message-ID: Halacha L'kovod Shabbos - "Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos" According to some Poskim it is prohibited to intentionally tan in the sun on Shabbos. Nevertheless it is permitted to walk or sit outdoors on a sunny day even if there is the probability of becoming tanned (even if one would be pleased that this happened - so long as one is not intentionally tanning) because the tanning is not intentional. One may also apply a thin and pourable suntan lotion for protection against sunburn when walking or sitting outdoors. However, one may not use a cream. S'U Minchas Yitzchok 5:32, Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchasa 18:70, Sefer 39 Melochos YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri May 25 08:56:20 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:56:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Questions on Theologically Motivated Message-ID: <3CB5DF8F-56E4-482D-BA72-9328800F007E@cox.net> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. 1) What is the difference between ?The religious person? and ?the truly religious person?? 2) What exactly do you mean by "cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:11:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:11:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: In this case, the problem pre-dated the smart? (or cell) phone. On 5/25/2018 4:38 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Sadly,? with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and > texting,? the English language is, IMO,? going down the drain.? People > do not spell properly,? write things that are not words,? etc.? This > is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:05:52 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:05:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular Message-ID: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Ever wonder what is the nafka mina of deciding if secular people are tinok sh'nishba or not? Here is a biggy. There is (apparently) a machloket between Rav Kanyevski and Rav Edelstein if it is permitted to donate a kidney if it may end up in someone secular. RK believes it shouldn't be done because he paskens like Rav Elyashiv that no one today has the din of tinok sh'nishba and therefore they shouldn't get this type of help from the religious. RE paskens like the classic Chazon Ish psak that today's secular people do have the tinok din? and therefore it is permitted to donate a kidney to a secular person. See the article (Hebrew) for more details. http://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/558795 From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 09:31:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:31:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? In-Reply-To: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525163124.GF9702@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:59:56PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious : person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are : theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic : inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral : creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a : Supreme Law?" : Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would : be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a : judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? I think it's self-evident. If the gov't is "of the people and by the people" (regardless of "for the people", appologies Pres Lincoln), then the only way to really seperate church and state would be to separate church and people. And "church" here includes not only all religion, but all religious stances. Including atheism, agnosticism, apathy and Sherleyism. A person's vote should be informed by their values. And a person's values by their religious stance -- whether religious, "truly religious", or an atheist. After all, an atheist cannot phrase abortion or end-of-life issues in terms of souls and therefore their etheism will inform their vote when Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice is a key issue. (Looking at you, Ireland!) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man micha at aishdas.org is how he treats someone http://www.aishdas.org who can do him absolutely no good. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Samuel Johnson From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:11:20 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:11:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Professor L. Levine" T >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra'ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra'ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye....? .....the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru'ach Ra'ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru'ach ra'ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one's hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL ? >>>>> ? It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children.? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:05:24 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:05:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398431932-c8d-935e@webjas-vaa194.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Rich, Joel" >From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" ? Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich ? ? >>>>> ? There is no constitutional requirement, no legal requirement, no ethical requirement and no logical requirement for each individual to erect a wall of separation between church and state in his own heart and mind.? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:52:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:52:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> >>>>> It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ============= IIRC R? A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 12:26:01 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:26:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525192601.GC25353@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 05:52:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : IIRC R' A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. It was ruach ra'ah, as per our discussion. Thus, neigl vasr. I think RAS's understanding was that Chazal were using evidence-based reasoning. People were getting sick, and since bad vapors were believed to be the cause of disease, Chazal presumed there was a ru'ach ra'ah. Which means that given that we today attibute disease to microbes, we would transvalue ruach ra'ah to refer to germs. I don't think too many others understand ru'ach ra'ah as a physical threat. Rashi (Taanis 22b "mipenei ruach ra'ah") understands ru'ach ra'ah to be a sheid entering the person -- "mipenei ruach ra'ah: shenichnas bo ruach sheidah..." and then he might drown or fall and die. Perhaps psychiatric illness? In which case, there is no clear transvaluation to today's science, as minds kind of straddle the physica - metaphysical fence. Sheidim /are/ intellects; so how do we map sheidim talk to rationalist psychology talk? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. micha at aishdas.org If you want time, you must make it. http://www.aishdas.org - Charles Buxton Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 09:30:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:30:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2 Message-ID: It is often confusing when trying to determine whether an item is subject to bishul akum or not. This article should help. YL Click here to download "Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2" From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:50:45 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:50:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular In-Reply-To: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> References: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <8849942693d54a55aab7bd43e07dddc7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/901388/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/from-the-rabbis-desk-choosing-a-recipient,-diverting-tzedakah/ Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz-From The Rabbi's Desk - Choosing a Recipient, Diverting Tzedakah Listen to the 1st part-lots to discuss KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 26 12:17:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:17:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Ben On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Toby Katz via Avodah wrote: > >>>>> > > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? > So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their > children. From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 14:07:40 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:07:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? Message-ID: <1639920e25b-c96-3738@webjas-vaa110.srv.aolmail.net> From:?"Prof. Levine" Date:?Wed, 22 Aug 2012 Subject:?Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? One may download this article that appeared in Tradition at http://www.mesora.org/mezuza-gordon.pdf Towards the end of this article the author writes To claim, then, that the Divine inscription, which directs the attention of the Jew to God, is possessed of its own potency, generating protective benefits, perverts a spiritual instrumentality into a cultic charm.... YL >>>> ? I hope I will be forgiven for resurrecting an old, old thread -- from 2012.? But I recently came across something when I was preparing for my Pirkei Avos shiur, and it made me think of this old thread. ? This is from _Ethics From Sinai_?by Irving Bunim.? On Pirkei Avos 5:22 he talks about the difference between the disciples of Avraham and the disciples of Bilaam.? The former have a sense of security; the latter have no sense of security in the world.?? ? ---quote-- Today we have all sorts of insurance policies: fire insurance, flood insurance, life insurance. On one level they represent a wise precaution [but mainly] the man of piety places his trust in the Almighty. When he closes his place of business at night, he knows there is a mezuzah on the door, to betoken His protection. At bedtime he recites the Shema, to invoke His protection. This is his basic insurance policy.... . The Sages tell of Artaban IV, the last King of Parthia, who sent his friend Rav a priceless jewel, with the message, << Send me something equally precious>>; and Rav sent him a mezuzah.? The king replied, <> Answered Rav < >> --end quote-- ? In a footnote, Bunim explains that that last sentence is a pasuk, Mishlei 6:22, and it applies to the mezuzah. This doesn't make the mezuzah an but does say that the mezuzah is protective. . (I am using << and >> instead of quotation marks in the hope of minimizing the number of random question marks AOL strews in my path.? If anyone can help me solve this problem please let me know.) . --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri May 25 13:29:34 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 16:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: . R' Simon Montagu wrote: > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards > went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing > towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", > and I cringe every time I go past. > > But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. ... I used to cringe too. But then I thought of a different limud zechus, and it's not just an excuse. I really believe this: They are not speaking the language that you'd like to think they are speaking. We are in the process of developing a new dialect, or creole, ... I don't know or care what the technical term might be, but consider the following phrases: making kiddush will be davening had paskened was mekadesh Technically speaking, I do concede that "davening k'vasikin" is meaningful, while "davening vasikin" is bizarre. But the truth, whether you like it or not, is that when someone says "davening vasikin", EVERYONE knows what the speaker meant. In this new language, there's nothing wrong with saying "davening vasikin". It is (I think) EXACTLY like the phrase "Good Shabbos", when the first word is pronounced "good" (and not "goot") and the second word is pronounced "SHABbos" (and not "shabBOS"). What language is that???? It's not Hebrew. It's not Yiddish. It's not English. It's something new. (Where "new" can have values of 50 to 100 years. Maybe more.) I am reminded of going to the bakery when I was twelve years old, and the sign by the brownies said that the price was: .10? each (If your computer messed that up, it is a decimal point, followed by a one, and a zero, and a "cents" sign. You know, a "c" with a line through it.) Twelve-year old me looked at the decimal point, and noted that the sign had a cents sign, and not a dollar sign. So I concluded that the price for the brownies was one-tenth of a cent each. I tried to buy ten of them for a penny. It didn't work. And I was pretty upset about it too. I knew I was right. Plenty of people tried to console me, but no one could explain my error. I was right, and everyone seemed to agree. It took about 40 years, but I finally figured out the lesson of that incident: What people SAY is not nearly as important as what they MEAN. Focus on the ikar, not the tafel. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sat May 26 19:46:16 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 22:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <68109a23-b784-405e-60d5-b1c30853273a@sero.name> Think of saying "netz" instead of "honetz" the same way you do about saying "bus" instead of "autobus", "phone" instead of "telephone", or "flu" instead of "influenza". I recently saw "'bus" written with an apostrophe, but that's very unusual. Most people have no idea that these are abbreviations of longer words. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Sun May 27 05:00:54 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 12:00:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is the meaning of Cholov Yisroel? Message-ID: Please see the video at https://goo.gl/S5mPTn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat May 26 18:36:57 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:36:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Behaaloscha YOU CAN'T WIN 'EM ALL Message-ID: <89C443B9-BCD6-4E3D-A485-59F3CF2C7515@cox.net> Both dedications, the dedication of the Mishkan by the Nesiim and the dedication of the Menorah by Aharon were required. The Midrash mentions that Aharon was depressed that neither he nor his tribe was included in the dedication of the Mishkan. This brings to mind the time when I gave a student of mine a part in the family service that he considered inferior and unimportant. Convinced I had the perfect answer, I confindently and proudly informed him about the dedications of the Mishkan and of the Menorah and how God comforted Aharon by saying that his part of the dedication ceremony was the greatest of all, in that he was charged with the kindling of the Menora. I was sure that would make my pupil feel much better but without batting an eyelash, my student immediately retorted: "Yeah, but you're not God!" I ended up being more depressed than Aharon! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:25:32 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:25:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? Message-ID: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and Reuvain claims insolvency. Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an ongoing business for Pesach? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:27:43 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:27:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? Message-ID: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose. (The gemara in b"b is worth looking at-what exactly is the halachic force of "people don't sell their homes"). Two items: 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? 2. What if the other fundraising fails-would the community sell the Beit Knesset? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 31 11:22:30 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:22:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns > beer over pesach), one source quoted is S?A C?M 99:7, which deals with a > case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows > money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din > is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and > Reuvain claims insolvency. > Do you think it?s a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an > ongoing business for Pesach? Not at all, for two separate reasons. First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. So in this case where the Jew sold not the chametz but the entire business, there's nothing to indicate that the sale was anything but serious and effective. Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to "pierce" it in the name of equity. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 1 03:28:46 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 06:28:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra Message-ID: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> With discussed "Higher" Bible Criticism before, we've discussed the IE on the topic before, RGS went the next step -- the Ramban on the IE on Bible Criticism. I am includng the comment, and I would have written something similar. :-)BBii! -Micha Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student R. Avraham Ibn Ezra has long been a controversial figure. R. Shlomo Luria (Yam Shel Shlomo, intro to Bava Kamma) respectfully but strongly rejects his entire approach to Torah commentary. What does the Ramban, one of the classical commentaries whose work serves as a foundation for modern Jewish thought, think of his predecessor, Ibn Ezra? He certainly disagrees often with Ibn Ezra, sometimes sharply. But there may be a more fundamental reason for opposition. At the end of Ramban's commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim, he writes that anyone who says that Ezra the scribe added to the Torah -- such as Gen. 13:6 or Deut. 3:11 -- is a heretic (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 p. 548). Ibn Ezra famously suggests that four verses imply post-Mosaic interpolations -- Gen. 12:6, 22:14, Deut. 3:11, 31:22. Ramban, who shows clear expertise in Ibn Ezra's Torah commentaryn quotes two of these four verses in describing the heretic! Coincidence? R. Betzalel Naor, in his annotated edition of Rashba's Ma'amar Al Yishma'el (Orot: Spring Valley, NY, 2008, pp. 25-27) finds this correspondence convincing. The author of the commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim must have been condemning Ibn Ezra as a heretic. Even though some supercommentaries and scholars dispute the claim that Ibn Ezra ever intended anything other than that Moshe wrote those verses prophetically, many believe he made the more radical claim.[1] If so, this passage from the Shir Ha-Shirim commentary condemns him as a heretic. However, R. Naor points out that Ramban did not write that commentary. R. Chaim Dov Chavel argues cogently in his introduction to that work that it was written by the earlier, kabbalist R. Ezra of Gerona (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 pp. 473-475). If so, we can ask whether Ramban agreed with R. Ezra's evaluation. R. Naor (ibid., pp. 136-143) makes the following points and suggestions: 1- Even in his introduction to his Torah commentary, Ramban expresses his mixed attitude toward Ibn Ezra, which he calls "a public rebuke and private affection." This might be used to describe a commentary that is both brilliant but occasionally sacrilegious. However, Ramban calls him "Rabbi" Ezra, a term of respect. 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him about Ibn Ezra. 3- Ramban unquestionably rejected any post-Mosaic interpolations into the Torah, as seen in his general introduction to his commentary. While hiss attitude toward the level of prophecy of the Torah varies (commentary to Num. 16:5), that is nowhere near the claim that any verse postdates Moshe. 4- Rabbeinu Tam wrote a poem in praise of Ibn Ezra. Perhaps this influenced Ramban to judge him favorably as an inadvertent heretic, which was a status that, according to the Ra'avad (Hilkhos Teshuvah 3:7), even great scholars fell into. 5- The Chida (Shem Ha-Gedolim, part 1, alef 89) quotes R. Binyamin Spinoza, a late eighteenth century rabbi, who deduces from Ramban's failure to argue against Ibn Ezra's radical suggestions that those comments must be late forgeries (interpolations?). Had Ramban seen them, he would surely have objected. In the end, once we determine that the commentary to Shir Ha-Shirim is misattributed, we can only speculate about Ramban's attitude toward Ibn Ezra. Maybe he agreed with R. Ezra of Gerona's condemnation or maybe he felt the belief was wrong but not heretical. Or maybe, as R. Naor suggested, he rejected the belief as heretical but not the person. (Republished from May '13) [1] On this disagreement, see R. Yonatan Kolatch, Masters of the Word, vol. 2 pp. 310-318. ------------------ J. C. Salomon May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late addition to the text. I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 1 08:03:13 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:03:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <70c7cc6f-c870-c610-b592-25a81940172f@sero.name> I find the entire idea that RABE's "secret of twelve" was a secret heresy to be without foundation, and think it more likely that this is wishful thinking by heretics who would like to find "a great tree" on which to hang their heresy. We don't know what the secret was, because it was a secret, but his comment on Vayishlach makes it unlikely to be what the "bible critics" claim it is. On Bereshis 12:6, he simply says: "If it is not so, then there is a secret here, and the intelligent person should be silent". On Bereshis 22:14, and Devarim 3:11 and 31:22 he makes no comment at all, and indeed there's nothing unusual to hint at, no reason to even suppose these pesukim might not have been written at the same time as what surrounds them. The "secret of the twelve" is in Devarim 1:1, on the words "Eleven days out of Chorev", which makes me think whatever this secret is relates to that, and perhaps to a mystical "twelfth day". It's there that he cryptically mentions these four pesukim, with no context or explanation; the theory that he was hinting at a deep secret heresy in his heart is therefore pure speculation and should be rejected. The Ramban's (or whoever wrote it) comment in Shir Hashirim only means that there existed such heretics in his day; there is not even the hint of a hint that RABE might have been among them. These are the same heretics who claimed him; there's no reason to suppose the Ramban agreed with that claim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sat Jun 2 20:49:06 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2018 23:49:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: >From R'Micha (Avodah V36n64): > When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? > We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. < If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; and "vaya'as kein Aharon." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 00:42:20 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 10:42:20 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua Message-ID: In last weeks parsha we have the Torah stating that Moshe's nevua was unique that Hashem spoke to him directly (see Rambam Yesodei Torah for the list of differences). However, I was bothered by the following question. A number of times the Torah writes Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe v'Aharon leimor where certain halachos are given over to both Moshe and Aharon. The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? In Behaalosecha it is clear that Aharon and Miriam dd not know that Moshe's nevua was different then theirs, yet, if Aharon heard these like a regular nevua as a vision not clearly then how did he not realize that Moshe got a clearer nevua then he did? The first thing Moshe did after getting halachos from Hashem was go over them with Aharon and his sons. Also, the pasuk says that Hashem called out to all 3, Moshe Aharon and Miriam to go out, and Rashi comments that it was one dibur something that a person cannot do. If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 01:54:52 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 11:54:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? Message-ID: At the beginning of Bamidbar the Meshech Chochma asks the following question. A Baal keri is prohibited from being in the machane leviya, if so how could the Leviim ever live with their wives (in the machane leviya) and become a baal keri? Ayen sham his answer. Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A Baal keri is prohibited from going there. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Jun 4 11:24:18 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:24:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> Message-ID: On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns >> beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a >> case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows >> money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din >> is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and >> Reuvain claims insolvency. >> Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an >> ongoing business for Pesach? [Zev Sero:] > Not at all, for two separate reasons. > First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones > property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a > going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and > continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected > to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. AIUI there was no change in the business other than the 'titular" ownership > Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get > away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently > made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of > the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that > the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he > still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity > the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the > Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that > he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So > none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not > an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own > chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, > and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that > CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to > "pierce" it in the name of equity. https://headlinesbook.podbean.com/mf/download/reyy6b/headlines_6-2-18.mp3 6/2/18 Owning Businesses in Halacha and Hashkafa: People who are making a difference- Freddy Friedman, Elchonon Schwartz, Rabbi Yosef Kushner, Nesanel Davis, Shimon Webster, Mr. Sol Werdiger The first half deals with a similar type of arrangement for nursing homes-so aiui you're saying it's up to the Rabbis to evaluate the "need" in each case to determine if haaramah is allowable? KT Joel Rich From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 13:46:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:46:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180604204625.GA25546@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:28:46AM -0400, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : : Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student ... : 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, : as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could : agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him : about Ibn Ezra. ... : J. C. Salomon : May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm : Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that : the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, : before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late : addition to the text. : I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that : certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might : have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate : extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight : verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. Except that the tell-tale idiom is "sod ha-12", not 8. From Devarim 1:1: ... And if you understand sod hasheneim asar... Pit stop: the standard text doesn't even say that, it says "(hasarim) [tz"l hashneim] asar". So there is a slight chance it doesn't even say 12. Back to the IE: ... also "Vayikhtov Moshe" (31:22), "VehaKenaani as Ba'aretz" (Bereishis 12:6), "Har H' Yeira'eh" (Bereishis 22:14), and also "arso eres barzel (Devarim 3:11), you will regonize the truth. If it does refer to the last 12 pesuqim (from Moshe going up Har Nevo), then there are 5 quotes in discussion. 4 refer to the future, likely quotes for someone to say were actually written later. But Og's iron bed? And besides, it's the last 8 pesuqim that amoraim argue how and if Moshe could have written them. Now, if Moshe couldn't write "and Moshe died", then it makes sense to argue that he couldn't write "and Moshe went up Har Nevo" if he never came back. But that is more conjecture, that this "12" is "12 pesuqim", and the last 12 pesuqim at that, and that it is related to chazal's discussion of last 8 pesuqim, and all this despite one of the quotes not having this "problem" of not being true when Moshe left us. And for all we know, the secret could be about prophecy. Even if all 5 were about the future, who knows what secret the IE posited to explain them? One of the parts of the Torah that is NOT in this list is the list of kings of Edom "lifnei melokh melekh liVnei Yisrael", Bereishis 36:31. On which the IE qrites: Some say that this parashah was written bederekh nevu'ah. And Yitzchaqi says in his book that this parashah was written in the days of Yehoshafat, and he explains the generations as he wished. This is why his name was called Yitzchaq -- kol hashomeia yitzachaq li. .. Vechalillah chalilah that the matter is as he said about the days of Yehoshafat. His book is worth burning... And he explains that the kings ran in rapid succession, this being warrior tribes of Edom. And the melekh Yisrael in the pasuq was Moshe, "vayhi bishurun Melekh. A lot of work if the IE was okay with later interpolations of narrative snippets of 12 pesuqim or less. In 2002, RGStudent reposed something from Cardozo at . See fn 50: Most enlightening is Spinoza's observation that some texts of the Torah, such as the ones in Genesis 12:6; 22:14, and Deuteronomy 1:2, must have been written many years after Moshe's death, since they reveal information that refers to latter days. Spinoza relies here on the famous Jewish commentator Ibn Ezra (1088-1167), who wrote that these verses were "mysteries" about "which the wise should be silent" (on Deuteronomy 1:2). The traditional understanding of Ibn Ezra, as also confirmed by the modern Jewish scholar Samuel David Luzzatto (ShaDaL) (1800-1865), is that these passages must be understood as prophetic and anticipating the future. .... However, in RGS's own essay on that web site writes: Also, phrases and even verses were added to the texts that perhaps even these prophets could not have written. For example, Ramban explains (Genesis 8:21) "G-d said in His heart" as meaning that this was only revealed to Moshe at the time of the writing of the Torah. See also Ralbag there and Moreh Nevuchim 1:29. Another case is Genesis 32:33, "Therefore the Children of Israel are not to eat the gid hanasheh." According to the Mishna and Gemara in Chullin 101b, as explained by Rashi, this verse was a later insertion by Moshe. See the Radak's commentary to this verse. It is possible that Ibn Ezra, in his "secrecy", believed that many more verses fall into this category and were inserted into pre-existing narrative by G-d to Moshe. His thesis there is that the Torah was redacted from pre-existing scrolls during the Exodus; that it was this redaction that was dictated to Moshe in Sinai. Since such megillos are named in a few places, it's a pretty hard thesis to totally dismiss. The only question is how much was already given in writing in texts like Seifer Milkhamos Hashem (cf Bamidbar 21:13). Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 14:21:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 17:21:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 11:49:06PM -0400, Michael Poppers via Avodah wrote: : If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two : recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; : and "vaya'as kein Aharon." But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. Y-mi Nedarim 9:4 (violna ed. 30b) has the famous machloqes between R' Aqiva and Ben Azai about whether the kelal gadol baTorah is "ve'havta lerei'akha" or "zeh seifer toledos adam". In the version in the introduction to the Ein Yaaqov, he quotes Ben Zoma, attributes Rav Akiva's opinion to Ben Nanas, and then adds a new opinion: Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi says: We have found a more inclusive verse than that, and it is, "The first lamb you shall sacrifice in the morning and the second lamb you shall sacrifice in the evening." Rabbi Ploni stood up and said: The halachah is like Ben Pazi as it is written, "As all that I show you, the structure of the Mishkan and all its vessels: so shall you do." That makes constancy kind of important. FWIW, here is how my discussion (ch 2. sec. 3) of that quote goes: There are two interesting implications to Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi's and Rabbi Ploni's words. First, Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi could be making the point that Rabbi Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov found in Ben Azzai's position -- the role of personal development. After all, there are a number of verses that discuss this offering; Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi chose a verse that discusses its constant and regular nature. In his opinion, this is the most important verse in the Torah -- even in his or our day, after the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash and there are no korbanos. Perhaps the point here is consistency in avodas Hashem in-and-of-itself, not limited to this one mitzvah. Just as service in the Mishkan has its schedule and routine, so too our observance must be a discipline with well-defined structure and consistency. Second, the anonymous rabbi endorses this view by quoting a verse about the Mishkan and its vessels' structure, their composition, not their service. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi statement is about something done in the Beis HaMikdash as part of its daily service, but the proof is about its structure. This rabbi is relating "so shall you do" not only to following the description of that structure Hashem gave us when building it but also to the discipline of the ritual within it. The discipline in avodas Hashem of the previous implication is a taken as fundamental part of what the building is. At least homiletically, we can say this is true of both microcosms -- not only the Mishkan, but also the human soul, as Rav Shimon ben Pazi is giving importance to structure and consistency even in our era, without a Mishkan or Beis HaMikdash. Discipline in avodas Hashem is not only part of the structure of what the Mishkan is, but also our own soul's structure. This homily would be consistent with Rav Shimon's statement ... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search micha at aishdas.org of a spiritual experience. You are a http://www.aishdas.org spiritual being immersed in a human Fax: (270) 514-1507 experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 15:06:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:06:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180604220616.GC25546@aishdas.org> On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Rn Toby Katz Avodah wrote: > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be > bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before > feeding their children. According the Tosafos (Yuma 77b) and the Yam Shel Shelomo (Chulin 8:31) there isn't any ru'ach ra'ah anymore. Unsurprizingly, the Rambam (Rotzeiach 12:5) doesn't mention ru'ach ra'ah when he discusses not putting food under your bed, his reason is "shema yipol bo davar hamaziq". If it is a modern and mundane issue, I would think ru'ach ra'ah is depression, not a physical illness. The day after Shaul learns he lost his throne, "vatilach ruach E-lokim ra'ah el Sha'ul". (Shemu'el I 18:9) On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:17:24PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Actually, you need to do both for neigl vasr, as you need to get rid of chatzitzos. AhS 161:1, MB s"q 7,10. So the question might be... What's the problem with chatzitzos? Can someone make an argument that it's about places where disease can hide? Then why haqpadah? I really don't know what to do with RASoloveitchik's suggestion that ru'ach ra'ah can be things like germs. If it's a saqanas nefashos thing, then pesaqim should indeed be more maqpidim about things like soap than about using a cup, koach gavra, etc... BUT... this is RAS. I am assuming he did indeed have an explanation. Keeping the discussion alive (and CC-ing R Harry Maryles) to see if we can get down to one. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water micha at aishdas.org that softens the potato, hardens the egg. http://www.aishdas.org It's not about the circumstance, Fax: (270) 514-1507 but rather what you are made of. From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Tue Jun 5 19:06:11 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 22:06:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. < Agreed, and both examples I mentioned are examples of doing, not knowing. The point is that not just "v'halachta bidrachav" but also that "v'halachta" in the path of the noted examples, that one should imitate paragons of *derech H'*. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 05:07:43 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah Message-ID: The article below gives many halachas that are applicable to situations where gentile workers are employed in one's home. IMO it is worth reading carefully. YL Click here to download "Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 6 10:49:54 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:49:54 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Why I support the private kashrut initiative of Tzohar rabbis Message-ID: <628e074c-450f-a464-ed95-2eca5d3ed825@zahav.net.il> Placing this article in Avodah because Rav Melamed uses the model of the 70 elders to show how differences in community leadership should be handled. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22250 A few critical paragraphs: But when groups and institutions try to impose their opinion on members of another circle, and abolish the status of their rabbis (and to boycott them from becoming rabbinical judges and rabbis) we are no longer speaking of a situation where the rabbis of Tzohar should also establish a kashrut organization, but rather a situation in which it is almost obligatory for them to establish one, just like other accepted rabbinic organizations, in order to give halachic and Torah expression to their part in the Torah. If they do not, then they are similar to a prophet who suppresses his prophecy, or as our Sages said: ? Yea, all her slain are a mighty host? ? this refers to a disciple who has attained the qualification to decide questions of law, and does not decide them? (Sotah 22a). How Does a Difficult Dispute Develop? At first, there is an argument over a focused halakhic issue. However, when an agreement is not reached, instead of agreeing to disagree and continuing to respect each other, one side thinks that the other has no authority to retain his position, because, essentially, his position is inferior, since he belongs to a liberal circle, or his position differs from that of most rabbis. Then, that same party departs from the particular halakhic issue they have debated, and moves on to a more acute arena, in which the main argument is that the rabbi against whom he is arguing with is not authorized to express a halachic position, for in any case, who appointed him to be a rabbi who can express a position at all? Since this argument is not convincing enough, and the rabbi who is being attacked remains in his position, consequently we are now moving over to a dispute of a different magnitude ? since we are no longer dealing with a person who rules on a matter without authority, but with a person who undermines the foundations of authority as a whole, and thus, it is compulsory to wage an all-out war against him? From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 11:31:07 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 18:31:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: Please see the article at Eretz Yisroel, Zionism,and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH This article is from The Jewish Observer Vol. 23 No. 6 September 1990/Adar 5751 and is available at https://goo.gl/LNRpZZ YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 7 01:06:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 08:06:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra Message-ID: The letter below appears on pages 113 - 114 of this week's Flatbush Jewish Journal. It is not clear to me that all FJJ readers appreciate the gadlus of Rabbi Shamshon Raphael Hirsch when it came to Torah. Indeed, last week MW (whomever this may be) referred to RSRH as "Reb Shamshon Refoel Hirsch" rather than as Rabbi or Rav or even Rabbiner. Therefore, I feel that I should refer FJJ readers to Rav Yaakov Perlow's article Rav S. R. Hirsch - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra that appears in The World of Hirschian Teachings, An Anthology on the Hirsch Chumash and the Hashkafa of Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, Published for the Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer Foundation, Feldheim, 2008. Reading this article will give one a true understanding of how great a Torah scholar RSRH was. Moreover, the following is from page 102 of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, Architect of Torah Judaism for the Modern World by Rabbi Eliyahu Meir Klugman. We also have the assessment of the K?sav Sofer, Rabbi Avrohom Shmuel Binyamin Sofer, Rabbi of Pressburg and leader of Hungarian Jewry. The K'sav Sofer first met Rabbi Hirsch in Vienna, not long after the latter assumed his post in Nikolsburg. On the first Shabbos after his return to Pressburg, a large crowd came to his home for Shalosh Seudos in order to hear his observations about the new Chief Rabbi. Their curiosity was understandable, since, as followers of the Chasam Sofer, the K'sav Sofer's father, they harbored deep suspicions of anyone versed in secular studies, which they considered a potent danger to the Jewish people. The K?sav Sofer described his meeting with Rabbi Hirsch in the following terms: ?We spoke at length on Torah subjects with the new ?Rosh Medinah? and whatever topic we discussed, his reply showed that he had Shas and poskim on his fingertips. We, the rabbonim of Hungary, have to consider ourselves very fortunate that he holds us to be his superiors as scholars, for if he were only aware of the extent of his own scholarship, we would have no rest from him.? Finally, a talmud muvhak of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, ZT"L, told me that Rav Hunter once told him that anything that Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch wrote is Kodesh Kedoshim. Based on this It should be clear to all that what RSRH wrote about one going to see the wonders of nature is to be taken very seriously. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 7 06:02:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 13:02:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? Message-ID: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, how else might the desired result be accomplished? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 7 07:48:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 10:48:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: [VBM] Chassidic Service of God (continued) Message-ID: <20180607144830.GA19716@aishdas.org> This is where our compartmentalization into camps holds us back. The Piaseczner Rebbe (the "Aish Qodesh", R' Kalonymous Kalman Shapiro zt"l Hy"d) is largely reinventing Mussar. Admittedly his goals are different; the elements of the ideal Jew that are emphasized in Chassidus and Mussar differ. But he procedes to build and advocate from scratch a toolset for somthing that another tenu'ah invested the lion's share of their effort on -- self-awareness. To quote RYGB's loose translation of REEDessler (MmE vol 5 pp 35-39), cut-n-pasted from : In our times: The qualities of "Emet" that personified the Ba'alei Mussar [Mussar Masters] are already extinct. We no longer find individuals whose hearts are full with profound truth, with a strong and true sense of Cheshbon HaNefesh [complete and rigorous reckoning of one's spiritual status and progress]... Contemporary Chassidus lacks the component that was once at its core: Avodas Hashem with dveykus... For today's era, there remain only one alternative: To take up everything and anything that can be of aid to Yahadus; the wisdom of both Mussar and Chassidus together. Perhaps together they can inspire us to great understandings and illuminations. Perhaps together they might open within us reverence and appreciation of our holy Torah. Perhaps the arousal of Mussar can bring us to a little Chassidic hislahavus. And perhaps the hislahavus will somewhat fortify one for a Cheshbon HaNefesh. Perhaps through all these means together we may merit to ascend in spirituality and strengthen our position as Bnei Torah [adherents of a Torah centered lifestyle] with an intensified Judaism. May G-d assist us to attain all this! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight, micha at aishdas.org and he wants to sleep well that night too." http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok Fax: (270) 514-1507 Yeshivat Har Etzion PHILOSOPHY > Great Thinkers > The Piaseczner Rebbe > Shiur #24: Chassidic Service of God (continued) Dr. Ron Wacks Ways of Achieving Hitragshut (continued) The Importance of Self-Awareness One of the primary keys for entering the gates of inner service is self-awareness. Remarkably, although a person is generally concerned for his own wellbeing, he is not always aware of what is happening in his own inner world. His psyche is in constant movement, expressing its will and its aspirations, but even though the person may sense something going on, he is not equipped to interpret it and to take the appropriate steps: The hiddenness and imperceptibility of what is happening inside him distances a person greatly from himself. He is unfamiliar with himself and ignorant of what goes on inside him. Even the psyche of the simplest person never ceases its restlessness and writhing, crying out in supplication over its lowliness, and over all the blows and trials and tribulations that he causes it through his foolish actions, speech, and thoughts. The fact that he senses none of this is because he gives no thought to listening to this tempestuous wretch.[1] A person naturally tends to occupy himself with matters external to himself; he is not attentive to his own inner workings. It is easier to engage with the outside world, with its affairs of greater and lesser importance, than it is to listen inwardly. Even when he detects inner movement, he is unable to decode and make sense of it: For that is the way of man: he always strive for that which is extraneous to himself, the affairs of the world, both those that are vital and those that are not. He interests himself in what happens at the end of the world, but he pays no heed to his own psyche, and does not listen and give attention to the business that is within him. Or he may sense it, but since even at the moment that he senses it his desire, his attention, and his thought are turned to the lowly muck of this world, he hears the moaning and its voice only weakly. This may be compared to a person who is asleep and a mosquito bites him on his forehead. If he is a merchant, he dreams that a bag of his merchandise has fallen on his forehead and struck him; if he is a tailor, he dreams that his needle has pricked his forehead, etc. Each individual perceives his inner workings in the guise of his own dreams.[2] The psyche expresses its longings in different forms, but often a person is unable to decode any of these spiritual needs, such as a desire for teshuva and the fear of God. Sometimes, when he feels something oppressive inside him, he goes to the refrigerator and takes out a bottle of sweet drink and some cake, or he tries to distract himself by joking with his friends. Often, a person makes the mistake of thinking that it is his body that is suffering physical hunger, and he believes that he can satiate it by filling his stomach - while in fact it is his psyche that is starved and crying out in distress: Sometimes the psyche of a Jew is animated by regret, teshuva, submission, fear of God, and so on, and the person feels some sort of movement and restlessness within himself, but he has no idea what the problem is. He thinks he may be hungry, or thirsty, or in need of some wine and wafers, or he may think that he has fallen into melancholy, and in order to lift his spirits he chatters playfully with the members of his household, or goes over to a friend to joke and engage in lashon ha-ra, gossip, foolishness, etc.[3] R. Kalonymus's grandfather, author of Maor Va-Shemesh, also addresses the connection between an unhappy psyche and stuffing oneself with food. Attention should be paid to the chain of wrongdoing: Bnei Yisrael complain, convincing themselves of how bad things are for them. This leads them to melancholy, which gives rise to the craving for meat and the punishment that follows: "And when the people complained, it displeased the Lord" - This means that they fell into melancholy... and the Lord's fire burned amongst them, for black bile is detestable and abhorrent, for it is a tinge of idolatry... and for this reason they were punished. And Moshe prayed, and the fire subsided, but it continued through their melancholy, for they felt a lusting and they said, "Who will feed us meat?" For as we explained, the lust for food is drawn from black bile... Therefore, one has to distance oneself far from melancholy, for it brings a person to all sorts of sins. And despondence begins with a growing desire to eat, as we see when a person is mired in black bile, heaven forfend, he eats with lust, ravenously, and very quickly.[4] When a person tries to "quiet" his inner distress with sweets and snacks, not only has his psyche not received what it really wanted, but it is greatly pained by his failure to understand its true needs. Sometimes, after a person continually ignores and steamrolls his inner voice, it simply grows silent: Sometimes, after all of these actions which he has done, he still feels inner discomfort, since with these worthless medicines not only has he not cured the sores of his psyche, nor given it relief from the blows that he has administered to it, but he has in fact added further injury and assault. But sometimes it happens that after these misguided actions he actually feels better, and his spirit is quieted within him, because the blows and injuries and sores that he has added through his actions have rendered his psyche unconscious, or he has piled mounds of dirt and refuse over it to the point that it is completely hidden. Then he will no longer hear even the slightest peep out of it - and he can relax.[5] The psyche also transmits signals of joy, not only distress. A person often misses these signals too, failing to give them expression. For example, when a person fulfills a mitzva or rejoices in his prayer, and his psyche awakens with joy and hitragshut, he will fail to notice this - both because of his general insensitivity to his inner world and because his attention is oriented elsewhere. R. Kalonymus argues that the way to achieve hitragshut and hitlahavut is not by "importing" new feelings from outside of oneself; they are already to be found inside him. However, they must be given more powerful expression and allowed to effect a greater influence on his consciousness: It is not new excitements that you need to seek, nor a heavenly-initiated awakening. First and foremost, the work is required of you yourself, for everything exists within you. You are capable of hitragshut, and you are a person who is able to attain fervor; you simply need to try to get to know yourself and what is going on inside. Your psyche is full of signals, shouts, and supplications, and all you need to do is to provide space within yourself within which it can be revealed and strengthened. Then you will come to know and feel your natural hitragshut, with no need to garb yourself and your needs.[6] R. Kalonymus not only demands self-awareness, but also explains how to attain it. A person has to learn to listen to his own inner world and ask himself questions: Is my psyche happy, and if so, about what? Is my psyche sad, and if so, why? What are the inner feelings that accompany me in this situation, and how did they come about? At first, this work will involve only the major movements of the psyche. It is not advisable to start with weaker movements, since, owing to their delicate nature, their meaning is not always clear. Attention should therefore be paid to the stronger signals, and when one notices them, he should "provide space" and allow them expression. This is facilitated through paying attention to them, strengthening them, and allowing them to reveal themselves through our power of imagination. We will now elaborate on each of these tools individually. (To be continued) Translated by Kaeren Fish _______________________ [1] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 29. [2] Ibid., p. 40. [3] Ibid. [4] R. Kalman Kalonymus Epstein Ha-Levi, Maor Va-Shemesh (Jerusalem, 5748), Parashat Beha'alotekha. [5] Ibid., p. 29. [6] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 30. Copyright ? 1997-2017 by Yeshivat Har Etzion From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 7 21:17:05 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 06:17:05 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <950f4b82-36d2-0f57-abef-73c113119730@zahav.net.il> RSH's third objection to Rav Kalisher is the key one (RSH couldn't imagine that non-religious Jews could be the vehicle for redemption). Once you say that "I can't imagine. . . " than everything else has to fit into that paradigm that you just set up for yourself. The author's conclusions are also strange. To mention all the benefits and great things that have come from the state but to still look at it as if it is a treif piece of meat boggles my mind. I would also add that if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - he should move here. Like I always tell my Reform Jewish friends - If you move here, you get a vote which is 10,000 times (at least) more important than Facebook posts. Ben From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 07:09:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:09:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi Sacks on 'The Great Partnership' Message-ID: <20180608140928.GA11777@aishdas.org> R/L J Sacks on Science and Religion. In short: It's Gould's notion of non-overlapping magesteria -- they can't contradict, the discuss different topics. But RJS says it so well, giving the idea emotional "punch". And sometimes even maaminim need a reminder that the point of religion isn't to fill in the gaps in our scientific knowledge. (I know I do.) Our rishonim offer answers to the question of why an Omnicient and Omnipotent G-d would create a universe that requires His intervention once in a while. His Wisdom inheres more in the things science CAN explain than in the miracles that even in principle can't be studied scientifically. (Pace the Ralbag, whose actual position on nissim is a longer discussion.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LltoUg_WL2k That said, I think this is overstatement, as they do overlap when it comes to discussion of origins. I would instead posit "barely overlapping magesteria" -- they only overlap at the fringes, where no open question can threaten my trust in either. Yahadus explains the "why?" of life to well to question, and many scientific theories do too well at the "how?" I have a question about where they seem to contradict? Nu nu. Scientists believe that quantum gravity has an answer, and don't expect either QM or Relativity to be overturned just because we have a question where their fringes overlap. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 09:19:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 12:19:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? Message-ID: From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) apply only to male Kohanim, or does it also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V?kidashto applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K?Hilchaso 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash. This description applies only to men and not to women. Although the daughters of Kohanim are entitled to eat Teruma and may eat from certain Korbanos that are designated only for Kohanim, they are not eligible to serve in the Beis Hamikdash. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:48:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:48:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? Message-ID: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> I wanted to talk this out here, as this se'if in the AhS appears to use the kind of reasoning that is exactly what I argued for decades with C rabbis (and more recently with one or two of the more innovative OO rabbis) isn't how halakhah should be done. AhS CM 89:2 discusses the reason for a taqanah that if a sakhir and the BhB disagree about whether the sakhir had been paid, the sakhir can make a shevu'ah binqitas cheifetz, and the employer would have to pay. Normally, f two sides make conflicting unsupported claims, the rule would be that the defendent (the nitba) would make a shevu'as heises (which is a less demanding shevu'ah than the shevu'ah BNC) and not pay. A taqanah beyond the usual hamotzi meichaveiro alav hara'ayah to disuade liars. The stated reason for treating the sakhir as a special case is that many times the employer has many workers, and it's more likely he wouldn't remember the details of who he paid what than the employee not remembering the details of getting paid. However, the AhS continues, this doesn't explain why chazal worried more about employers than salespeople. Someone who has a lot of customers is prone to the same parallel likelihood of confusion. So, he explains that the iqar haataqanah is because employees have a lot riding on getting paid, "nosei es nafsho lehachayos nafesho venefesh benei beiso, chasu chaza"l alav..." And therefore even if it's a boss who has only one employee, and he isn't overhwlmed keeping track of vay, lo chilqu chakhamim. Doesn't this sound bad? Chazal really had some social end in mind, so they invented some pro forma excuse to justify their conclusion. I guess that in dinei mamunus, Chazal can do whatever they want -- hefqer BD hefqer -- and therefore on /that/ ground they can force payment of a worker for the sake of social justice. But that's not what the AhS invokes. Thoughts? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 12:15:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:15:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din but a takanah. By definition, takanos are ends-driven; they're made not because this is what we believe Hashem ordered, nor to avoid some issur, but in order to achieve some desirable goal. The same applies to the usual shvuas hesses that Chazal instituted; it's to achieve the two desirable goals of creating a disincentive for defendants to lie, and of assuring the plaintiff that the courts are not biased against him. So I see no problem with Chazal making a special takana for the benefit of employees, since the Torah itself gives their needs priority, and gives the reason that employees often risk their lives for their livelihood. And just as the Torah does not distinguish between those employees who actually do risk their lives and those who sit on comfortable chairs in air-conditions offices and risk nothing more serious than a paper-cut or RSI, Chazal saw no need to distinguish between a lone employee and one among many. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 12:53:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:53:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:35PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din : but a takanah... Not just a taqanah, a taqanah that needs an justification for why they're not following the din deOraisa. And so simply saying "it's a taqanah" doesn't really satisfy me. DeOraisa, the employer would have the right to not pay the money. The usual taqanah for conflicting claims would require he make a shevu'as heises first. Here, we're putting the power to extract the employer's money despite the deOraisa. Had the taqanah not violated the deOraisa, but went "beyond" it, I wouldn't have asked. And as I said, had the AhS invokved hefqer BD hefqer, we would need no excuse for how Chazal can move money despite the deOraisa. But he doesn't. Instead, he says they came up with a justication that isn't real. That opens a whole pandora's box of ascribing hidden "social justice" reasons for legislation that has an explicit explanation already given. And it makes it sound like legal mechanism can indeed be nothing more than a hopp to jump through, rather than justification in-and-of itself. So my question isn't "how did they make this taqanah", but "how can you claim that they wanted to ignore a deOraisa because they thought they had a 'more moral' alternative, and then just found some way to legally justify it?" :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the micha at aishdas.org second time and as if you had acted the first http://www.aishdas.org time as wrongly as you are about to act now! Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 12:15:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 15:15:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:52 PM 6/8/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's >OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: >: A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto >: applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso >: 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he >: offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... > >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to be "honored" like all other Kohanim? I recall that there was a Kohein when I lived in Elizabeth who had a deformed hand. However, I think that he still got the first aliya. However, I do not think that he duchened. He left the shul right before duchening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:52:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:52:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: : A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto : applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso : 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he : offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 13:21:23 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:21:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:09PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to : >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. : : If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability : that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to : be "honored" like all other Kohanim? ... I think aliyah laTorah is different than duchaning because it's not about the kohein as a kohein, but mishum tiqun olam. So, we divy out the kavod according to strict rules, so that society runs smoother. Not based on qedushah. Maybe it's even kavod vs qedushah. Tangents: BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not a kofer. There is also a separate discussion is someone who is wheelchair bound can get an aliyah at all, or if the chiyuv for an oleh to stand is me'aqiev. From the pasuq "amod imadi". The accepted pesaq really only permits calling someone who can't stand if their reason for not being able to stand is obvious or known to the tzibbur. IOW, oneis Rachamanah patrei for his non-standing, but the kavod haTorah is an issue if it looks bad to the tzibbur. I didn't spend the same time researching this tangent, as you can tell by the lack of a single source. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe micha at aishdas.org you can be certain of improving, http://www.aishdas.org and that's your own self. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aldous Huxley From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:41:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9e545852-4e47-2e1a-0f1b-f6fe418d3daa@sero.name> I don't think it's accurate to say that mid'oraisa he doesn't have to pay. If he really does owe the money then mid'oraisa he has to pay, and has an *additional* obligation to pay this debt over all other debts, because of "lo solin". The only question is whether he really owes the money or not. Normally, the way the Torah left things, we can't be sure he owes it, so we can't *force* him to pay; we have to leave it up to his own conscience. But his obligation (or lack thereof) is unchanged. Now Chazal come along and meddle with that setup, for social reasons. In order to discourage defendants from falsely denying their liability, and in order to give plaintiffs a sense that justice has been done, they instituted the sh'vuas hesses. If you don't swear we'll make you pay, despite the Torah saying we can't. According to you, how could they do that? Here Chazal went a bit further: We can't make the defendant swear, because he may honestly have forgotten or got confused, so we tell the plaintiff that if he's willing to swear, not just hesses but binkitas chefetz, then we'll believe him, and once we do believe him the *Torah* says the defendant must pay. Comes the Aruch Hashulchan and asks, what about the exceptional case where the defendant is not confused and unlikely to have forgotten? And what about other defendants who may be confused or have forgotten? And he answers "lo plug" because there's a deeper reason for the takana here. It's not just that we're worried about the defendant inadvertently making a false oath; if he's really worried about that let him pay up, but if he's not worried we won't be. The deeper reason why we've given the plaintiff a slight edge here is that we're emulating the Torah itself, which made the "takana" of "lo solin" for the explicit reason that employees *in general* risk their lives and so deserve extra protection. And just as it did not distinguish between employees, so we won't either. I have a bigger question, though: This takana seems to be biased *against* the employee whose employer is a yerei shamayim. Without the takana the employer would decline to swear because he can't be sure he's right, and he'd have to pay. Now we say no, you don't have to pay until we test the employee, more rigorously than we were going to test you. So mah ho'ilu chachamim betakanasam? It seems as if our real concern here is not for the employee's welfare but to protect honest employers from employee fraud! That's surely a worthy goal, but opposite to the one the AhS posits. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 9 20:19:14 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2018 23:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Korach "There's Good Even In The Worst Of Us" Message-ID: The rabbis saw a hint that while the Korah rebellion ended so tragically, it had the seeds of redemption. In the Shabbos Maariv we recite Psalm 92: Tzaddik katamar yifrach, the righteous will blossom like the palm tree (v. 13). The last letters of those 3 Hebrew words (kuf, reish, chet) spell Korah. Although blinded by anger and envy, Korah's egalitarian vision will indeed be established. Then the "righteous will blossom like the palm tree, and grow mighty like a cedar in Lebanon, planted in the house of the Lord." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:47:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <36fd05b2-e021-0e98-cdcc-6e84353eb84b@sero.name> On 08/06/18 16:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. > Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the > first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not > a kofer. This is not just RMF, it's the plain halacha. A kohen who eats treif and breaks shabbos can even duchen, let alone get the first aliyah. Even if he's living with a nochris he can still duchen. But the moment she converts and marries him he can no longer duchen. And if he can't duchen then of course he can't get the first aliya either. (The baal mum is different. The only reason he can't duchen is because the deformity is in his hand; if it were anywhere else he could duchen. And even so he still has a *chiyuv* to duchen, which is why he has to leave before retzei in order to avoid it. A cohen married to a grusha doesn't have to leave, since he is a temporary chalal and thus has no chiyuv.) It seems to me that "vekidashto" *does* apply to the wives of cohanim, because for purposes of kavod the general rule is ishto kegufo, and a wife who marries up gets her husband's social status. As for his unmarried daughters, it seems to me that they too are included in their father's status for this purpose, since they are called by his name. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 11 08:07:53 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:07:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. There are two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Should the Kohanim be asked to leave the shul during Kriyas HaTorah, so that both Yisroelim will receive aliyos? A. The Mishnah Berurah (135:9) writes that a Kohen may not give up his aliyah because we are obligated to honor a Kohen. This is the case not only on Shabbos or Yom Tov when the Shuls are crowded and it will be noticeable, but even on a Monday or Thursday when it is less obvious. However, many poskim, including Igros Moshe (OC 3:20), write that if there is a pressing need on a Monday or Thursday, a Kohen may be mochel (forgo) his kovod and give up his right to the first aliyah. In such a situation, the Kohen exits the Shul before the Torah reading so as not to cast any doubts on his lineage. In contrast, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt?l held that it is not proper for a Kohen to relinquish his aliyah. Aside from the issue of the Kohen being mochel (forgoing) the honor of receiving the first aliyah, there will also be a deficiency in the Kriyas HaTorah itself. The Gemara (Megilla 21b) states that the three aliyos on Monday and Thursday and on Shabbos Mincha were instituted to correspond to the three categories of Jews: Kohanim, Levi?im and Yisroelim. If a Kohen is not called up for an aliyah, the Kriyas HaTorah is lacking this kiyum (fulfillment) of reflecting the three categories of Jews. Therefore, one should not ask a Kohen to forgo his aliyah, since this would diminish the fulfillment of the mitzvah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Jun 11 19:53:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:23:36 +0930 Subject: [Avodah] Kashrus - Wooden Sticks and Feathers Message-ID: If a wooden stick is used to stir a hot pot of non-K meat, it becomes non-K. It will in turn, render a pot of hot Kosher food non-K, if it is used, whilst fresh, to stir that pot. But, wood is not a food. May one eat the shavings of that wooden stick? Probably yes. Hog hair is not a food and it cannot be deemed to be non-K. Therefore one may sprinkle hog hair on ones food, or cook it in ones soup. Does it get worse if the hog hair is first cooked in a pot of non-K meat? Probably yes. This is an issue faced today by Kashrus agencies regarding food ingredients/additives that are extracted from non-foods, like bird feathers. In order to facilitate plucking, the dead, non-Shechted birds have been plunged into a tank of boiling water. Thus the feathers have absorbed the non-K taste of the birds. Although the feathers are dissolved in acids in order to extract what will be used as food additives, this consideration is not accepted regarding gelatine since gelatine is a 'food' at the conclusion of its processing, and it is similarly not accepted by the Kashrus agencies for feathers. Some suggest that there is a difference between the two. Gelatine is worse because it is extracted from the non-K item itself i.e. the skin and bones, whereas the non-K absorbed in the feathers, is not the source of the extracted food/additive which are derived exclusively from the feathers that are a non-food. Therefore, even though skin and bones do become inedible during their processing, this is just a temporary state, generated by acids and alkali, which are removed from the finished product and the finished product is essentially still the same skin and bones. Whereas the product extracted from feathers is entirely disassociated with the absorbed non-K flavour and is therefore K. Nevertheless, a well known Rav argues that in any case where the chemical is removed, the product returns to its non-K status, even in the case of feathers. It will permitted only if the chemical remains but is camouflaged by other additives. Therefore, feathers and what is derived from them remain prohibited because whatever chemicals are used to process and extract the foods/additives, are removed. Is it possible that the foods/additives extracted from the feathers are permitted because all, or almost all of the absorbed non-K flavour is removed - in other words, just as we can Kasher our wooden stick, so too we can deem the feathers to have been Kashered? Now if we were to actually Kasher the feathers or the wooden stick, we require 60 times the volume of the stick. For example, a 500g stick requires 30 litres [500gX60=30,000g] and 3 tonnes of feathers would require [3,000litresX60=500,000 litres] which we obviously dont have in the normal processing. Now the only reason we cannot Kasher in less than 60 is ChaNaN [ChaTiCha NaAsis Neveilah] This means, Kashering is not a process of dilution of the prohibited component that is absorbed until it is less that 1:60, in which case we could immerse the non-K spoon or feathers in 100 small pots of boiling water and each dip would further dilute the concentration of the absorbed Issur Kasheing is rather a process that MUST revoke the prohibited status. If it is not revoked - i.e. it is immersed in a pot that does not have more than 60, then EVERYTHING becomes non-K and the spoon is just as non-K as it was before it was immersed. In other words ChaNaN applies to Kelim. And yet the Kosher agencies permit the additives extracted from non-K feathers because the feathers are not food but a Keli, and are therefore not limited by ChaNaN. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Jun 11 11:09:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:09:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:19 PM 6/11/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would also add that >if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >he should move here. Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who come here collecting for all sorts of things? What would they do if there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious community of Jews in the US? Indeed, how many religious Jews living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things. Is this not a huge mitzva? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 11 20:48:41 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 05:48:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <4a055873-1dcb-8b0f-2b31-69cec4cbdb81@zahav.net.il> 1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. 2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - what does that mean? Ben On 6/11/2018 8:09 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the > frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who > come here collecting for all sorts of things?? What would they do if > there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious > community of Jews in the US?? (1) Indeed, how many religious Jews > living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things.? Is > this not a huge mitzva? (2) > > YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 12 05:36:49 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah Message-ID: Please see the article at Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah by Dr. Leo Levi This article appeared in the December 1988 issue of the Jewish Observer which is available at https://goo.gl/9JUkt4 YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 11:25:42 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:25:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? In-Reply-To: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <10180612182542.GA32068@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 01:27:43PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a : Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) : but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose... However, when fundraising, pidyon shevuyim comes first, even after the funds were raised and the building materials bought for the not-yet-existent shul. SA YD 252:1. And the Tur says this is the only mitzvah we may sell those building supplies for. : 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities : and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent : in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? Is this distinction more than semantic? You are asking whether the "other priorities" are outside the label "tzedaqah" and therefore "other halakhot", or within the label, and therefore tzedaqah's priorities would be "multivariate". But the word "tzedaqah" has multiple usages. For example, in the sense we have been using it, we've been including pidyon shevuyim and binyan bhk"n. But it could be used to refer to supplying the poor with their needs exclusively. Or to mean their needs and dei machsero. Etc... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. micha at aishdas.org I awoke and found that life was duty. http://www.aishdas.org I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:31:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 10:42:20AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like : Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem : spoke to both? ... : If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would : seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply : they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. Like "shamor vezakhor bedibur echad"? There is no proof they all heard the same thing, never mind in the same way. But that's not where I wanted to go. If we take the Rambam's approach to the uniqueness of Moshe's nevu'ah, then the difference isn't in the "Dibbur" (which didn't actually involve heard words, leshitaso). It's in the shomeia'. Moshe's seikhel was able to accept the nevu'ah unmediated. Others, the same message could only be received via koach hadimyon so that it reaches the navi's conscious mind cloaked in visions and metaphoric sensations. So, if Hashem did make one dibbur to both, Moshe would still receive it Peh-el-peh and Aharon would experience the revelation as a prophetic vision. OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then we are left with two possibilities: - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, and passing Torah down the generations, etc... - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording the kelal, there could be others. There are other potential exceptions, most enigmatically Bil'am (Yalqut Shim'oni 966) on the very pasuq that describes Moshe's nevu'ah as being "Panim al panim" -- "velo qam navi od beYisrael keMoshe", but among the other nations, there was Bil'am. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that micha at aishdas.org a person can change their future http://www.aishdas.org by merely changing their attitude. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:39:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:39:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? In-Reply-To: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180612203937.GB20060@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 01:02:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 : minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority : of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to : reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish : the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, : how else might the desired result be accomplished? Through unofficial norms. It wasn't all that long ago (at most a couple of decades) when speed was left to the chazan watching the rav (or the chazan himself, if the rav is at another minyan), and the norms of the minyan set the chazan's pace without a watch and often without conscious thought. But then, even in those days people were coming late. I think you're dealing with a misdiagnosis. To my mind, the only real way to get people to come on time and to stay for davening and not spend the time learning with breaks for prayer is to offer programming that helps people relate to davening. If you don't cure the problem of boredum, people will come late regardless of the scheduling system, and find excuses to step out, whether physically or mentally. I would suggest the minyan in question explore in that direction, rather than worry about how Yishtabach time is determined. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. micha at aishdas.org - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 12 14:24:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 17:24:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> References: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <233e14ea-9b86-d3dc-f8fc-2d8bb4c8c50c@sero.name> On 12/06/18 16:31, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part > of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah > itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, > and passing Torah down the generations, etc... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording > the kelal, there could be others. Other possibilities: * Moshe told Yehoshua what he should write the next day. * The Rambam says that after a navi's vision a mal'ach explains it to him. I see no reason why the mal'ach in Yehoshua's vision could not have told him exactly what he should write. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Wed Jun 13 06:07:13 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:07:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW SHOULD COME FROM THE LETTER Message-ID: <9D3675F5-16E2-4542-A632-D76A033B1BCE@cox.net> There?s the story of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi who, when studying Torah, heard the crying of his infant grandson. The elder rebbe rose from his studying and soothed the baby to sleep. Meanwhile, his son, the boy?s father, was too involved in his study to hear the baby cry. When R. Zalman noticed his son?s lack of involvement, he proclaimed: ?If someone is studying Torah and fails to hear the cry of a baby, there is something very wrong with his learning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 13 12:29:17 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 21:29:17 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Perhaps there are several aspects of nevuah. One is the hearing, which Moshe did better. Another is the experience itself.? Here, it doesn't matter if Moshe's experience was "better" than Aaron's and in fact the word better doesn't apply. Aaron experienced this totality called nevuah and he did it his way. After doing that, he isn't the same person, or the same cohen. The same would apply to the hundreds of thousands of people who experienced nevuah but didn't have anything recorded. They became different people, and their avodat Hashem was completely upgraded as a result of the experience. Ben On 6/3/2018 9:42 AM, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was > the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 13 12:51:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:51:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah Message-ID: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> >From your friendly neighborhood clipping service. Taken from , with transliteration added for Avodah digest purposes. R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" of "Torah lishmah" means. I intend to reply, once I have time to collect a mar'eh maqom or two. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Tvunah in English Beit Midrash for Birurei Halachah Binyan Zion Under the Leadership of Maran HaRav Asher Weiss Shlita Learning Torah L'Shma Introductory Note Our Sages[1] have greatly commended one who learns Torah Lishmo -- literally, for its own sake.[2] Many times in the Talmud [Pesachim 50b, Nazir 23b, Horiyos 10b, Sotah 22b, Sotah 47a, Sanhedrin 105b, Erchin 16b] they have stated that one should always learn Torah, even if it not Lishmo, for through this one will eventually reach Lishmo. The goal, though, is total Lishmo. Two questions have to be dealt with: Firstly, is there anything negative or positive if one enjoys one's learning? Secondly, what precisely is Torah Lishmoh? Position One -- Enjoyment Is Not Ideal The Agrah D'Kallah[3] states that the disciples of the Ba'al Shem Tov asked their master if there is a problem if one enjoys learning Torah. He answered that since this is the very nature of Torah, as is written in Tehillim[4], "the statutes of Hashem are straight, [they] gladden the heart," Hashem will not act unfairly towards a person[5] and punish him for having had such enjoyment. This statement seems clear that the ultimate aim would be not to derive any enjoyment from one's learning. A similar sentiment seems to have been echoed by Rav Chaim Volozhiner. He seems to writes[6] that one who enjoys his learning does not commit a sin.[7] On the other hand, the Eglei Tal[8] writes that he has heard some people make a grave mistake, thinking that the ideal is for one to learn without enjoyment. He argues vehemently that one must love and enjoy one's learning. The one whom the Eglei Tal was arguing with was the Yismach Yisrael. He writes[9] that the true learning of Torah is only when one learns with no intention of any enjoyment at all. My feeling is that there is room for both the position of the Eglei Tal and that of the Yismach Yisrael to be correct. On one hand, Hashem wants us to enjoy His Torah, and, as we shall discuss in length soon, it is the proper way for one to study Torah. However, there are many instances where one does not enjoy learning, either because one has had a bad day, or because it is a piece of material which really does not grab his interest. In such a case, one needs to recall the words of the Yismach Yisroel that one needs to study Torah even if one does not have any enjoyment. Position Two -- Enjoyment Is Ideal In my opinion, it seems clear from many Rishonim that enjoyment and pleasure in one's learning is an integral part of the process of Torah study. Firstly, the Mishnah in Avos[10] states that when one studies Torah one needs to know in front of Whom one toils. Rabbeinu Yonah[11] explains that just as the Torah was the plaything of Hashem[12], so to speak, before the creation of the world, so too one's Torah should be one's own plaything. This seems to state clearly that deriving pleasure for Torah study is an ideal. Secondly, the general rule regarding commandments is that they were not given for pleasure[13], and therefore the pleasure of having fulfilled a commandment is not Halachikally considered pleasure. For example, if one took a vow not to derive pleasure from one's fellow, one's fellow may still blow the Shofar on his behalf, since the mere fact that one's fellow is enabling the fulfilment of one's commandment is not considered pleasure.[14] However, regarding the commandment of Torah study, Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar writes[15] that the essence of the commandment is to enjoy one's learning. Therefore, says Rabbeinu Avraham, if one forbade one's fellow from using one's Torah scroll, one's fellow may not use it. Again, this is a clear statement that enjoying one's learning is ideal. [A note of explanation is in order. It is difficult to understand how Rabbeinu Avraham can state that enjoyment is the essence of learning Torah. It is understandable how it is an integral part -- but to be the essence? I think his intent is as follows. The Shulchan Oruch HaRav[16] argues that there are two separate commandments of learning Torah. One is to study the Torah, and the other is to know the Torah. In my opinion this particular formulation is difficult, since we do not find that the Rishonim count the commandment of Torah study as two separate commandments.[17] Rather, it seems that these two categories make up the commandment. The commandment is to learn, while the essence and purpose of this learning is in order to know the Torah. The proof to this understanding of the commandment is that the commandment of Torah study is the verse veshinantam levanekha -- "And you shall teach your children,"[18] and our Sages explain[19] that the word veshinantam is to be expounded from the root shinen -- sharp. The words of Torah should be totally clear to oneself, to the extent that if one is asked about a given Torah matter one should be able to answer immediately, without babbling. This teaches us that the essence of the study is to achieve clear knowledge. Since the clarity of Torah knowledge is the essence of the commandment of Torah study, and this clarity of knowledge brings one great pleasure, Rabbeinu Avraham writes that the essence of the commandment of Torah study is to have pleasure from it.] A third proof: If deriving pleasure from the study of Torah is not the ideal state, how could it be that our Sages instituted the words, "veha'arev na es divrei Sorasekha befinu" in the morning blessing on the Torah? However, it could be that this is not a proof. The Avudraham[20] cites two verses to explain the word ????? in this context. The first is from Malachi[21] -- Ve'orvah Lashem minchas Yehudah viYrushalayim kiymei olam ukhshanim qadmonios -- "And the flour-offering of Yehudah and Yerushalayim will be pleasing to Hashem as the days of old and the years past." However, his second verse is from Tehillim[22] -- arov avdekha letov, which the Ibn Ezra[23] explains is the same root as an areiv -- a guarantor -- "Guarantee Your servant for good". Accordingly, the blessing is to be understood as a request from Hashem that He should act as a guarantor that our children should know the Torah, and does not refer to a request for having pleasure from the Torah. On the other hand, Rashi[24] explains that this blessing is a request that the study of Torah be with the tremendous pleasure of loving, feeling loved by, and being close to, Hashem. His interpretation is also cited by the Avudraham.[25] According to this interpretation, there is strong proof that pleasure is an ideal part of the study of Torah. Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind on this thought. 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must learn Torah in order to fulfil it. Support for these Positions All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the Rishonim. 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov. 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Uniting the Opinions However, in my opinion, it seems that these are really three sides to one coin. Before I demonstrate this, I would like to show some indications in this direction: 1. Although Rashi in Brachos[38] writes that Lishmo means in order to find out what to do, however in his commentary to Ta'anis he writes[39] that Lishmo means to fulfil Hashems will. 2. Although the Ba'al Shem Tov seems to be of the opinion that Lishmo means in order to fulfil the will of Hashem, however two of his main disciples[40] write that one must learn in order to act. Therefore it seems to me that all these three interpretations are really three parts of one whole. The first step is that one has to learn in order to fulfil the will of Hashem. However, what is His will? It is that one should learn and know clearly His Torah. What is the purpose of us knowing his Torah? In order that one should know what to do. In light of this, it would seem that we can understand that which we quoted from Rav Chaim Volozhiner in the beginning of the Shiur[41], even though at face value his statement that "there is no sin," seems to contradict that which we quoted later in the Shiur from him.[42] According to my understanding of Lishmo it is not a contradiction. The earlier quote is directed at one for whom part of his motivation to learn is because of his enjoyment. The motivation, ideally, should be purely because Hashem said so. But one should most definitely enjoy one's learning when one is learning. [1] For example, Mishnah Avos 6:1 and Sanhedrin 99b [2] We shall later discuss another manner to translate this word. [3] Agrah D'Kallah Parshas Chayei Sarah d"h BeMidrash BeParsha Zu Kad Damich Rebbe Avahu [4] Tehillim 19:9 [5] Avodah Zarah 3a [6] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [7] We shall return to this statement in the end of the Shiur [8] Hakdamah to Eglei Tal [9] Yismach Yisrael Parshas Bechukosai [10] Mishnah Avos 2:14 [11] Rabbeinu Yonah ibid d"h VeDah Lifnei Mi [12] Mishlei 8:30 [13] Rosh HaShannah 28a [14] Ibid, as explained by Rashi d"h Mutar Litkoah Lo [15] Peirush Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar Nedarim 48a d"h Sefarim [16] [Blank on web. -mb] [17] See, for instance, Rambam Sefer HaMitzvos Mitzvah 11 [18] Devarim 6:7 [19] Kiddushin 30a [20] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [21] Malachi 3:4 [22] Tehillim 119:122 [23] Ibn Ezra ibid [24] Rashi Brachos 11b d"h Ha'arev [25] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [26] Degel Machane Efraim Parshas Vayishlach d"h Ba Na El Shifchasi [27] Yosher Divrei Emes Os 7 [disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch, who was a major disciple of the Ba'al Shem Tov]; Ma'or VeShemesh Parshas Vayetzei d"h Vayomer Eilav Lavan [disciple of the Noam Elimelech, who was a major disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch] [28] Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 2 and 3 [29] Chiddushei Chasam Sofer Nedarim 81a d"h Shelo Borchu [30] Reishis Chochmah, Hakdamah [31] Shnei Luchos HaBris, Chelek 1, Ba'asarah Ma'amaros, Ma'amar 6, Os 187 [32] Yerushalmi Brachos 1:2 [33] Peirush HaRosh Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen [34] Mefaresh (Rashi) Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen. [There is doubt whether the commentary printed as Rashi on Nedarim is actually from Rashi, hence this commentary is commonly referred to as "the Mefaresh (commentator)"] [35] Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah 10:5 [36] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [37] Tosfos Pesachim 50b d"h Vekan [38] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [39] Rashi Ta'anis 7a d"h Lishmo [40] Likutei Amarim of the Maggid of Mezeritch (otherwise known as Maggid Devarav LeYa'akov) Siman??, Sod Yachin U'Boaz Perek 2 [41] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [42] [Ed. Note] According to the later quote, as is clear from the end of Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 4, learning for the love of the pure understanding of Torah is Lishmoh. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 04:22:44 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:22:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How to pour nesachim, major differences between the first and the second beis hamikdash Message-ID: Yesterdays daf (Zevachim 61b) says that the mizbeach in the first beis hamikdash was 28x28 amos and in the second beis hamikdash was 32x32 amos. Rabin explains the difference as follows: In the first Mikdash, Nesachim would flow into Shisim (a pit south-west of the Mizbe'ach) down the wall of the mizbeach. In the second Beis Hamikdash they enlarged the Mizbe'ach in order that the Shisim would be within (under) the Mizbe'ach and they made the corners of teh mizbeach hollow so that they could pour nesachim in the mizbeach. At first (during the first Beis Hmikdash), they learned from the words "Mizbe'ach Adamah" that the mizbeach has to be completely solid. In the second beis Hamikdash they thought that drinking ('consumption' of libations) should be like eating (Korbanos that are burned, i.e. within the boundaries of the Mizbe'ach) and therefore made the holes to pour the Nesachim as part of the mizbeach. Therefore, they understood that Mizbe'ach Adamah" teaches that the Mizbe'ach cannot be built over domes or tunnels (that are not needed for the Mizbe'ach). According to the Rambam in Hilchos Mamrim, this is perfectly standard practice. Any Beis Din can come and darshen the pesukim differently then a previous beis din. However, according to others this is not so simple. For those who hold that there is one halachic truth, this would seem to be very difficult, in either the first or second beis hamikdash they did the avoda of the nesachim wrong. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 05:50:21 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:50:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40a627c0-37a1-a74d-6f72-165b6d6d9469@gmail.com> On 6/14/2018 8:17 AM, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org wrote: > Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 From: Micha Berger > ...who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah? If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah ... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. ... Another possibility: Hashem dictated the last pesukim about Moshe's death to Moshe beforehand, even before Moshe ascended the mountain, and Moshe dictated them to Yehoshua, who did not write them down until after Moshe's death. Thus, all the Torah, to the last letter, was revealed to Moshe, but it was Yehoshua who put the last pesukim in writing. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Jun 14 06:47:54 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: At 08:17 AM 6/14/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you >regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. >2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That >isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >what does that mean? I am going to give you an answer that I know you will not like and will dismiss out of hand, but IMO, it is the truth. Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to Eretz Yisroel. After all, I said, Orthodox Jews are interested in doing mitzvahs, and one can certainly do more mitzvahs in Israel. He responded by pointing out that the additional mitzvahs that one can do in Israel are only of rabbinical origin at this time. Furthermore, he went on, one has to keep in mind the following. The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the right spiritual level before you go." While reciting the Shema twice a day we say, ?Beware lest your heart be seduced and you turn astray And you will swiftly be banished from the goodly land which G-d gives you.? Thus it is clear to me that one must be on the appropriate spiritual level to live in Eretz Yisroel. Encouraging those who are not on this level to settle in Eretz Yisroel was and is perhaps a mistake. This is a radical statement, and many will react strongly to it. However, is it possible that part of the reason for what is going on in Israel today is a result of the fact that the vast majority of Jews living in Israel are not properly observant, and the statement quoted in Shema is being, G-d forbid, fulfilled? I am not the one to judge anyone else, but each person should look in the mirror and ask themselves if they are sure that they are spiritually elevated enough to live in Eretz Yisroel. As Reb Dovid said, "You just don't go to Israel." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:19:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:19:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? Message-ID: We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping that stringency. Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? KT Joel Rich From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:18:14 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:18:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? Message-ID: The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases (each iteration away from the primary source can cloud fine points, or Godel's incompleteness theorem at play?). I also see much more of the implicit sociological assumptions made over time (and wonder how we define the community [e.g., town, city, continent...] and time [every decade, exile...] that we measure). Two examples: 1) S"A O"C 153:12 (MB:76) discusses an individual who had a stipulation with a community to build a Beit Knesset (synagogue), it stays with him and his family but it's not transferable. Why not? "Mistavra" (it's logical) that that's what the community had in mind unless specifically stipulated differently at origination (me -- who measured? How?) 2) S"A O"C 153:18 (MB:95) concerning a private object (e.g., Menorah) used by the synagogue. Originally, the assumption was they became kodesh once used, however, "now" it's assumed that they remain totally private (as if this were the original stipulation). So how, when, and where did this change? Were the first people who acted this way sinners, but enough sinners makes it OK? KT Joel Rich From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:35:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:35:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17593052-ba12-6371-5050-960187b566d0@zahav.net.il> Yes we have heard this answer before, several times. Putting aside its multiple problems, it is basically rejecting the paper you linked, given that the paper's author supports the state albeit with several large reservations. You can't say that the aliya of the vast majority of people to Israel is a mistake and support the state at the same time. Ben On 6/14/2018 3:47 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if > one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the > exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D > forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong > deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be > on the right spiritual level before you go. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:36:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:36:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. ?Ben On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > > Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? > From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 14 15:07:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:07:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, micha at aishdas.org but it's smarter to be nice. http://www.aishdas.org - R' Lazer Brody Fax: (270) 514-1507 From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 14:18:33 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 21:18:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: , <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. > Ben ?1?/??? Which raises a question I?ve been thinking about lately. When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From zev at sero.name Thu Jun 14 15:39:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:39:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <76b76294-55ee-c10b-66b4-858544078685@sero.name> On 14/06/18 18:07, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the > : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to > : Eretz Yisroel... > > : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one > : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact > : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, > : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed > : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the > : right spiritual level before you go." > > This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It's much earlier than that. It's a Tosfos (Rabbenu Chaim, quoted in Tosfos, Kesubos 110b, sv Hu Omer). -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 22:37:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 07:37:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> Message-ID: <1d515cf4-41e6-53ed-9246-feaee76b81cd@zahav.net.il> I'd guess the latter - the Gemara is telling us you have to decide for yourself and that while the Gemara will give values and weight, it? leaves the final choice up to you. On 6/14/2018 11:18 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 15 01:27:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 04:27:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 06:07 PM 6/14/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the >: Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to >: Eretz Yisroel... > >: The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one >: does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact >: same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, >: in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed >: here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the >: right spiritual level before you go." > >This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. If so, then why are there Satmar Chassodim living in Israel? Are they all on a high spiritual level? And could it be that the Satmar Rebbe left Israel, for this reason? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmeisner at mail.gmail.com Fri Jun 15 05:27:58 2018 From: jmeisner at mail.gmail.com (Joshua Meisner) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 08:27:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > Question -- is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? On Jun 14, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Ben Waxman wrote: > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a > bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. The implication of this sugya is that given that one has made a neder, it is better not to keep it than to keep it. Clearly, it is not suggesting that one violate the neder but rather that one be matir it before a chacham. The meforshim provide different reasons why this is the case -- e.g., because the neder was made out of anger that would hopefully subside or because the neder is characteristic of ga'avah -- but a chumra taken on because a person perceives a need for a s'yag or similar reasons (or, for that matter, a neder bish'as tzarah) may not be what the gemara is referring to. Going back to RJR's question, to provide a few data points, while on the one hand offering a korban without making a neder is assur, one tanna used to be makdish his korban only after he brought it to the mikdash to avoid the possibility of stumbling. Not sure if these cases can be translated into nidrei issur. Josh From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 15 12:02:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 15:02:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Referring to "the holy month of Ramadan" In-Reply-To: References: <163fc9b81f2-c8f-124c4@webjas-vaa038.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180615190235.GA17319@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:18am EDT, Prof. Levine wrote on Areivim: : What about referring to the "holy month of Ramadan"? Aren't their : restrictions regarding what a Jew is allowed to do when it comes to : non-Jewish holidays? Interesting question... Yes, if Moslems are aku"m. But Islam is monotheistic. In fact, they're more pedantic about it than the Torah requires. E.g. Many Moslems believe that the Torah's use of "Yad Hashem" et al even acknowledging they are meant as metaphors shows Shaitan's alleged corruption of the text. So, it's not yom eideihem in the normal sense. For that matter, one might even argue that many versions of Ramadan observance are actually qadosh (in our sense of the word). They fast to learn self-discipline and empathy for those who are less fortunate, they give sadaqah to the poor (I'm bet you can guess that Arabic) and there is a point of having a nightly meal, iftar, in fellowship with the broader community, not alone or as a nuclear family. All values the Beris Noach would want them to be fostering. So, the previous intentionally provocative paragraph aside, is there really a problem talking about Ramadan or referring to it as they do, as "the holy month of"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The trick is learning to be passionate in one's micha at aishdas.org ideals, but compassionate to one's peers. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 12:09:48 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:09:48 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? Message-ID: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with whom did the PC disagree? Ben From hanktopas at gmail.com Sun Jun 17 18:49:29 2018 From: hanktopas at gmail.com (Henry Topas) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch Message-ID: Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in a din Torah pls? Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. Thank you and kol tuv, HT Sent from my iPhone From zev at sero.name Sun Jun 17 21:42:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:42:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? In-Reply-To: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> References: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 17/06/18 15:09, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. > In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered > putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim > on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with > whom did the PC disagree? The issue was the way he wrote about gedolei haposkim, especially the Bet Yosef. http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1640&pgnum=250 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 23:10:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 08:10:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] machloquet - good or bad Message-ID: <5c275a89-82ba-3763-db85-3c8663f1b5a9@zahav.net.il> Summary of a talk given on Shabbat and then my commentary: According to the Rambam, machloquet is a fashla, something we don't want. It started when students didn't properly learn from their teachers. Had they done so, Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai would not have had so many disagreements. Rav Kook and Rebbe Nachman had a much more positive approach to machloquet. According to RK, when say that talmidei chachamim bring peace to the world, it is because they know how to argue with someone yet respect him and his opinion. A talmid chacham knows how to be inclusive, how to allow for and even want other opinions. According to RN, machloquet is a reenactment of Creation. God created the world through tzimmzum, allowing space for others. When there is one opinion only, that opinion fills the entire space so to speak. When someone else comes up with a different opinion, the first person has to contract to allow room for the new idea. This in turn allows for even more opinions. Ad kan the class. Today we don't do machloquet very well or at least we struggle with it. We try and either destroy the other side or we say that the other position doesn't really exist. This week a rav made a statement about Rav Lichtenstein tz'l and his position regarding (a very minor) women's issue. The easiest thing to do if one wanted to know RL's opinion about something is to pick up the phone and ask his sons, his daughter, an extremely close talmid. Instead the rav simply heard something and made a conclusion. When he was shown that his conclusion was incorrect, he pontificated that RL really didn't accept the more liberal position, he simply gave in to pressure. Occam's razor says that if RL said something and did something, it is because RL believed that to be the right thing to do. There is no need to come up with any explanation. Simply accept that there is a machloquet in the matter. Similarly, there is a mechina whose rosh yeshiva said things about women's role in society which people in the left wing MO world don't accept. No one says that anyone needs to send their kid there, but to try and work to shut down the mechina? You can't accept that someone, who BTW probably agrees with the LW on a whole bunch of other subjects, differs with you? You want to shut them down? Come on people, get a grip. From yherczeg at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:15:11 2018 From: yherczeg at gmail.com (Yisrael Herczeg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:15:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Re: Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." ::This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It is also in the Tashbetz Kattan. Yisrael Herczeg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:53:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:53:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is One Required To Live In Israel? (Bava Batra 91a) Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NKZ2eR by Raphael Grunfeld. (Note: Raphael Grunfeld is a son of Dayan Dr. Grunfeld who translated the Horeb and other works by RSRH from German into English.) First, it is not universally accepted that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel. Rashi?s commentary on the Torah as understood by the Ramban implies that there is no obligation to live in Israel. Rabbeinu Chaim, one of the Tosafists of the twelfth century, states clearly that following the destruction of the Second Temple and the exile from Israel, there is no longer any requirement to live in Israel. The Rambam agrees with Rabbeinu Chaim and accordingly did not include living in Israel in his list of the positive commandments. In more contemporary times, the Rebbe of Munkatch, in his responsa Minchat Eliezer, endorses Rabbeinu Chaim?s position. The Rebbe of Satmar, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, points out that the Shulchan Aruch does not include the mitzvah of living in Israel in its code of law. The majority opinion prevailing in the halacha, however, follows the Ramban and maintains that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel today. Although it is preferable to live in Israel, there is no obligation to go. However, once you live in Israel, there is an obligation not to leave. In fact, the language used by the Ramban in his supplement to Sefer Hamitzvot is that ?anyone who leaves Israel? ? ?kol hayotze mimenah? ? is like an idol worshiper. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:56:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:56:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In just a few weeks, we will observe Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av. This particular Rosh Chodesh is always only one day long, and this year it happens to fall on Erev Shabbos. This means that when Shabbos occurs, Rosh Chodesh will be over. I want to discuss the ramifications of a person who begins Shabbos early in this situation. Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal. (I know that there are poskim who advise one to eat a kezayis of bread after tzeis, but they don't require it.) In my experience, mealtime goes much quicker when there are fewer people at the table. This past Friday, for example, I went to a very nice minyan, beginning Kabalas Shabbos and Maariv shortly after Plag, I took a leisurely stroll home, and despite our best efforts at taking our time through the meal, my wife and I were still ready for Birkas Hamazon a full five minutes before shkiah. In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? I don't recall ever learning about this particular situation. There is an analogous but very different situation that I *have* seen discussed, namely that of a Seuda Shlishit that begins on Shabbos Erev Rosh Chodesh, and continues into Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos. In that case, the poskim give a wide variety of answers, but (among the poskim who *don't* pasken to say both) it is not always clear whether their rule is to base oneself on the beginning of the meal, or the end of the meal, or the holier of the two days. Further, some of them make a distinction, paskening differently for one who is merely benching after tzeis but didn't actually eat after tzeis, as opposed to one who actually ate [food in general or perhaps bread specifically] after tzeis. All that is a good starting point for my situation, but it is only a starting point. A tremendous difference between the two cases is that in the more common case, the calendar day DID change during the meal, to some extent or another. But in the case that I'm asking about, the calendar day did not actually change, only that the people involved are doing the mitzvah of Tosefes Shabbos. To be more explicit: Imagine a couple that goes to an early minyan on Erev Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Av. They daven Maariv, make Kiddush, and say Birkas Hamazon, all before shkiah. Then, after benching but still before shkiah, imagine that the wife gives birth to a boy. This boy will have his bris milah a week later on *Erev* Shabbos, and his bar mitzvah will be on Rosh Chodesh. Is it possible that his parents should have omitted Yaaleh V'Yavo from Birkas Hamazon? Of course, I understand that the answer may depend on details like whether or not the meal continued after shika, or even past tzeis. But I am most curious about the simple case, where benching was before shkiah. And the other cases will perhaps flow from that one. Any and all sources are appreciated. Thanks in advance. (Disclosure: I have other questions about the calendar and a person who begins Shabbos early, but I'm starting with this one, and perhaps I'll open new threads later about the others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:10:57 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:10:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What to do with old pots Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I found an old set of pots in my parents' basement. They have not been used in many years. No one remembers if they were milchig or fleishig. I would like to use them for milchig. May they be kashered and used for milchig? A. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Commentary on Nidah 27a) writes the pots may be designated for meat or dairy without kashering. The pots have not been used in more than 24 hours. After 24 hours any taste that was absorbed in the pot becomes foul, and on a Torah level the pot can be used for meat or dairy without kashering. Nevertheless, there remains a Rabbinic obligation to kasher pots even after 24 hours have elapsed. However, in this case, we may apply the principal of ?safek d?rabbanan l?kula? (in cases of doubt that pertain to a Rabbinic prohibition one may be lenient). Additionally, Igros Moshe (Y.D. II:46) writes that if a utensil is not used for more than a year, there is an opinion that holds that it does not need kashering. Although we don?t follow this opinion, it can act as an additional mitigating factor. However, since one can avoid the doubt by kashering the pot, it is proper to do so. Although the Magen Avrohom (OC 509:11) writes that the custom is not to permit kashering a fleishig pot to use it for milchig, in this case kashering is acceptable since it is only a chumra (extra stringency). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 04:30:24 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:30:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder Message-ID: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don?t know the exact reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That?s only known by HQBH. However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah that you?ve taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 07:50:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:50:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Learning, Spirituality, and Neo-Chassidus In-Reply-To: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> References: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180618145018.GE28907@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 1:14pm, R Aryeh Stein wrote on Areivim: > Rabbi Shafran's letter to Mishpacha included the following paragraph: >> It's easy to say that a person has a relationship with Hashem wherever >> he is, regardless of what he is doing, but it's not true. Many of us break >> that connection through destructive habits and the like, and sugarcoating >> them doesn't make them any less destructive. "Feeling spiritual" may >> be better than feeling bad about yourself, as quoted in the article, >> but are we to be content with feeling spiritual? I think the real problem with R' Avi Shafran's article was picked up in the replies. It's not an either-or. Rather, people whose core learning is the regular gefe"s or shas-and-posqim aren't getting inspired by intellectual pursuit *alone* and are looking for a better connection to the emotional and experiential aspects of Yahadus. Addition, not replacement. The question is more: Are we content with thinking the right thoughts while being parched spiritually? > Rabbi Moshe Weinberger was very disturbed by this paragraph in which > Rabbi Shafran seems to state that one's relationship with God can be > severed if one engages in destructive behavior. > He didn't discuss this specific point in his response to Rabbi Shafran > that was printed in Mishpacha, but he dedicated two shiurim to > demonstrate that Hashem's love for every Jew is eternal and > unconditional (see links to shiurim below) At 03:59:40PM -0400, Zev Sero via Areivim wrote: : To Hashem's love may be unconditional, but the direct connection a : person has with Him can certainly be severed; that is what kares : means. See Igeres Hateshuvah ch 5-6: : https://tinyurl.com/y9hckn5t : https://tinyurl.com/y6wtghxf But on another level, I don't think a person or even an object can be fully severed from the Borei, because withough Or Ein Sof, there is no such thing as existing. This fits kareis as per the Rambam, that the onesh after misah is ceasing to exist. (Except that we would have to translate the Baal haTanya's "Or Ein Sof" language into the Rambam's chain of sikhliim.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:14:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:14:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180618151454.GF28907@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:49:29PM -0400, Henry Topas via Avodah wrote: : Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in : a din Torah pls? : Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. A to'ein is a plaintiff. Could you ever have a din Torah in CM without a to'ein and nit'an? Ah, just googled. I take it you mean a to'ein rabbani, a modern Israeli coinage in order to avoid calling someone an oreikh din, since the job was defined in a way so as to avoid violating "al ta'as atzmekha ke'orkhei hadayanim" (Avos 1:8). The Yerushalmi, Kesuvos 4:10 and BB 9:4 (same quote; both gemaros are short and it's easy to find the quote), says the issur in the mishnah is telling only one side the law when they're still trying to phrase their claim. See also Kesuvos 52b and the Ritva d"h "asinu". So, while I don't have a maqor for when it became normal to have to'anim rabbaniim, I would think the place to look is the earliest shu"t that explain how they're not orkhei din. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, micha at aishdas.org The end is near. http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Moshe Sherer Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:57:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:57:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms Message-ID: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> See "Hezekiahs Religious Reform -- In the Bible and Archaeology" on the Biblical Archeology Society web site at . Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to get rid of everything hidden in private homes. A large 9th-century horned altar was discovered [in Beersheba] -- already dismantled. Three of its four "horns" [rectangular projections on the four corners of the top of the altar] were found intact, embedded in a wall. Their secondary use indicates that the stones were no longer considered sacred. The horned altar was dismantled during Hezekiah's reign, which we know because some of its stones were reused in a public storehouse that was built when the Assyrians threatened Judah and was destroyed by the Assyrian army in 701.... Next we move to Lachish. The second most important city in Judah after Jerusalem, Lachish was a military and administrative center in the Judean hills.... In 2016, an 8th-century BCE cultic place at Lachish was uncovered next to the main city gate. Archaeologists have called this cultic place a "gate-shrine." In it were found two small horned altars, whose horns had been cut off and embedded in an adjacent wall. Further, a square toilet was found installed in the shrine but was never used. The toilet was more of a symbolic act of desecration (see 2Kings 10:27) -- part of Hezekiah's cultic reforms. The best candidate for the elimination [of these cultic sites and others] is King Hezekiah, who probably ordered the abolition of all official cultic sites. Only the Jerusalem Temple and small, household shrines were spared. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. micha at aishdas.org Life is about creating yourself. http://www.aishdas.org - George Bernard Shaw Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:48:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:48:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder In-Reply-To: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> References: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180618154848.GG28907@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 07:30:24AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don't know the exact : reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That's only known by HQBH. : However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah : that you've taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. To do a mitzvah Hashem obligated you in, yes. But one you've taken on yourself? I don't know. As for untuitiveness, see my 9/8/2001 post at . But it ties together why Hashem would command men in something He didn't command women to that mitzvah likely being of more value to a man, to the greater reward. A line of reasoning that doesn't apply to volunteerism. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten micha at aishdas.org your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, http://www.aishdas.org and it flies away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 18 12:50:21 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:50:21 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? On 6/18/2018 5:57 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's > portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the > archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to > get rid of everything hidden in private homes. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 12:13:52 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:13:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chukas Message-ID: <0955AA8C-8FE3-48BA-A965-3E9AA6A10782@cox.net> 1) Four Torah laws cannot be explained by human reason but, being divine, demand implicit obedience: a) to marry one's brother's widow (Deut. 25:5); b) not to mingle wool and linen in a garment (Deut. 22:11); c) to perform the rites of the scapegoat (Lev. 16:26, 34); and d) the red cow. Satan comes and criticizes these statutes as irrational. Know therefore that it was the Creator of the world, the One and Only, who instituted them. Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 19:8). 2) [Ch.19:1] "Hashem spoke to Moses and to Aaron saying:" Symbolically the cow came to atone for the sin of the Golden Calf, as if to say let the mother come and clean up the mess left by her child. If this be the case, this explains why the commandment was directed to Aaron, the one who made the calf. 3) [19:2] "Zot chukat ha-Torah...." This is the statute (also translated as "ritual law," or "decree") of the Torah......" This unusual expression occurs only once more in Bamidbar 31:21. The rabbis have commented that it should have said ?Zot chukat ha parah.? Why does it sound as if this chok is the whole Torah? There are several explanations such as only Jews can be ritually impure. A non-Jew cannot have tum?ah. Also, since a chok is incomprehensible, it is as if you have observed the whole Torah if you follow an irrational, illogical commandment. 4) The Midrash to this chapter focuses primarily on one paradox in the laws of the Red Cow: Its ashes purify people who had become contaminated; yet those who engage in its preparation become contaminated. I thought of a contemporary example of something that would appear just as paradoxical. Radiation treatment is used to treat many forms of cancer, and yet, the same radiation can cause cancer. For someone who has no knowledge of medicine, this would appear as irrational as the paradox of the Red Cow. In a similar vein, the Midrash notes a number of such paradoxical cases of righteous people who descended from wicked parents, such as Abraham from Terach, Hezekiah from Ahaz, and Josiah from Ammon. The Talmud adds the paradox that it is forbidden to drink blood, but an infant nurses from its mother, whose blood is transformed into milk to become the source of life (Niddah 9a). You won?t go broke if you follow the chok. But if you don?t keep trying, you?ll end up dying. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 12:24:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:24:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180618192417.GC12350@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:50:21PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, : had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real : reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split : with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have : been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira : in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? I dunno. Look at David haMelekh. He had what to do teshuvah for as well. (Yeah, yeah, I know, kol ha'omer David chatah... But let's look at the navi's presentation of David, if not the historical figure.) However, he owned his mistakes, did teshuvah. And indeed, excelled at singing shirah. It seems there is a big difference between someone who errs, but stays connected to the Borei through it all well enough to be moved to song, and someone who doesn't. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, micha at aishdas.org and after it is all over, he still does not http://www.aishdas.org know himself. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Jun 19 00:15:18 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:15:18 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive into a hostile Arab town? Ben From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 19 03:01:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 06:01:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive : into a hostile Arab town? I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, no? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 19 06:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Used Metal Pots Bought From a Non-Jew In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Q. I bought a set of used metal pots from a non-Jew. Do I kasher them first or do I tovel them first? A. Shulchan Aruch (YD 121:2) writes that one should first kasher the pot and afterwards immerse it in a mikvah. If one toveled the pot first before kashering, it is a matter of dispute among Rishonim whether the tevila was effective. The Rashbam (cited in Beis Yosef YD 121) writes that toveling a pot before kosherization is like immersing in a mikvah while holding a sheretz (unclean item) and the tevila is ineffective. However, other Rishonim disagree and maintain that tevila is a separate mitzvah and is not connected with kashering. The Shach (YD 121:5) writes that if one was to tovel a pot before kashering, tevila should be repeated without a bracha because of the uncertainty. Nonetheless, the Dagul Merivava writes if the pot had not been used in the past 24 hours, one may tovel before kashering. After 24 hours, the non-kosher taste that had been absorbed in the pot is ruined. At that point the absorbed taste is no longer similar to a sheretz. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 19 08:17:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:17:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <3cd91821-d660-3a72-164e-c3abb8aaf807@sero.name> On 19/06/18 06:01, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone > : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the > : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the > : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive > : into a hostile Arab town? > > I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, > no? I don't know the answer, and wouldn't dare try to pasken it, but I do see a big question. The person is in no danger now. He will be in danger only if he chooses to drive on Shabbos. Is it permitted to help him do so safely? Does it make you an accomplice to his avera? Does hal'itehu larasha' perhaps apply here? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ydamyb at mail.gmail.com Tue Jun 19 05:19:56 2018 From: ydamyb at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:19:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 6:17 PM Akiva Miller wrote: > Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and > begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal > before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal... > In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a > regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling > Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Akiva Blum From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jun 19 09:44:50 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 16:44:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10d8a9cc4d8f47e593bd2928a907b8fd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. -------------------------- I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you can daven maariv after plag-would he say if you did that you don't say retzeih if you ate later? BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 05:11:06 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 08:11:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some degree or another. Would they pasken the same way if the Seuda Shlishis was earlier, and - for whatever reason - he had davened maariv and said birkas hamazon on Saturday afternoon after Plag Hamincha? I concede that it is a bizarre example, but the boundaries of halacha are defined by exactly this sort of situation. It's not done nowadays, but a person *IS* allowed to daven maariv on Shabbos afternoon after Plag. If someone did so, and did it during seudah shlishis, and then chose to say Birkas Hamazon while the sun was still above the horizon on Shabbos afternoon, perhaps he should indeed say Retzeh? Perhaps not, but I'd love to know what a posek might say. Summary: The question in this thread concerns someone who is benching on Friday afternoon which is Rosh Chodesh but he already said the non-RC maariv. This is VERY analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday afternoon which is Shabbos but he already said the non-Shabbos maariv. It is NOT so analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday night and he already said the non-Shabbos maariv, and the only argument in favor of saying Retzeh is that the meal began on Shabbos. I just thought of another difference between Friday Rosh Chodesh and the situation cited by RAB. If a person davened Maariv during seuda shelishit - and presumably included Ata Chonantanu - then he has verbally and explicitly declared Shabbos to be over, and it would be contradictory to reverse this by saying Retzeh in the benching (even if the sun is still shining on Saturday afternoon). BUT: When someone says maariv on Motzaei Rosh Chodesh he merely omits Yaaleh V'yavo, and there is no explicit declaration that RC has ended, so perhaps he could still include Yaaleh V'yavo on Friday afternoon. [There would still be a problem of including both Retzeh and Yaaleh V'yavo in the same benching, but some poskim do allow that in the Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos situation.] Akiva Miller From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 20 13:47:08 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:47:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi S. R. Hirsch Takes On The Rambam Message-ID: My grandson Daniel Levine who is studying in Yeshiva KBY and I are in the process of reading RSRH's Nineteen Letters with the notes written by Rabbi Joseph Elias. Today we read part of letter 18. While I knew that RSRH criticizes the RAMBAM, I was surprised at how strong this criticism is. Some of what is in letter 18 is posted at https://goo.gl/o3uXdg Below is a sampling. "Pressure of the times demanded more: the underlying ideas of the Tanach and the Talmud were recorded in the aggados, but again, in a veiled form, requiring of the student an active effort on his part in order to grasp the inner spirit, which really can be passed down only by word of mouth." "However, not everybody grasped the true spirit of Judaism. In non-Jewish schools Yisrael's youth trained their minds in independent philosophical inquiry. From Arab sources they drew the concepts of Greek philosophy and came to conceive their ultimate aim as perfecting themselves in the perception of truth. Hence rose conflict. Their quickening spirit put them at odds with Judaism, which they considered to be void of any spirit of its own; and their view of life was in contradiction with a view that stressed action, deeds, first and foremost, and considered recognition of the truth to only be a means toward such action." And so the times brought forth a man of spirit who, having been educated within an uncomprehended Judaism as well as Arab scholarship, was compelled to reconcile this dichotomy within himself. By giving voice to the way in which he did this, he became the guide for all who were engaged in the same struggle. It is to this great man alone that we owe the preservation of practical Judaism until the present day. By accomplishing this and yet, on the other hand merely reconciling Judaism with the ideas from without, rather than developing it creatively from within, and by the way in which he effected this reconciliation, he gave rise to all the good that followed- as well as all the bad. His trend of thought was Arab-Greek, as was his concept of life. Approaching Judaism from without, he brought to it views that he had gained elsewhere, and these he reconciled with Judaism. Thus to him too, the highest aim was self-perfection through recognition of the truth; and the practical, concrete deeds became subordinate to this end. Knowledge of God was considered an end in itself, not a means toward the end; and so he delved into speculations about the essence of God and considered the results of these speculative investigations to be fundamental axioms and principles of faith binding upon Judaism. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ydamyb at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 21:34:54 2018 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:34:54 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, 4:46 p.m. Akiva Miller via Avodah, < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > R' Akiva Blum wrote: > > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. > > Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are > presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and > benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some > degree or another. > > Please see the MB 424:2 where he quotes the MA specifically about where one davened maariv while still day that he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. I wonder about a case where one said kabolas shabbos, then ate and davened maariv later. I would think that too would be sufficient. Akiva -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 21 03:56:40 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:56:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Timeless Rav Hirsch Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/ZEcnxP The writings of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (RSRH) deeply resonate with many people today, as they have since the time he penned them in the middle of the nineteenth century, using them to recreate a community of modern, Torah-faithful Jews in Frankfurt that had all but disappeared. Many find that, ironically, his words seem more suited for our times than when he composed them. He stands almost alone among commentators in dealing with many themes of modernity: cultural evolution; our relationships with non-Jews; the Jewish mission to the rest of civilization; freedom of the will versus determinism; autonomy and totalitarianism; understanding the impact of paganism on the ancient world. Of course, his treatment of symbolism. This web page contains links to commentaries on the parshios by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein based on the writings of RSRH. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 06:00:23 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:00:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: Perhaps the machmirim would say to respond, "It is Shabbat and it is assur to drive, so I cannot tell to how to go. BUT I will tell you this: Do not go on such-and-such a road, because it will take you through such-and-such a dangerous area." That would not be a problem by those who the OP refers to as machmirim, it seems to me. (Of course, personally, I would label Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as the machmir, and would use the response he suggests: "It pains me that you are driving on Shabbat, so to minimize the Chilul Shabbat, I will give you the very best directions...") Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 21:02:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:02:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. And R' Joel Rich asked: > I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent > and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you > can daven maariv after plag - would he say if you did that > you don't say retzeih if you ate later? This situation is raised by Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen in "The Radiance of Shabbos" (ArtScroll). He writes (pg 95?), "If one interrupts a prolonged meal to daven Maariv or recite Havdalah, he does not say Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon afterwards. If one merely said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, he should still recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon. Rabbi Cohen cites MB 263:67 that if one said "Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol" during the meal, it is a "Tzorech Iyun" whether he can say Retzeh. Then he cites Eliya Rabba 299:1, Petach Hadvir there, Chayei Adam 47:24, Kaf Hachayim Palagi 31, and Rav Moshe Feinstein all as saying that one *can* still say Retzeh, but that Shulchan Aruch Harav 188:17 says not to. Personally, I am surprised that so many poskim distinguish between Maariv/Havdala on the one hand, vs. Omitting Shem Umalchus on the other hard. Here is a situation which will illustrate this point: Suppose someone had a long seuda shlishis, and after Tzeis he said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, and then he actually did a melacha. Would those poskim still say that he should recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon? Akiva Miller From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 21 18:01:47 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 01:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Individualism? Message-ID: <6b39dd928de144b0ba94b9a16c4318c5@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Anecdotally, it seems to me I've seen an increase in "individualistic" practices across the orthodox spectrum [e.g., davening at one's own pace with less concern as to where the tzibbur is up to (shma, shmoneh esrai, chazarat hashatz . . .), being obvious about using a different nusach hatfila, wearing tfillin at mincha . . .] I'm curious as to whether others have seen this? If yes, any theories as to why? (e.g., outside world seeping in?) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Jun 22 13:51:26 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:51:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In Avodah V36n72 (to which I'm humming "Chai, Chai, Chai/Am Yisrael Chai" :)), RJR asked: > BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? < Iff we're considering when one ended the meal; but then you're comparing unlike items (BhM vs. Ma'ariv), not to mention that BhM is a Torah-level *mitzva* while Ma'ariv is .... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 23 19:24:37 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 22:24:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BALAK "JACOB'S TENTS, ISRAEL'S DWELLING PLACES, MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD" Message-ID: "How goodly are your tents, O Jacob; your dwelling places, O Israel." [Num. 24:5] Why the repetition? What does each of these terms [tents and dwelling places] represent? And furthermore, why is the first appellation used "Jacob" and the second one "Israel?" In addition to the sensitivity and modesty demonstrated by the arrangement of the tents and camps, the Sages (Sanhedrin 105b) expound that these terms refer to the habitats of Israel's spiritual heritage. Tents (Ohalecha), alludes to the study halls, and dwelling places (Mishk'nosecha), which is related to Shechinah, or God's presence, alludes to the synagogues and Temples (Sforno). Rav Kook has a novel interpretation. He says that the verse, which mentions tents first, reflects a lower level and hence, uses the name Jacob, the first and lesser name. However, the verse which mentions dwelling second, reflects a higher level. Thus, it uses the name Israel, Jacob's second and more elevated name. The reason Rav Kook considers "tents" to reflect a lower level and "dwelling places" a higher level is because the tent is inherently connected to the state of traveling. It corresponds to the aspiration for continual change and growth. The dwelling is also part of the journey, but is associated with the rests between travels. It is the soul's sense of calm, resting from the constant movement, for the sake of the overall mission (sort of a parallel to Shabbos). I delved into the gematria aspect of this and came up with some heavy, mystical stuff. The gematria for "Ohalecha Ya-akov" (your tents O Jacob) is 248. There are 248 positive mitzvot. The word 'Avraham' and 'bamidbar' (In the wilderness) is also 248, as is the phrase 'Kol Adonai Elohim' (the voice or sound of Hashem, God). The word 'romach' (spear) is also 248. Now to tie all this together-- Balaam had intended, in a manner of speaking, to use a 'spear' to harm the Jewish people and curse them 'in the wilderness.' However 'the voice of Hashem, God' caused Balaam to turn the negative to the positive, (symbolized by the 248 positive mitzvos). Thus when Balaam said "How goodly are your tents O Jacob," he was blessing the Jewish people completely right from 'Abraham.' The gematria for "Mishk'nosecha Yisrael" (Your dwelling places, O Israel) is 1,381. As Rav Kook said, this part of the verse was on a higher level. In Gen: verse 25 (last part) and verse 26 (first part) we have: "Vayar Elohim ki tov. Vayomer Elohim na-a-seh Adam b'tzalmeinue" ("And God saw that it was good. And God said: "Let us make man in Our image..."). The gematria for this is also 1,381 as is the word "Ha-ashtaroth" (the principal Phoenician goddess, the consort of their chief male deity, Baal). Though Balaam was steeped in idolatry ("Ha-ashtaroth"), when he pronounced the second part of the phrase, ("mishk'nosecha Yisroel") God 'saw that it was good.' And so, the "image of God" wins out! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 25 07:17:25 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:17:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Waiting After Some Cheeses Before Eating Meat Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I know that we are supposed to wait after eating certain cheeses, before we can then eat meat. After which cheeses should one wait, and what is the basis for this practice? A. The Rama (Yoreh Deah 89:2) writes that the custom is not to eat meat after eating hard cheese. The waiting time for this is equivalent to the amount of time that one waits after eating meat, before then eating dairy foods. (See Taz ibid. 89:4, Aruch HaShulchan ibid. 89:11, Chochmas Adam 40:13.) There are two reasons that one needs to wait after meat before then partaking of milk; these two reasons apply as well to eating certain cheeses after meat. The first reason is that of basar she?bein ha-shinayim ? meat that gets stuck between the teeth ? which takes a considerable amount of time to dislodge or disintegrate, before which one may not consume milk. (Rambam, Hilchos Ma?achalos Asuros 9:28) The second reason for waiting after eating meat is meshichas ta?am ? an aftertaste left in the mouth, due to meat?s fattiness; only after a substantial lapse of time does this aftertaste dissipate, whereupon one may then consume milk. (Rashi in Chullin 105a s.v. ?Assur?) Poskim apply both of these reasons to cheese: Hard cheese, due to its firm and brittle texture, is like basar she?bein ha-shinayim, and is termed gevinah she?bein ha-shinayim ? cheese that gets stuck between the teeth. One therefore needs to wait a considerable amount of time for such cheese to dislodge or disintegrate before then consuming meat. (Sifsei Da?as Yoreh 89:2) Also, cheeses that are very pungent and leave a noticeable aftertaste are like meat that has meshichas ta?am; one must wait for the aftertaste to dissipate before then eating meat. (Taz Yoreh Deah 89:4) Although some classical poskim argue as to whether one or both of the above rationales for waiting apply to cheese, contemporary poskim rule that both apply. The next installment of Halacha Yomis will discuss further details. View OUKosher's list of Aged Cheeses. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sun Jun 24 23:26:22 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:26:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] [Commentary] Rabbi Meir Soloveichik: Why Christians Are Reading the Rav In-Reply-To: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: [RET emailed me this under a subject line that began "Too long for Avodah thought you might be interested..." But I thought his reluctance was missplaced. I just held on to the piece for its own digest. -micha] Jun 20, 2018 The nature of the dilemma can be stated in a three-word sentence. I am lonely. - Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik In 2015, I was invited to a conference held at a Catholic University in Spain, celebrating the first Spanish translation of *The Lonely Man of Faith*, the seminal philosophical essay of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik (my great uncle), reverently referred to by many Orthodox Jews as "the Rav." Published 50 years earlier, the essay contrasts two biblical accounts of the creation of man and teases out two personas, known as Adam the First and Adam the Second. In the first chapter of Genesis, humanity is created in the image of God and instructed by the Almighty to "fill the world and subdue it." Adam the First, Rabbi Soloveitchik suggests, is majestic; through his God-like creative capacities he seeks scientific breakthroughs, to cure disease, to build cities and countries, to advance the health and comfort of mankind. But then there is Adam the Second, who in Genesis 2 is created from the dust of the earth and remains in the sanctity of the garden of Eden, "to work and protect it." This represents the religious aspect of man, man who is ever aware of his finitude, who finds fulfillment not in majestic achievement but in an intimate relationship with a personal God. These two accounts are given, Rabbi Soloveitchik argued, because both are accurate; both Adam I and Adam II are divinely desired aspects of the human experience. One who is devoted to religious endeavors is reminded that "he is also wanted and needed in another community, the cosmic-majestic," and when one works on behalf of civilization, the Bible does not let him forget "that he is a covenantal being who will never find self-fulfillment outside of the covenant." The man of faith is not fully of the world, but neither can he reject the world. To join the two parts of the self may not be fully achievable, but it must nevertheless be our goal. In his letter of invitation to the conference, the president of the Spanish university reflected on how Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings spoke to his own vocation. As a leader of a Christian school, he said he grappled constantly with the challenge of being an *hombre de fe* in a Europe that, once the cradle of Christendom, was now suddenly secular: As Adam the First understandably and correctly busies himself with the temporal concerns of this world, we encourage our students to not lose sight, within their own hearts, of Adam the Second, the thirsting Adam that longs for a redemption that our technological advances cannot quench. We hope that our students, who come to our university seeking degree titles that will translate into jobs, will leave it also with awakened minds and hearts that fully recognize the deep aspirations that lie within their youthful spirits, and which *The Lonely Man of Faith* so eloquently describes. The letter reflected a fascinating phenomenon. As Orthodox Jews mark this year the 25th anniversary of Rabbi Soloveitchik's passing, more and more of his works are being studied, savored, appreciated, and applied to people's own lives -- by Christians. As interesting as this is, it should not be surprising. *The Lonely Man of Faith* actually originated, in part, in a talk to Catholic seminarians, and today it is Christians who are particularly shocked by the rapidity with which a culture that was once Christian has turned on them, so that now people of faith are quite lonely in the world at large. In his essay, Rabbi Soloveitchik notes that though the tension between Adam I and Adam II is always a source of angst, "the contemporary man of faith is, due to his peculiar position in secular society, lonely in a special way," as our age is "technically minded, self-centered, and self-loving, almost in a sickly narcissistic fashion, scoring honor upon honor, piling up victory upon victory, reaching for the distant galaxies, and seeing in the here-and-now sensible world the only manifestation of being." Now that the world of Adam I seems wholly divorced from that of Adam II, people of faith seek guidance in the art of bridging the two; and if, 70 years ago, Reinhold Niebhur was a theologian who spoke for a culture where Christianity was the norm, Rabbi Soloveitchik is a philosopher for Jews and Christians who are outsiders. The Catholic philosopher R.J. Snell, in a Christian reflection inspired by the Rav's writings, wrote that "like Joseph B. Soloveitchik in *The Lonely Man of Faith*, I am lonely," and he tells us why: In science, my faith is judged obscurantist; in ethics, mere animus; in practicality, irrelevant; in love, archaic. In the square, I am silenced; at school, mocked; in business, fined; at entertainment, derided; in the home, patronized; at work, muffled. My leaders are disrespected; my founder blasphemed by the new culture, new religion, and new philosophy which...suffers from an aversion to the fullness of questions, insisting that questions are meaningful only when limited to a scope much narrower than my catholic range of wonder. Yet Rabbi Soloveitchik's thesis remains that even when society rejects us, we cannot give up on society, but we also cannot amputate our religious identity from our very selves. Adam I and Adam II must be bridged. This will not be easy, but a theme throughout Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings is that all too often religion is seen as a blissful escape from life's crises, while in truth the opposite is the case. In the words of Reuven Ziegler, Rabbi Soloveitchik insisted that "religion does not offer an escape from reality, but rather provides the ultimate encounter with reality." Traditional Jews and Christians in the West face cultural challenges to their faith -- disdain, scorn, and even hate -- but if the challenge is faced with fortitude, sophistication, and honor, it will be a religious endeavor worthy of being remembered. And as both traditional Jews and Christians face this challenge, it will often be as compatriots, in a fellowship that we may not have foreseen 50 years ago. After attending the conference, I was emailed by another member of the administration, the rector of the university. He thanked me "for the pleasure of sharing that deep friendship which is a sign of the community inspired by the principles of the second Adam," and added, "[I] really enjoyed the time we passed together and the reading of the book of Rabbi Soloveitchik," which was, he reflected, "so stimulating for a better understanding of my own life and my faith." To be a person of faith is indeed to be lonely in this world. But more and more, lonely men and women of several faiths may be brought together by *The Lonely Man of Faith.* From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:42:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:42:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627194234.GE22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:18:14PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand : the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic : sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's : underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases... This is why the Maharal (Be'er 1, ch 19 or so) says that the Tur is only usable because of the BY, and SA, because it comes with the suite of nosei keilim. Speaking after years of learning AhS daily... There is a strong feel for the flow of the pesaq and how each area of halakhah is reasoned through by going to Tur, BY, SA, nosei keilim, AhS. It could be the Maharshal too would be more bothered by the Yad than by the other codes, IFF once studies the Tur or SA (or MB) with the other texts that explain how we got there. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The worst thing that can happen to a micha at aishdas.org person is to remain asleep and untamed." http://www.aishdas.org - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:36:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:36:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627183655.GC22635@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 11:54:52AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At : the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking : against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi : comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas : keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same : question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A : Baal keri is prohibited from going there. Or to put it less obliquely... The pasuq there (Bamidbar 12:4) refers to their location as Ohel Mo'ed. But the idiom is not necessarily referring to the Mishkan. Moshe went to the Ohel Mo'ed to get nevu'ah *outside* the camp. (Shemos 33) It had a pillar of cloud at the door, not at a mizbeiach. In Bamidbar 11:16 we learn that the 70 zeqeinim, after getting ruach haqodesh at the Ohel Mo'eid, returned to the camp. The Sifrei Zutra where (Bamidbar 11) writes: And he set them round about the tent the tent for speaking which was outside the camp. They made two tents, a tent for service and a tent for speaking. The outer tent had the same dimensions as the inner one, and the Levites served in both with the wagons. Two ohel mo'eds, the mishkan, and the nevu'ah center. The Ohel Mo'eid in this story also has a cloud at the door. So, I would think it was Moshe's place of nevu'ah, not the Mishkan. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and micha at aishdas.org this was a great wonder. But it is much more http://www.aishdas.org wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a Fax: (270) 514-1507 "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:38:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:38:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627193824.GD22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:19:19PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency : greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? It depends why gadol hametzuveh ve'oseh. The accepted theory is that it's because the YhR chimes up when a prohibition -- issur or bitul asei -- is involved (what pop-psych would describe as the attractiveness of "forbidden fruit"), so so one gets greater sekhar for winning the greater battle. Lefum tzaara agra. In which case, the YhR would work against keeping a neder, and so one should get more sekhar for fighting that battle. I argued that it's that someone we are obligated to do is indeed obligated because we need its effects more than someone who isn't. In which case, no one *needs* the chumerah for basic development; because if they did, it would have been obligatory. Then there would be no added value for keeping the chumerah in terms of the substance of what he's doing, but there is added value to keeping a neder. Meanwhile, it's subject to the Chullin 2a: "Tov shelo tidor mishetidor velo meshaleim." (Qoheles 5:4) Utanya: Tov mizeh umizeh, she'eino nodei kol iqar. -- Divrey R' Meir. R' Yehudah omer: Tov mizeh umizeh, nodeir umeshaleim. The gemara then continues by limiting R' Yehudah to nedarim of "harei zu" not shavu'os of "harei alai". Which would appar to include maintaining a chumerah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:07:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:07:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah In-Reply-To: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> References: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180627180708.GB22635@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 03:51:17PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote: : ... : R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" : of "Torah lishmah" means. ... :> Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions :> :> We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing :> opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. :> :> 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion :> of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent :> generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to :> fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice :> was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind :> on this thought. :> :> 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing :> in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo :> [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, :> one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is :> learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] :> :> 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh :> means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to :> learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah :> is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- :> i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar :> with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must :> learn Torah in order to fulfil it. :> :> Support for these Positions :> :> All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the :> Rishonim. :> :> 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara :> in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir :> bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the :> commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, :> that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." :> :> 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text :> reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake :> of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, :> for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out :> of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of :> the Ba'al Shem Tov. :> :> 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] :> and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Along the lines of #3, Yesushalmi Beraikha 1:1 (vilna 1a), Shabbos 1:2 (vilna 7b): One who learns but not in order to do, would have been pleasanter that his umbilical cord would have prolapsed in front of his face and he never came into the world. The Meshekh Chokhmah, Devarim 28:61, explains this in terms of the idea that the soul learns Torah with a mal'akh before birth. Someone who wants to learn as an end in itself would have been better off staying with that mal'akh! And (citing the intro to Qorban Aharon) a soul that was not born is a seikhel nivdal who grasped his Creator. All that is being given up by being born. But, if one is learning al menas laasos, which one can only do after birth, then their birth had value. The other opinion in the Y-mi is that someone who is lomei shelo al means lelameid is better off not existing. Again, the MC, notes, because the point of learning is to bring it into the world. The MC also gets this from Sanhedrin 99b, where the gemara concludes that "adam la'amal yulad" is for amal peh -- speaking Torah. While the gemara doesn't say al menas lelameid is a definiition of lishmah, the transitive property would lead me to conclude that's the implication. Al menas and lishmah... can they be distinguished? And if not 4. Al menas laasos. (I have discussed this MC before. He ends up showing that in terms of priorities, one who is going somewhere to teach doesn't have to stop to do mitzvos maasiyos; but someoen who is actually learning (and not teaching) has to stop even for a hakhsher mitzvah (maasis). This is one of my favorite shtiklach; worth a look! (There is a complete copy with a bad translation scattered among .) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jun 29 11:07:36 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 18:07:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? Message-ID: >From OU Kosher Yomis Q. What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? A. Chazal, the Talmudic Sages, prohibited cheese that is not made under the special supervision of a Jew (Avodah Zarah 29b, 35a-b). Various reasons are advanced for this rabbinic prohibition, but the reason accepted by most halachic authorities is the concern for the use of rennet enzymes from the stomach flesh of neveilah/non-kosher animals. Unsupervised cheese is termed Gevinas Akum. Cheese is only permitted if it is Gevinas Yisroel ? Jewish-supervised cheese (Yoreh Deah 115:2). This rule is unrelated to the rules of Cholov Yisroel (Jewish-supervised milk) and Cholov Akum/Cholov Stam (milk not under Jewish supervision). Therefore, even if a person eats Cholov Stam dairy products, he may only eat Gevinas Yisroel cheese. According to the Rama (Yoreh Deah 115:2) and many other poskim, Gevinas Yisroel is obtained by the mashgiach visually supervising the incorporation of the enzymes into each vat of milk in the cheese-making process; this way, the mashgiach will verify that the enzymes are kosher. According to the Shach (ibid. 20) and many other poskim, the mashgiach must manually add the enzymes to each vat of milk in the cheese-making process. The Vilna Gaon (ibid. s. 14) provides the rationale for this: Gevinas Yisroel is similar to Pas Yisroel (bread with onsite Jewish involvement) ? just like Pas Yisroel means that a Jew actually participated in the baking process, so too does Gevinas Yisroel mean that a Jew actually participated in the cheese-making process. Contemporary poskim rule that the basic halacha follows the Rama, although kashrus agencies typically endeavor to fulfill the Shach?s requirement as well. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:00:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:00:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Game Theory and Bankruptcy Message-ID: <20180629190056.GA23432@aishdas.org> Nobel Laureate R/Dr Robert Aumann famously (in our circles) explained the distribution of funds in the mishnah on Kesuvos 93a. In that mishnah, a man left behind 3 wives -- but the case works for 3 debts in general. Whatever wife 1's kesuvah is worth in the mishnah would be the same as if 1 of 3 creditors were owed the same amount. It is the creditor version that is the topic of AhS CM 104:15. But it only holds in cases where the assets aren't real estate, or if the debts are loans without certified contracts, if all the debts' contracts have the same date -- in other words, in cases where one doesn't pay the oldest loan fast. Creditor A is owed 100 zuz, creditor B is owed 200 zuz, and creditor C, 300. And the debtor has left than 600 zuz to divide. The AhS notes that there is a minority opinion that would have them divide as we today would probably consider more intuitive -- proportionally. A gets 1/6 of the assets, B gets 1/3 (ie 2/6) and C gets 1/2 (=3/6). And in his day this was a common practice. So, while one may say this became minhag hamaqom and thus a tenai implicitly accepted when doing business or lending money, the AhS recommends that if the creditors assume this division, beis din seek pesharah and divide this way. However, iqar hadin is as per the mishnah. Which the gemara tells us is R' Nasan, and R' Yehudah haNasi disagrees. (Stam mishnah, and the redactor of mishnayos doesn't mention his own opinion???) The first 100z has three claims on it and is divided in thirds. The second 100z has two claims on it, and is divided equally between B & C. And whatever is left is given to C. What this means is that whomever has the biggest loan is most likely to absorb the loss. RRA explains this case in two papers. The first, aimed more at mathematicians, invokes the Game Theoretic concept of nucleolus. (R.J. Aumann and M. Maschler, Game Theoretic Analysis of a Bankruptcy Problem from the Talmud, Journal of Economic Theory 36, no. 2 (1985), 195-213.) In the second, written for people who learn gemara, he avoids all the technical talk. ("On the Matter of the Man with Three Wives," Moriah 22 (1999), 98- 107.) The second paper compares this mishnah to the gemara at the opening of BM, and derives a general rule, RAR saying that no other division in Qiddushin would follow the same principles as the 2 person division in BM. Here is an explanatory blog post on Talmudology blog ("Judaism, Science and Medicine"), by R/Dr Jeremy Brown. (The blog would particularly be interesting to someone learning daf who is interested in science or math.) The aforementioned AhS gives two sevaras for R' Nasan's position: The first is that the first division is taken from the beinonis (mid-quality property) of the debtor's or the estate's holdings. Therefore, it has to be divided separately from the rest of B & C's debt. Each has claim to the full 100z, so each gets equally. The second division is taken from the beinonis of what the person owned that the time he started owing B & C money, and if there is non left, from the ziburis (lesser quality). Again, different material, so it is divided without consideration to the remainder of the debt to C. merchandise. Therefore, it is accounted for separately The second explanation focuses on why this case is different than shutefus, where the shutefim do divide proportionally to their investments. The debtor's assets are entirely meshubadim to A just as much as to B or C. C can't get his 300z until A's 100z is accounted for, no less than the other way around -- each has full power to halt distribution of any of the man's assets. So the division is by shibud, which is equal. But with shutefim, the profit is clearcut. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late micha at aishdas.org to become the person http://www.aishdas.org you might have been. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - George Eliot From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Migo vs Chazakah Message-ID: <20180629194917.GA8106@aishdas.org> AhS 82:18 is a qunterus on migo. Looking at #6 (within se'if 18), RYMEpstein looks at two gemaros that discuss migo bemaqom rov -- BB 5a and Qiddushin 64. In BB, Raza"l say that while rov adif meichazaqah, this is not true for every chazaqah. Chezqas mamon outranks rov (you don't make someone pay up on a "probably"), because the mi'ut yeshno ba'olam, so we can't take something out of his hands -- maybe he is of the mi'ut. This is true even though chezas haguf adif mechezqas mamon and migo adif meichezqas haguf. So chazaq IOW: rov > migo rov > chezaqa chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon So rov > chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon But chezqas mamon > rov -- where mi'ut yeshno be'olam, without bitul Acharei rabim lehatos is a case of bitul, so if the majority of dayanim rule that the nit'an has to pay up, that rov does trump chezqas mamon. Hoserver the gemara in R' Nasan says: "Mah li leshaqer?" ki chazaqah dami. Lo asi chazaqah ve'aqrah chazaqah legamrei. (R' Nasan shows up in two of my posts in a row!) Migo doesn't trump chazaqah, because assuming a person wouldn't give that particular lie is itself a chazaqah. Which is it? Another related issue that confuses me is what kind of chazaqah is a chezqas mamon: One could say it's a chazaqah demei'iqara -- preserving the status quo of who has the money. One could say it's a chazaqah disvara -- normally property belongs to the person holding it. Now, say the to'ein is tofeis the money he claims. This can at times work, because it shifts which is hamotzi meichaveiro when they get to BD. However, we know this is a normal case of the person holding the money, we know how he got it. So how would my chazaqah disvara apply? OTOH, it's not your usual case of presrving the old halachic state, because everyone agrees that before the dispute, the property was the nitan's. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger How wonderful it is that micha at aishdas.org nobody need wait a single moment http://www.aishdas.org before starting to improve the world. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anne Frank Hy"d From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jun 30 21:01:59 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? Message-ID: Naaah, of course he was not Jewish. The subject line was just to get your attention. But then again.... I would not have surprised me if Bil'am had said, "I can't do what my god doesn't let me do." After all, religious people of *any* religion generally refrain from going against the will of their god. Likewise, I would not have been surprised if he said, "I can't do what Hashem doesn't let me do." He is a professional, and he knows the rules of the game (most clearly seen in maftir). He knows who he is dealing with, and if he is trying to curse the Jews, it would be a good idea to follow the rules of the Jewish God. But Bil'am didn't say either of those things. What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase. There have been plenty of polytheists who accept the idea that there are many gods, One of them being Hashem, the God of the Jews. But in this pasuk, we see that Bil'am goes beyond accepting Hashem as *a* god - he accepts Him as "my God". I checked my concordance and found about 50 cases in Tanach of the phrase "Hashem Elokai", spelling "Elokai" with either a patach or a kamatz. It seems that this was the ONLY case where this phrase was used by a non-Jew. Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Sat Jun 30 22:44:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 01:44:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180701054415.GA28439@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 12:01:59AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me : do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase... : Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding : has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply : spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now : it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not : have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I : guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. This works well with my recent (few minute old) blog post. I argue that the whole point of Bil'am might have been to illustrate how monotheism and deveiqus don't guarantee being good people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Aspaqlaria Bil'am the Frummy by micha ? Published 18 Tammuz 5778 - Sun, Jul 1, 2018 Sun, Jul 1, 2018 The Medrash Tankhuma (Balaq 1) says: And if you ask: Why did the Holy One blessed be He, let his Shechinah rest upon so wicked a non-Jew? So that the [other] peoples would have no excuse to say, `If we had nevi'im, we would have changed for the better', He established for then nevi'im. Yet they [these nevi'im] broke down the moral fence of the world... For that matter, the Sifrei says on the last pasuq of the Torah: And another navi did not arise again in Israel like Moshe: In Israel, [another] one did not arise, but among the nations of the world, one did arise. And who was it? Bil'am ben Be'or. So here you have a prophet with the abilities of Moshe (whatever they meant by that) and yet he was no paragon of moral virtue. He didn't teach them how to lift themselves up, but how to corrupt the Jews. So how does that address the complaint of the nations? They had their navi, but they said it was unfair that they didn't have nev'i'im to give moral instruction -- and Bil'am wasn't capable of leading them in that way. Perhaps Bil'am stood for them as an example to teach them just that point. The nations are described as complaining that if they only had a navi they would have been as good as the Jews. But Bil'am was there to show them nevu'ah wasn't the answer. Even being a navi and having the Shechinah rest upon them is not sufficient to make an ideal person. The whole detour into telling us about an event in the lives of Balaq and Bil'am is such a departure from the rest of the Torah, it is considered a separate book. "Moshe wrote his book and Parashas Bil'am" (Bava Basra 14b) So why it it included? Based on the above suggestion, the section teaches us about the dangers of frumkeit. We can get so caught up in the pursuit of deveiqus, one's personal relationship with G-d, one can end up as self-centered and honor-seeking as Bil'am. We need to start out pursuing moral and ethical behavior, ehrlachkeit, and then the connection with the Divine can be harnessed to reach those goals. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 30 21:01:27 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pinchas Message-ID: <56A42568-E095-442F-A19F-017F306492C3@cox.net> ?Pinhas? has turned back Chamasi, my wrath, from the people of Israel.? (Num.25:11) Pinhas has proven his unusual power to turn back God?s wrath from Israel through a very courageous, difficult and controversial act. The Vilna Gaon brilliantly observes that in the word chamasi (my wrath), the two outside letters ches and yud read chai ? life ? while the inside letters mem and sav read meit ? death. The hidden meaning is that by Pinchos facing squarely what has taken place on the outside, he has miraculously turned back the wrath of the Almighty. In doing so, he has removed death (meis) from the inside, replacing it with life (chai). Why do we pray with a set text? An opinion recorded in the Talmud states that prayers correspond to the daily sacrifices offered in the Temple which are mentioned in this coming week's portion of Pinchas. (Numbers 28:4) It has been argued that this opinion may be the conceptual base for our standardized prayer. Since sacrifices had detailed structure, so too do our prayers have a set text. If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 08:09:35 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 01:09:35 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: This year's incarnation of the Gebrochts discussion attempts to discuss the Halacha and I think traverses territory not clearly enunciated in the past. Also I would not characterise this as Gebrochts-bashing; I dont believe anyone is troubled by those who say, "My Rebbe/My tradition is not to eat whatever it may be" the issue is that Gebrochts is promoted as Halachically legitimate and therefore preferred if not mandated. The ShA HaRav declares firstly, that as far as the Halachah is concerned, there is no concern with Kneidlach during Pesach, see the link - http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=25074&st=&pgnum=486 He does however advise that it is a valid stringency his first observation/proof however is that flour can be found on the surface of the Matzos and later on says this is quite common However, A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years B] no other Posek ever verified this claim this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within the finished Matza - but C] there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already been made D] even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link provided - It is universally accepted these days that flour is not added to a dough already made and there is no Matza baking program that permits adding flour to the already made dough Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 18:30:38 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 21:30:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The not-Korban Pesach Message-ID: I had asked: : It has come to me attention recently that the Torah never refers to : the Pesach as a Korban... : My question is this: Whatever reason it was, why the Torah avoided : using that word in this context ... why did Chazal feel differently? Upon further research, it seems that my question was based on the *mistaken* assumption that the Pesach was unique in this regard. It turns out that while the Torah does use the word "korban", it never uses phrases such as "Korban Tamid", "Korban Todah", or "Korban Musaf". These were referred to simply as the Tamid, the Todah, and the Musaf, just as the Pesach was. Apparently, construction of the phrase came much later, and was applied to them all. Exception: The "Korban Mincha" is mentioned three times in Vayikra 2, but that would change the whole question drastically. I should also clarify: these phrases aren't missing only from the Torah, but from the whole Tanach. They seem to have arisen after the Tanach. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sun Apr 1 20:40:08 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 23:40:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b27445d-5dde-c27e-a809-871e12258604@sero.name> On 01/04/18 11:09, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years Who is "we"? > B] no other Posek ever verified this claim > this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within > the finished Matza - but > > C]? there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not > thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product > the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already > been made Perhaps you mean no *other* posek, because this one clearly says it. It's no surprise that nobody before him mentions it, because he says it's a recent phenomenon. > D]? even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link > provided - This is a bizarre claim. The teshuvah "admits" no such thing. First of all, the footnote is obviously not part of the teshuvah, not by its author, and thus completely irrelevant to anything. Second, the footnote does not "admit" such a thing either. It brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 1 21:12:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 06:12:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions, one that basically is an exception that proves the rule and the other is a real exception. 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. 2) Powered chalav nochri. Labels here are supposed to state that a product containts powered chalav nochri (if it does). This was the result of a lawsuit.? I guess that no one wants to start listing every possible kula that goes into a food product. OTOH? if meat isn't halaq, labels generally don't state it. They only state the meat's halaq status if it is halaq. Ben On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: > I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the > lines to fine, or it becomes unusable. Once it's certifying a product > as lacking qitniyos, it might as well stick to avoiding all qitniyos > rather than having a confusing (to some) explanation on each package > which minhagim can or can't use the product. > > The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that > in a number of ways. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 1 18:58:35 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 21:58:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which >is eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give >his full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are >15,000 Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. Have patience and watch developments. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 2 07:10:57 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:10:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 01/04/18 21:58, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >> I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which is >> eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give his >> full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are 15,000 >> Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. > > Have patience and watch developments. Do you claim prophecy, or are you breaking silence on some vast and hereto unsuspected conspiracy? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 3 08:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180403150030.GA23693@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 06:12:23AM +0200, Ben Waxman wrote: : On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: :> I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the :> lines to fine, or it becomes unusable... :> The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that :> in a number of ways. : I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions... I think what I said is really particular to the US, or maybe chu"l as a whole. Where people who keep kosher will suffer with less, and people who don't won't care what has a hekhsher and what doesn't. Few people will make a less observant choice if an Amerucan hekhsher chooses to be more machmir than their own minhagim require. Non-Mehardin rabbanut has a strong motive away from least common denominator. They have a responsibility to a large population that will buy with a hekhsher IFF and only if the sacrifice is not too onerous. : 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that : they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that : proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any : case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically : stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. I recall the marshmallows sold in the US with a long explanation as to why the mei qitniyos they contain are a non-issue. Tha candy with a teshuvah on every wrapper. (Even better than Laffy Taffy or Bazooka Joe!) Unfortunately, they all have the same one. Pretty much the same thing. But didn't work in the US in the long run, as the rightward drift continued. :-)||ii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 3rd day micha at aishdas.org in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Chesed: What is perfectly Fax: (270) 514-1507 balanced Chesed? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 3 21:58:05 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:58:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin Message-ID: One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, he does this privately, since the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was sitting up front without wearing tefillin. When I asked his brother, who does put on tefillin during Chol Moed, about this, he told that the rabbi put on tefillin during Chol Moed until he married. "Our minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed," he said. My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in the ladies section. Thus I do not understand how the rabbi of the shul that I davened in yesterday could sit up front facing everyone without wearing tefillin. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 06:28:11 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:28:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Professor L. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 12:58 AM > My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them > in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put > on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should > not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in > Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in > the ladies section. This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom came from different places with different minhogim. According to halokho, what the acharonim say about wearing t'fillin or not halakhically does not apply here. Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where there was a mnhag hamokom. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 4 07:44:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:44:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin References: Message-ID: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 09:28 AM 4/4/2018, Mandel, Seth wrote: >This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." >But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from >Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom >came from different places with different minhogim.... >Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where >there was a mnhag hamokom. If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 08:07:12 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 15:07:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: , <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: From: Prof. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 10:44 AM > If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section > than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin > can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section Any shul has the right to set up its own rules, and anyone who davens there has to follow its rules. That is also halokho. Even if they were to make a rule, for instance, that one must wear green on Chanukka. Or that the shul must say the prayer for the State of Israel. But to claim that it is halokho that in America people who daven with t'fillin may not daven together with people who do not is wrong. There is no such halokho in America. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 4 20:58:28 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 05:58:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6b0af463-987c-0e3e-d5a2-27cb630b86ba@zahav.net.il> On 4/4/2018 6:58 AM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is > to put on tefillin during Chol Moed,? he does this privately,? since > the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. > > > Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin > during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was > sitting up front without wearing tefillin.? When I asked his brother . > . . . . > Wouldn't the rav in question be the proper person to ask? ?Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at mail.gmail.com Wed Apr 4 23:46:31 2018 From: meirabi at mail.gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: The ShA HaRav does not initiate this ban on Gebrochts as his own, rather he bases himself upon the propositions of Poskim which we are now exploring, and it seems that they actually do not support the proposition to create a ban against Gebrochts. A] The observation made by the ShA HaRav, which is central to his anti-Gebrochts argument - is un-supported. Our Poskim and our personal experience, has verified that there is no such thing as flour being found on the surface of baked Matza. B] The ShA HaRav does not issue his own assessment [other than observing flour on the surface of baked Matza] but relies upon other Poskim to support the proposition that flour remains within the finished Matza. However, no such thing is found in the Poskim, other than in situations where flour is added to a dough which is ALREADY formed. No Posek ever suggested that a normal dough may not be thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product. And the ShA HaRav admits this by saying that nowadays the dough is made very hard, dry, with very little water i.e. it is not surprising that Poskim have not discussed this as it is a concern that is due only to this recent change. But no other Poskim from his time endorsed the reasoning that flour is found on the surface of baked Matza etc. C] it is surprising to hear a devoted Chabadnik suggesting that the footnotes found in the KeHos, the official Chabad publishers' publication - are completely irrelevant to the Teshuvah. There are 2 versions to understanding note 33 on the link provided = here is the gobbledigook version - "it brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions" = here is the plain speak version - "this is the best we can find to support the proposition" which is, however which way you turn it, no support at all for this new concern of flour remaining within the baked Matza. One can hardly but suspect that the footnote was added because the Taz and MaAv that the ShA HaRav next refers to, is no support at all for banning Gebrochts, because their observations are exclusively applicable to thick soft Matzos that were under suspicion of having had flour added to the dough during its kneading - and as we mentioned - this had already been comprehensively stamped out by the times of the ShA HaRav. Remember, they were kneading soft dough for soft Matza and it was quite likely that the dough may have been a little too loose and one would be tempted to add more flour to it. So there we have it - if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not - then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha - then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Apr 7 20:38:51 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 23:38:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Isru Chag Message-ID: <64A81636-64D4-4FF1-B35D-C25381E32A1C@cox.net> The gematria for Isru Chag is 278, the same gematria for l'machar found in Bamidbar, Ch.11, vs.18. This is in the Sidra, Beha'alotch, where God has Moshe establish a Sanhedrin because Moshe complained that he could not carry on alone. God says to Moshe: "To the people you shall say, 'Prepare yourselves for tomorrow and you shall eat meat..." There is an interesting tie here. The day after a festival is the "morrow" and even though the holiday is over, we must always be preparing ourselves. As a matter of fact, in counting the omer, we are preparing ourselves for mattan Torah in 50 days. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Sat Apr 7 21:15:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 14:15:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 "Rabbi Meir G. Rabi" wrote: > So there we have it -- if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your > parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o > Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and > enjoy Pesach Is RMG Rabi's post on Gebrokts consonant with the comment of the Mishna Brura. The Chafetz Chaim stated that even though one may have doubts as to the Halachic imperative of being careful (yes, perhaps needlessly) about Matza Shruya, nevertheless, "one should not be MAZNIACH [translate as you will] those who have this Chumra" In particular, it seems to me that the practice of actually keeping Shruya is very much in line with many other Chumras that people have. Consider Garlic on Pesach, for example. I would posit that today the chance of garlic inducing Chametz is akin to itinerant matza flour being present on a baked Matza. Nonetheless, those who have this Chumra, keep it. They keep it because of the Minhag to be Machmir on Pesach! That Minhag, by its nature is concerned with the infinitessimal. There are many other examples. The Belzer don't eat carrots because of a Chametz incident. They were Machmir from then on. Lubavitchers has an incident with sugar and were Machmir from then on to pre-cook it. Halacha on Pesach does admit the concept of remote Chumras! Yes, for those who look at things from a non Pesach purist halachic view, may well scratch their heads. Nonetheless, the Chafets Chaim taught us that we should not be Mazniach. The idea that Pesach cannot be enjoyed without Kneidlach is fanciful, and not directly born out by plain Halacha. The Halacha specifies Meat and Wine as primary inputs from Gashmiyus food that give rise to happiness. Yes, B'Sar Shlomim (not chicken) and wine (good enough for Nisuch Hamizbeach?) To state "if you are CONCERNED about Halacha... eat Kneidlach" is perhaps a worse actualisation than "Mazniach" as it implies that such people are acting in perhaps some antinomian-like chassidic voodoo practice. [ One can argue quite cogently, for example, that wearing a Gartel today is also "not in line with the Halacha". (We wear underpants!) We do not, however, dismiss such practices. [On Shruya see also Gilyoney Hashas from Rav Yosef Engel Psachim 40b]] The Ari z'l stated that he would never 'talk against' a minhag yisrael/chumra on Pesach. In summary, and I've felt that RMG Rabi, Halacha is not a pure science which leads to a true/false conclusion for every question that is investigated using the rules of the Halacha. Admission: My father a'h had the Minhag from his family (likely via Amshinover fealty) not to eat Gebrokts. This is Toras Imecha for me, especially on Pesach, and whilst I know that in general this practice is unique to families who follow the minhogim of the Talmidei HaBaal Shem, and is most minor, I state quite openly that deciding NOT to follow a family minhag/chumra on Pesach would be FAR more upsetting and disturbing to me than not eating Kneidlach. I'm happy to wait for the last day, and for the record, I am not a fan of them, despite my wife being a superlative cook. Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a "hot dog roll". "It is only the anticipation of redemption that preserves Judaism in Exile, while Judaism in the Land of Israel is the redemption itself." Rabbi A.I. Hacohen Kook From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 8 05:55:41 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 12:55:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent actions of Simcha Felder. >From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv "Using his leverage as the swing vote in the divided State Senate, Sen. Simcha Felder appears to have strong-armed a provision into the budget that significantly changes state oversight of yeshiva curricula, political observers say. " I have talked to some people who live in Willimsburg, and the picture they paint of the level of secular education in Hassidic yeshivas is not a good one. One Satmar woman who lives in Williamsburg told me that her sons received no secular education in the Satmar yeshiva they attended. For the record NYS law requires that all children receive a secular education. What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf R. Barukh Schick of Shklov (d. 1808): When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . . . He urged me to translate into Hebrew as much secular wisdom as possible, so as to cause the nations to disgorge what they have swallowed, making it available to all, thereby increasing knowledge among the Jews. Thus, the nations will no longer be able to lord it over us-and bring about the profaning of God's name-with their taunt: "Where is your wisdom?" R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. I:Iayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, 6 through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash. The Gaon of Vilna's sons: By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... 8 First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): I cannot refrain from repeating a true and astonishing story that I heard from the Gaon's disciple R. Menachem Mendel. . . . 10 It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. This included its inner and outer manifestations. He explained: All secular wisdom is essential for our holy Torah and is included in it. He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. He especially praised music, explaining that most of the Torah accents, the secrets of the Levitical songs, and the secrets of the Tikkunei Zohar could not be comprehended without mastering it. ... He explained the significance of the various secular disciplines, and noted that he had mastered them all. Regarding the discipline of medicine, he stated that he had mastered anatomy, but not pharmacology. Indeed, he had wanted to study pharmacology with practicing physicians, but his father prevented him from undertaking its study ,fearing that upon mastering it he would be forced to curtail his Torah study whenever it would become necessary for him to save a life. . . . He also stated that he had mastered all of philosophy, but that he had derived only two matters of significance from his study of it. . . . The rest of it, he said, should be discarded. To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw for this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 8 05:22:36 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 08:22:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Message-ID: <9ABBE35B-0F5B-4CD1-917D-550FD3E33394@cox.net> 9:1 "Vay'hi bayom hashemini..." The Sages teach that the word "vay'hi" often indicates that trouble or grief is associated with the narrative (Megillah 10b). What trouble or grief could there have been on that joyous first day of Nissan? It presages the tragic deaths of Aaron?s sons, Nadav and Avihu. Another explanation: Even in the midst of our greatest rejoicing, a Jewish wedding, we pause for a moment to recall the destruction of the Temple and the fragility of life through the breaking of the glass. Here, too, we have such a happy occasion, but the "Vay'hi" is to remind us of our fallibility and the frailty of life. There are many commentaries on Aaron?s response when told of his sons' deaths: Vayidom Aharon, ?and Aaron was silent.? It is somewhat coincidental that the third syllable of vayidom sounds a little like the English word ?dumb.? One of the literal meanings of the word ?dumb? is mute and unable to speak. It seems to me that Aaron?s silence was his inability to speak due to shock. Many people would faint dead away if told of such news. So it really isn?t surprising that his reaction was one of a deafening silence. When two egotists meet "It's an I for an I" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 8 12:08:57 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2018 21:08:57 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rabbis Ben Nun, Sherlo, and Rimon have come out strongly against the wheat substitutes and feel that they should be banned. In their opinion, the primary reason for the kitniyot minhag is to prevent mixing up the various grains. Eating these types of products will lead to the same confusion. Ben On 4/8/2018 6:15 AM, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: > Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they > essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and > pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are > quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a > "hot dog roll". From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 07:29:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 10:29:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180409142919.GG25254@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 12:55:41PM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects : in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent : actions of Simcha Felder. : : From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv ... : What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular : studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept : only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time : studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, rather than the one you're critiquing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 07:54:47 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:54:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: Message-ID: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:29 AM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with >the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? > >You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh >in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, >rather than the one you're critiquing. And what do you do with the GRA's statement When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . simply ignore it? This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech cannot go against the facts. Also from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf Friesenhausen's critique, however, was hardly confined to the left; he also had to contend with the right: I appeal especially to all those who fear God and tremble at His word, that they not heed the false claims of those who plot against secular wisdom . . . , unaware that those who make such claims testify against themselves, saying: "We are devoid of Torah, we have chosen folly as our guide." For had the light of Torah ever shone upon them, they would have known the teaching of R. Samuel bar Nachtmeni at Shabbat 75a and the anecdotes about Rabban Gamaliel and R. Joshua at Horayot 10a. Also, they would have been aware of the many talmudic discussions that can be understood only with the aid of secular wisdom. Should you, however, meet a master of the Talmud who insists on denigrating secular wisdom, know full well that he has never understood those talmudic passages whose comprehension is dependent upon knowledge of secular wisdom. . . . He is also unaware that he denigrates the great Jewish sages of the past and their wisdom, as well. Worst of all are those guilty of duplicity. They speak arrogantly in public, either to appease the fools and gain honor in their eyes, or out of envy of the truly wise, disparaging those who appreciate secular wisdom, yet in their hearts they believe otherwise. See in the above link the Chasam Sofer's evaluation of Rabbi Friesenhausen. He was indeed a talmud Chacham. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 08:17:47 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:17:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:54:47AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : And what do you do with the GRA's statement .... : simply ignore it? Yes, that's exactly what the Chassidim who run the mosedos in question do with many of the Gra's statements. Why would it surprise anyone if they ignore this as well? As for me, as in your question, "what do you do", that's an entirely different issue. : This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree : with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech : cannot go against the facts. It may be more productive to ask about 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on and 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. Being surprised when Chassidim don't see the world the way the Gra did isn't really useful or warranted. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 11:28:06 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 14:28:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 1144 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 13:30:59 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:30:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180409203059.GB4975@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is : not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with : what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find : that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Or any of a million other things someone who disagrees with the Gra might suggest. A few years back there was a storm, and my son's grade school rebbe ended up losing a son to a downed power line. The friend who tried saving the son died immediately. The boy lingered for about 2 weeks. We attended the levayah. The father was proud that his young son went to his Maker pure, unsullied even by learning the alphabet. Alef-beis, yes, the child knew; but they hadn't yet begun the English alphabet. Not a sentiment I would share. In fact, hearing it from a rebbe who taught my son in a MO school, I found it kind of startling. But it's a perspective. And if it fosters accepting ol malkhus shamayim and ol mitzvos, raising children who are "ohavei H', yir'sei E-lokim, anshei emes, zera qodesh..." who am I to say it's not the right answer for someone else? :> It may be more productive to ask about :> 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on :> and :> 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. : Rabbi Dr. Shnayer Leiman, who wrote the article from which the : quotes come... I meant in each point something different than what your responses reflect. To spell out further: 1- The reports that lead you to believe the norm for secular education in chassidishe chadorim today is actually as weak as you believe. Rather than the likelihood that the more extreme stories are the ones more often reported. They could all fully be true, and yet not reflect the experiences of a statistically significant number of American students. Or perhaps they do. I would want statistics, not anecdotes, before judging. For example, I did not notice it any easier to teach Sukkah 7b-8a "sukkah ha'asuyah kekivshan" and the diagonal of squares vs circles or their areas to MO Jews who weren't themselves in STEM fields than to American chareidim. And if things were so bad, how do so many end up "in computers", if not in a job that requires as much post-HS education as mine? 2- How do they understand those "facts" about needing limudei chol to succeed in limudei chodesh. Which of the numerous possible responses I refered to in response to the first snippet in this email they actually believe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 15:12:48 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 18:12:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:30 PM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: >: One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is >: not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with >: what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find >: that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... > >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 15:31:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 18:31:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409223134.GD12000@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:48PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's : >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. : : Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" : is learning? I hope not. I am implying that it is valid for the chassidim whose school you are critiquing to believe so. And yes, they probably believe that the Gra's hisnagdus was an error caused by his exposure to the wrong set of ideas. They *certainly* believe that of RYBS. (Or at least did in his lifetime. I see an "acharei mos - qedushim" effect currently going on with RYBS's memory.) As I wrote, I am defending the position in an eilu va'eilu sense. It is not a position to which I personally subscribe, nor could subscribe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com Mon Apr 9 23:17:53 2018 From: rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com (Rabbi Meir Rabi) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:17:53 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Gebrochts - MInhag but absolutely no foundation in Halacha Message-ID: My Gebrochts postings have been to clarify one point - it is wrong to claim that Gebrochts is Halachically mandated or justified and points to anything other than a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition. and I do thank RIB for his query to which the answer is a firm NO - my observation - [if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach] - is in no manner a violation of, "one should not be MAZNIACH [ridicule] those who have this Chumra" IF they do not eat Gebrochts FOR THE RIGHT REASON i.e. a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition BTW - I do not see this in the ChCHayim, pity RIB did not provide sourcing But it is in the ShTeshuvah [460:2] - Nevertheless those who wish to sanctify themselves by refraining from that which is permitted - soaked and cooked Matza, even that which has been [baked hard] and ground [again referring to the corrected practice of making Matza meal from thinner hard baked Matza and NOT from thicker soft Matza which was grated on a Rib Ayzen, and at greater risk of being underbaked and Chametz] - should not be ridiculed. RIB has not suggested any argument to associate not eating garlic during Pesach with Gebrochts, and I have no idea what makes one Chumra IN LINE with other Chumras. Neither do I understand the significance to our discussion/disagreement. We both urge those who do not wish to eat Gebrochts/Garlic etc because their parents etc did not - to keep their tradition. However, the natural corollary is - that IF you DO NOT have such a custom - then eat them and enjoy Pesach because there is no legitimate Halachic imperative. Also, the reference to Keneidelach being an important contribution to Oneg Yom Tov is not of my making - it comes from great and highly respected Poskim. It is also not correct to characterise this Minhag as being concerned with the infinitesimal - because that is the Halacha - a speck of flour can become Chametz and ruin your entire Pesach. Indeed this was the very point I am making - there is no substance in Halacha to support this concern - if there was it would be Halacha. And finally - If anything, the urging that we not be Mazniach, demonstrates that Halacha has no concerns about this issue. We ought to however, nevertheless, not ridicule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 01:37:42 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:37:42 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: " Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge." You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a question of cost/benefit for the masses. Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is greater then benefit. The people you listed were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 02:23:50 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:23:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: At 04:37 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will >affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a >question of cost/benefit for the masses. > >Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be >harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is >greater then benefit. The people you listed > >were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 03:05:03 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:05:03 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular > studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am > paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular > subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not > study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" > > I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from > observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of > Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. > > YL > > And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: "All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are largely Orthoprax." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 02:16:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:16:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: Will those who are against the teaching of secular subjects simply ignore what R. Yhonason Eybeschutz wrote in Yaaros Devash 2:7 (as translated by L. Levi in Torah and Science, pages 24-25)? For all the sciences are ?condiments? and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impureand how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:32:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:32:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:31:27AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: :> Is that a common interperation of minhag hamaqom -- that there be :> a common practice in all things? I understood minhag hamaqom to :> be designated practive by practice. : Otherwise the concept of Minhag Ha Makom is meaningless.... Again, why? It is meaningful to say, "here, the minhag hamaqom is to say "umoried hageshem", not "gashem", without making reference to anything else the qeillah might do. Why do we need a context of a qehillah that has many such rules rather than a few? And how many? : Many people wear tefillin on chol hamoed in Eretz : Yisroel, including some gedolim. However, some do : it betzinoh so it is not so well known. You misspelled, "a tiny percentage". : One such godol is the Erlauer Rebbe. You can go : in his beis medrash and see him with tefillin. He : keeps the minhogim of his zeide, the Chasam : Sofer, to wear tefillin on chol hamoed and daven nusach Ashkenaz. One may argue that the Erlau community has their own minhag, and their beis medrash it's own minhag hamaqom. But that raises questions of how one defines "maqom" that I don't know how to answer. .... : Bekitzur, Al titosh toras imecho, keep on : following your minhog and Al yisbayeish., as the : Rama says in beginning of Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim. Minhag avos is inferior to minhag hamaqom. In fact, we have had a hard time finding its basis. The best I can come up with is that minhag avos means that in the absence of a minhag hamaqom in your current location, you should follow the minhag hamaqom of your prior location even if that means the location of your avos. :> For other things? Give it time. How long did it take Jews from Provence, :> Italy and elsewhere to congeal into a single minhag Ashkenaz? : On the contrary, I doubt that the Chassidim will : ever eat Gebrokts on Pesach, the Sephardim will : stop eating kitnyos, and the non-Chassidic world : will stop eating Gebrokts on Pesach. And yet nowadays Sepharadim make an Ashkenazi qutzo shel yud, to be yotzei lekhos hadei'os. Yekkes and Litvaks eat glatt out of necessity (go find reliable non-glatt), but how many would eat that piece of non-glatt if they found a reliable hekhsher for it? Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. The choilam is far broader in the US than its ancestry; and in other communities, tav-lessness caught on. How many non-Morrocans in Israel celebrate Mimouna nowadays? It seems from the media, this minhag is spreading. (I think it would be a beautiful thing for "misht-night" communities to adopt. After a week of not being guests, make a point of sharing food and showing it had nothing to do with a lack of friendship.) I see lines coalescing. These things take centuries, and accelerate as people who remember pre-migration life pass away. We just begun. I think it is less that a Minhag America can't emerge than the mashiach won't give it the time necesssary to emerge. And Minhag EY may go back to being by sheivet and nachalah, but in any case its evolution will be radically changed by the rapid influx of the rest of Kelal Yisrael. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:03:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:03:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:37:30PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as : a trivia question for now). There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one were considered propitious for a large crop. (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:12:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:12:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101226.GC31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 07:50:13AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat before Biur : Chametz? What makes this mitzva different from so many other mitzvos, where : we cannot eat until doing rhe required act? When the issur de'oraisa begins is a machloqes tannaim (RH 28a-b): Rabbi Yehudah holds starting from chatzos, R Meir - from sheqi'ah. (Does the issur start from when the non-qorban could be shechted, or when it could be eaten?) The Rambam in Chameitz uMatzah 1:8 pasqens chatzos, as do we when we make the zeman 1 hour before chatzos (rather than 1 hour before sheqi'ah). MiDerabbanan, it's pushed earlier, and that's the safety margin. But I don't think that's enough to make it a morning mitzvah that it must be done first thing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:19:33 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:19:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 02:15:47PM +1000, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: : Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they : essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and : pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are : quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a : "hot dog roll". It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. Like not declaring quinoa to be qitniyos. And unlike declating peanuts to be. (Which some of Eastern Europe did, and as RMF attests, some didn't.) For that matter, is there anyone whose ancestors had the minhag of qitniyos but didn't include corn when it was brought over from the New World? Since minhag is by definition informal and mimetic, what happens to catch on or not doesn't trouble me. Boils down to a qasheh oif a masseh. (You can't ask a "question on a story"; how it happened is how it happened, unreasonalbe or not.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From isaac at balb.in Tue Apr 10 03:24:59 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:24:59 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> On Apr 10, 2018 at 8:19 pm, wrote: > It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, > even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. > There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels > would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of another term. From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 02:59:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:59:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] PESACH -- AFTER 400 YEARS GD'S IN A HURRY TO REDEEM US? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410095948.GA31049@aishdas.org> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:28:48PM +1100, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: : We begin the Seder with Matza being a reminder of our suffering -- but we : conclude it with a new perspective -- Matza reminds us of how quickly Gd : took us out of Egypt. Actually, that's the end of Maggid, not the end of the seder. Later than that in the seder, Hillel reminds us of a third aspect of matzah -- al matzos umorerim yokhluhu. Not that of slavery, nor of leaving, but of the midnight in between, and every Pesach thereafter. There is a fourth aspect: Lechom oni -- she'onim alav devarim harbei. Rashi takes this idea so seriously that he holds you're not yotzei the mitzvah with matzah eaten before Maggid. Matzah that didn't have the haggadah is not lechem oni. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:51:53 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:51:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> References: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> Message-ID: <20180410105153.GB23901@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:24:59PM +1000, Isaac Balbin wrote: : It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the : Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of : another term. The only thing we know for sure is that it included some subset of grain-like foods and of legumes. Any reason as to why is a post-facto theory. Multiple exist. In principle, pasqaning one such shitah is right, and therefore the rabbanim who made a din must have intended to include the new case is possible. But not compelled. We often leave a gezeira off where it originally ended because it's not for us to ban more things than Chazal did. All the more so in a case like qitniyos, when it's not a rabbinic issur but a minhag. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 05:14:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 08:14:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10.4C.08474.AFAACCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:05 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies >curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not >higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance >is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study >http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p >which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: >"All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, >when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are >largely Orthoprax." I am not claiming that the study of secular subjects is any sort of guarantee that one will remain religious. The reasons for someone to give up observance or to water down their observance are complex. However, for many reasons it is important to have a basic secular education. One of them is to open up some opportunities to earn a living. And let me be clear, I am not talking about a "Harvard" secular education. But I see no reason why someone born in the US should not be able to speak, read and write English. I have an Op Ed piece that will appear in this week's Jewish Press on the topic of secular subjects in chassidic yeshivas. In part it reads Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. Parents do not have a blanket right to determine the education of their children. Would you say that a parent has a right to send his child to a school that preaches Antisemitism and prejudice? Also, based on my experience as an educator for over 50 years, I have to say that parents do not always know what is best for their children educationally. Choosing to enroll one's sons in a school that does not give a basic secular education is a very poor choice. Also, having a school that does not give a basic secular education is against the law as is clear from my recent Jewish Press article. Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma let alone a Regents diploma? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Tue Apr 10 04:29:37 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:29:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: It's not only the lack of secular education (that R' Yitschok Levine refers to) or knowledge to interact with the secular world (that R. Hirsch z"l is reported to have referred to) that is the problem; it's the abysmal standard of the education they do receive, the overall intellectual integrity, and their attitude to anything scientific. Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. As far as i recall, the Munkatche Rebbe [frequently?] visited the Natural History Museum when he could. There is such a terrific gap in some of our children's education that it's hard to believe it's not going to be detrimental in some way to their development. [I know I'm spouting to the 'converted', but thanks for the opportunity to at least voice my concerns somewhere.] Dovid Rubin From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 06:07:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:07:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. I will just deal with one of the things you raised. If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against the crowd, this practice would end. YL The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of Volumes I-IV. The German custom to bring a young boy to the synagogue with a wirnpel (wrapping for t he Torah scroll) has no connection whatsoever to the practice of the chalaka (the Arabic term for Upsherin) observed by Sepharadirn and later ad opted by many Chasidirn. Th e custom of holding a special celebration marking the boy's first haircut developed among these groups. The celebration takes place at a specific age, usually three. Th e festivity is customarily held near the gravesite of a tzadik or in a synagogue. T his custom was unknown in ancient Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities. The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are found in accounts written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim. Some three centuries later, we find the first indications that the custom had made its way into Chasidic circles. The most important source concerning the chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. The details of this story are somewhat vague, and it is unclear whether the Ari-zal made a chalaka for his son, or whether the account refers to his disciple, Rabbi Yonatan Sagish. There is also some question as to whether the Ari-zal participated in Lag Ba 'omer events in Meron after his kabalistic insights because the custom to conduct a chalaka on Lag Ba 'omer runs in opposition to the Ari-zal' s final ruling that forbade hair cutting during the orner period. Furthermore, the custom of the chalaka has given rise to some questions as to the propriety of hair cutting at a gravesite or synagogue, which might constitute an infringement upon the sanctity of the site. Some have also questioned the permissibility of haircutting on Lag Ba omer, during bein ha-rnetzarirn (the three weeks before Tisha B' A v) or during Chol Ha 'rno 'ed. Yet another concern was the immodest behavior that occasionally accompanied this event. :Most Sephardic and Chasidic rabbis applauded, or at least defended the practices observed in their circles, though there were those who forbade The custom in this manner. Rabbi Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik of Brisk (1889-1960) disapproved of bringing children to rabbis on their third birthday for the chalaka, claiming that this practice "has no reason or basis." He noted that there are sources indicating that one should introduce the child to matters of Torah at the age of three, but none that involve haircutting. Rabbi Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky [the "Steipler Ga'on," (1899-1985)] also opposed this practice, and would send away parents who brought their children to him for the chalaka haircut. The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. Some, however, dismissed this argument, claiming that to the contrary, the chalaka perhaps began as an ancient Jewish practice which was later adopted by the gentiles. There are some older customs, originating in the times of Chazal and the Ge'onim, such as fasting on Erev Rosh Hashana and the ceremony of Kapaprot on Erev Yom Kippur which were opposed by some rabbis since they feared that their origins could be found in pagan rites. In any event, although some communities accepted this custom, Ashkenazi communities \yere never aware of such a practice. They did not receive this tradition from their forebears, and they found no mention of it in the writings of the Rishonim. The ancient tradition among Ashkenazi communities was to cut a boy's hair at a very young age. In fact, during the times of Chazal, parents would cut an infant's hair not long after birth, and they even permitted cutting a baby's overgrown hair on Chol Ha 'mo' ed. In the times of the Rishonim, too, boys' hair in Ashkenaz was cut already within the first several months after birth. The phenomenon of children with overgrown hair simply did not exist in Germany, and a boy with overgrown hair would have been mistaken for a girl. The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no special affair was held to celebrate the event. .. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:21:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:21:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 09:07:38AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for : >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. : : I will just deal with one of the things you raised. I only raised one thing. You are discussing an example, and not the point. : If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go : against the crowd, this practice would end. Which has nothing to do with the general principle of whether the resettlement of Jewry post-war should or shouldn't evolve into new minhagei hamaqom, nor the topic I raised -- the claim they actually are. Nor the reason why I raised the topic: the idea that minhag avos is only a stop-gap, a way to manage when in a maqom that has no minhag. Nor the reason for my post: Your claim that minhag hamaqom only has meaning if the maqom has loits of minhagim. That it can't be applied one-off to whatever practice is under discussion. And if you are correct, what's the threshold of minhagim that unify a community sufficiently to qualify. Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line accordingly. : The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: : Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of : Volumes I-IV. WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. : The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are : found in accounts : written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... It has to be earlier. Originally, chalaqah was held at the qever of Shemuel haNav on the 43rd of the omer, his yahrzeit. See teshuvos haRadvaz 2:608. (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get associated with a haircut at age 3. The move to Meron and Lag baOmer happened when the Ottomans restricted access to the qever in the 1500s. But that has little to do with upsherin in general, eg on a birthday.) The Radvaz, R' David b Shelomo ibn Zimra, was among the gerushei Sefarad, who ended up in Tzefas in 1513 and eventually end up in Egypt where he was RY (he taught the Shitah Mequbetzes, R' Betzalel Ashkenazi) and ABD. So, upsherin was already a practice old enough to get recorded as minhag by someone who lived through the transition from rishonim to achronim. : The most important source concerning the : chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. What makes this "post important source" if the practice predated the Ari by generations? Raising questions about a tradition that the Ari practiced it is a distraction if he isn't the basis of the minhag. AND, the problems with the story isaren't around upsherin, but around making a celebration the night of Lag baOmer, again nothing to do with making one on the child's 3rd birthday. (Unless it too is in the wrong part of the omer or during the 3 weeks. Issues we already navigate for bar mitzvah parties that aren't on Shabbos.) .... : The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice : stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka : transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's : hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in : ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation : of pagan ritual... All I know is that people invoke a similar Hindu practice. And while Hindus may wait to age 3 before making a celebratory first haircut, waiting until 5 or 7 are more common, and not making any ceremony at all is most common. (Although a girls' only haircut being at 11 months is most common.) Observant Sikh men never get a haircut. In Mongolia, between 2-5, girls get their first haricut when they are 3 or 5, boys when they are 2 or 4. No match. China - 1 month. (They wait until after the bulk of infant mortality; lehavdil but yet similar to our considering a child who dies in their first month a neifel.) Poles: a pre-Xian tradition that survived into the 1700s was 7-10. Ukraininans, 1st birthday. Polenesians, teens. Yazidi, originally 40 days, now, 7-11 mo. Interestingly, Moslem boys get their first haircut at 1 week old -- in other words, on the 8th day. In short -- no culture that wikipedia or google found for me has a special haircut for 3 yr old boys ceremony. And yet, I turned up much else. We've seen similar attacks on shlissel challah ('tis the week for that perrennial) based on a difficult to assert connection to key-with-cross breads in Xian communities that were nowhere near the areas where shlissel challah originated -- in either time or space. And yet, the same people continue dressing up their children in Purim costumes, despite the similarity to Carnivale -- and both being local to Italy in origin. Or milchigs on Shevu'os starting in the same region that already had Wittesmontag on the Monday before the Xian Pentacost. For that matter, both of those customs are first originated LATER than chalakah! ... : The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or : other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic : communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern : Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. : Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no : special affair was held to celebrate the event. Is using the haricut to tell the boy "You're not a baby now, time to start chinukh in earnest with alef-beis" really so terrible? Nothing will make that point as deeply as weeks of build up, followed by changing the look in the mirror. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From sholom at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:09:18 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:09:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> References: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <22b69f274e57a0d24c6dcbc45c456a93@aishdas.org> > : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? > : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as > : a trivia question for now). > > There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one > were considered propitious for a large crop. > > (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) REMT wrote me off line and noted: "I don't know its source, but I first heard it when I was a young child." He also answered my trivial question, writing: "In a leap year, the parsha read eight times will always be Acharei Mos. I know of no one commenting on its significance." It just occurs to me that the main event in parshas Acharei Mos occurred on the same day as the events in parshas Shemini. Kol tuv! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 09:30:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:30:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 11:21 AM 4/10/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line >accordingly. > >: The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: >: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of >: Volumes I-IV. > >WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. It was not RSRH who wrote this, but Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger who has spent much time investigating minhagim. >: The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are >: found in accounts >: written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... > >It has to be earlier. Again you are questioning Rabbi Hamburger. I suggest you contact him about this and the rest of your post. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:31:21 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:31:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 09:07, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >> Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >> children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. > > I will just deal with one of the things you raised. > > If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against > the crowd,? this practice would end. YL That is simply not true. The Baal Shem Tov and his talmidim practised it, and that is more than enough for most people. That not everyone did it is irrelevant; very few practices had unanimous support. The BeShT was far greater than the sources you cite, and many more people follow him today than follow those people, so they would have no reason to change. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:35:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:35:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, > and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get > associated with a haircut at age 3. Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From seinfeld at jsli.org Tue Apr 10 10:08:53 2018 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:08:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Playing devil?s advocate here. For the record, I have college and graduate degrees, my children all read and write well etc. However, in response to Prof. Levine. If the cost of that exposure to American secular culture (language, history, values, etc.) is that a certain percentage of children may be enticed by it and go OTD - more than would have otherwise - then, yes, it makes sense. That?s an unacceptable cost. I?m not saying that that is a real cost, but that is the perception. If you want to change the practice, you have to change that perception (which may have some truth to it, I don?t know). >Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America >cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade >science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he >has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the >history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what >happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the >mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic >knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the >digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of >HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has >no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. > From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 10:29:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180410172934.GA1877@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:35:39AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : >(This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, : >and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get : >associated with a haircut at age 3. : Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. As per the same discussion in previous years.... That's what the rishonim run with -- see Rashi and Radaq on the pasuq. Although Rashi says 22 mo in our girsa, I think the other girsa of 24 mo is more likely, because... As the Radaq points out, this fits halakhah, that the time a woman is mish'ubedes to nurse is 24 months. But while elegent, it is not mukhrach that Chanah kept to the minimum. (Thinking out loud: The exchange in 1:22-23 fits better if it was about Chanah not attending an aliyah laregel that was after Shem'el was 2. After all, why would Elqanah have pushed her to bring ShMemu'el to the mishkan before it was safe?) More to the point (and back to repeating myself), there is a machloqes in the medrash whether Shemu'el lived 52 or 53 years. And since that's 50 years after he was weaned and brought to the Mishkan, it implies a machloqes about when he moved into the Mishkan. The minhag was apparently based on the position that he was niftar at 52, and thus moved into the Mishkan at 3. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:06:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:06:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? Message-ID: One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has no inherent "Jewish" quality.) However, there are opinions that say that the Jews spoke Egyptian while in Egypt. I have posted some selections from the Sefer Lashon HaKodesh, History, Holiness, & Hebrew by Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/jews_egypt_hebrew.pdf While it is true that according to one Medrash the Jews did speak Hebrew while in Egypt, there is another Medrash that contradicts this. >From the above reference: GOD SPEAKS TO THE JEWS IN EGYPTIAN While the above sources point to the notion that the Jews in Egypt did not speak Egyptian, there is another Midrash that implies otherwise. This Midrash likens the Jews in Egypt to a prince who was kidnapped for an extended period of time. Finally, his father the king decided to exact his revenge on the kidnappers and release his son. Upon saving his son, the king conversed with the child in the language spoken to him by the kidnappers. Similarly, explains the Midrash, after God redeemed the Jews from exile in Egypt, He spoke to them in Egyptian.221 The Midrash explains that the Jews had been in Egypt for many years, where they had learned the Egyptian language.222 Therefore, when God wanted to give them the Torah, He began to speak with them in the Egyptian language with which they were already familiar. He began by proclaiming, "I (anochi, ) am Hashem, your God ... !"223 According to this Midrash, the word "anochi" in this context does not denote the Hebrew word for "I"; rather, it refers to the Egyptian224 word anoch (11:ix), which means "love" and "endearment."225 One Midrashic source even explains that the Jews forgot Lashon HaKodesh, which is why God had to speak to them in Egyptian. >From page 99 THEY SPOKE LASHON HAKODESH, BUT TOOK ORDERS IN EGYPTIAN Similarly, we can posit that even when exiled to Egypt, the Jews indeed continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, they were not accustomed to accepting orders in Lashon HaKodesh; their Egyptian taskmasters spoke to them only in Egyptian. Therefore, at Mount Sinai, when God was giving the Jews the Decalogue, He spoke to them in Egyptian, the language in which they were accustomed to "taking orders." THEY MAINTAINED THE ESSENCE OF LASHON HAKODESH, IF NOT THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE Even if we assume that the Jews completely forgot Lashon HaKodesh, we can still reconcile the contradiction based on a previously mentioned concept set forth by Rambam. Rambam, as we already mentioned, writes that Lashon HaKodesh is called so because it lacks the explicitness found in other languages, making it a chaste and holy language. Therefore, one can explain that although the Jews in Egypt spoke the Egyptian language, they did not deviate from the moral standards manifested by Lashon HaKodesh. God had to speak to them in Egyptian since that was the only language with which they were familiar. However, they did not change their manner of speaking; that is, they internalized the refined and moral linguistic style of Lashon HaKodesh, which they maintained even when speaking Egyptian. And from the Chapter Summary After discussing Joseph's personal exile to Egypt, we segued into discussing the Jews' collective exile to Egypt. A well-known Midrash states that the Jews in Egypt did not change their language, meaning that they continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, another Midrash states that God began presenting the Torah to them in Egyptian, because that was the language that they spoke in Egypt. While these two Midrashim seem at odds with each other, we presented several approaches to reconcile them and give a more concrete answer as to whether the Jews in Egypt spoke Lashon HaKodesh or Egyptian: ? Radak explains that there were some Jews who were not enslaved, and they spoke Lashon HaKodesh exclusively. Their not-so-fortunate brethren spoke Lashon HaKodesh between themselves, and Egyptian with their Egyptian overlords. ? Alternatively, it is possible that all the Jews spoke Lashon HaKodesh, yet God presented them the Torah in Egyptian because they were acclimated to accepting orders in that language. ? A third possibility is that since the hallmark of Lashon HaKodesh is its embodiment of holiness and purity, even if the Jews forgot the literal language, they could still be said to speak Lashon HaKodesh- The Holy Language-if their manner of speech remained holy. After the Jews exited Egypt and eventually arrived in the Land of Israel, establishing their own rule, it is clear that Lashon HaKodesh alone served as their spoken language. This arrangement lasted for several centuries until the language began receding under Babylonian influence, toward the end of the First Temple period. Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may not be true. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:22:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:22:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Legendary Chassidic Rebbe Admits: The Noda BiYehudah Was Correct In His Opposition to Lisheim Yichud Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/QEUCPq However, what is less well known, is that the Divrei Chaim, despite being a great Chasidic leader, actually said that the Noda BiYehuda was correct in the matter, and, based on that, his followers do not say lisheim yichud before sefira. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:39:28 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:39:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:06 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews > from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. > Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their > children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far > as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has > no inherent "Jewish" quality.) > > > ... > Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may > not be true. > > YL > > > May not be true is the operative word, there is no disputing that there is an opinion in Chazal that it is true and that the Jews spoke only Hebrew in Egypt. This is the opinion that the Chasidim follow and therefore they are against speaking English. I don't see how you can find fault with them when they are following a valid opinion in Chazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:10:49 2018 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Yehuda Gluck) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 04:10:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Wed Apr 11 02:59:49 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: R? Moshe Yehudah, Thank you for taking notice of my post! ?Only a narrow band of Torah studies are benefited by a narrow band of secular studies? - I agree with you - but only in part. 1. If I may add the word ?directly? to your statement (- ?only a narrow band of Torah studies are *directly* benefited?), as, arguably, the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education [though admittedly, this was not the thrust of my original statement]. 2. Re the case in point, Chullin and biology. Though, in general, the biology syllabus does not necessarily help in learning Chulin, biology could be taught in a manner that would: i.e. a teacher familiar with the various sugyos, could give a thorough grounding in anatomy, etc. This would be better than relying on Temunei Chol [or similar compilations], which (might) stifle critical thinking. Furthermore, an appreciable amount of Torah literature is based upon a medieval understanding of chemistry and anatomy. A fuller understanding of those thinking processes, coupled with a comparative study of [human] biology and the basics of modern chemistry, could conceivably open the door to a much fuller Torah experience. Indeed, a syllabus could conceivably be drawn up that would both benefit the Ben Torah and satisfy the requirements of an Examinatory Board. 3. Re maths; again, you are right, so far as a basic understanding of the sugyos are concerned. But to appreciate maths as a backbone of the world?s structure and thus marvel at the???? ????? , to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory to deeper areas of the Torah [which surely some of them will want to learn], requires a fundamental grounding in the subject. Dovid Rubin Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ________________________________ From: Moshe Yehuda Gluck Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 9:10:49 AM To: 'The Avodah Torah Discussion Group' Cc: 'D Rubin' Subject: RE: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:23:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:23:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Lets take a step back for a second. There has been a machlokes for thousands of years (see the Gemara in Berachos 35) whether the ideal is torah only or for lack of a better phrase torah im derech eretz. There is no disputing that in the last 200 years the overwhelming majority of Gedolim have been in the Torah only camp and in the 20th century the Torah im derech eretz is pretty much RYBS and the followers of R' Hirsch. I can provide an almost endless list of Gedolim who had zero secular education and knew kol hatorah kula while on the other hand the list of Gedolim who had a secular education is much much much smaller. Your position regarding secular studies while certainly a valid one is unquestionably the minority opinion and therefore it is ridiculous for you to simply dismiss the other opinion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 03:23:23 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 10:23:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <79615f4629784da49fb5941943399ebd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. ----------------------------- Bingo-and probably true on a micro level but not, I fear, on a macro level. I used to tell my boys that 80% (not based on a study but the handy 80/20) rule)of what they learned would not be used later, the problem is you don't know which 20% will be. Look here for the background of the inventor of the m-16 and you'll see what he brought together https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Stoner Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 04:40:52 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 07:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote, and I quote his closing last paragraph in full: > Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them > to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend > a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma > let alone a Regents diploma? The first and second sentences don't have any logical connection that I can see. There are plenty of boys who attended a Hassidic yeshiva, who now earn enough to support a family. Diplomas are not guarantees, and I'm don't know how much they help. They certainly don't help as much as drive and persistence and elbow grease. My boss, for example, asks me for help occasionally with English spelling and grammar, but that doesn't seem to have hampered his ability to own his business at half my age. (His mathematics abilities are a good example. He understands enough of the concepts that he can figure out anything on his calculator without my help. But he avoids doing even simple arithmetic in his head. And because he refuses to do the arithmetic in his head, I make more mistakes than he does.) Akiva Miller From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 11 06:22:58 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:22:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <1F.0A.18065.33C0ECA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:10 AM 4/11/2018, Moshe Yehuda Gluck wrote: >I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that >a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. >What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion >sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some >secular knowledge in order to understand them. Please read RSRH's essay The Relevance of Secular Studies to Jewish Education (Collected Writings VII) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 06:50:01 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:50:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption Message-ID: Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:20:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:20:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org> I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:45:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:45:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:50:01PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may : be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? All I have is the reverse. R' Gedalia Felder (Yesodei Yeshurun 2 pp 188-191) holds that an adopted child can be called up "ben Micha Shemuel", but that this shouldn't be done when the adopting father or the son is a kohein. In order to avoid confusion about the child's kehunah. (Or that of a future descendent, when people vaguely remember his name years later). I assume leviim too, but that's not in my notes. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 12:08:20 2018 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:08:20 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> References: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Tangentially, there is a convention to write the name of a chalal in official documents as Ploni ben Ploni Vehu Kohein, to signify the difference in status between father and son. I'm not sure that this would be recommended (or desirable) in the case of an adopted child. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 11 23:46:36 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 01:46:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: I suspect that some will feel that my position on the issue "secular" studies comes from the left of center. First off, we need to delineate what we mean by "secular" studies. This word as we use it today is far different from the science the GRA or the many achronim, rishonim and of course Chazal learned in the sense of math, astronomy and biology. Today that word would also include many areas such as social studies, psychology, philosophy, evolutionary biology, cosmology, comparative religion, black studies, sexual awareness, cultural studies etc, etc, that could lead a young untrained mind into problematic areas that could raise many question they are not prepared to deal with. The scientific study required by the various sugios in shas and halacha really require a minimal study of some elementary math such as some trig and geometry, some values such as that of Pi, square root of 2 etc and Pythagoras theorem, astronomy (mainly lunar orbit, seasonal and diurnal calculation), anatomy and some other limited areas of biology plus a handful of other concepts. By this logic much of what we call science today would be excluded from being necessary for learning Torah. Mi'sevoras libi, I would say that the study of much of what we think of in modern parlance of the many new fields of mathematics and the physical sciences such as the many branches of modern physics both classical and relativistic and quantum mechanics, the many branches of chemistry, biology and medicine and of course modern astronomy including much more than just solar system dynamics (mainly lunar & seasonal) and positions of a handful of stars are mandated for a very simple reason -- an understanding (the deeper the better) in these fields makes one truly understand that the world is so highly complex and functions so beautifully that this it can not be a random happening and that there must be a borei olam. A havana into the very ultra small as we find through quantum mechanics and particle physics, or into the wonders of the atom and chemistry and how things combine, or into the wonders of dynamics, optics, elec & magnetism, or the modern fields of solar and stellar astronomy and spectrographic analysis and through the beauty and understanding exposed through the many modern branches of modern math including advanced algebraic theory, statistical analysis, advanced calculus and vector and tensor analysis and the many other fields to numerous to mention here that are so useful throughout all of modern science.. These literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam. The understanding of biology from its lowest levels of its physics and chemistry to the molecular with the tremendous complexities at its molecular and cellular levels and onto its study at the organic and systemic levels, through developmental biology of the miraculous changes from conception through the fetus to birth, infancy and childhood to the adult and ultimately death. Many of these may not help much with the simple peshat of any particular sugio in shas, but they surely create emuna and tremendous yiras haromeimus. No one who has even the smallest inkling of any of this knowledge could believe that existence as we now can begin to perceive it is a bunch of random events. Just the mind boggling complexity of the functioning of a single cell is awe inspiring. With so many thousands of things happening in each cell with perfect timing, with everything just in the right place at the right time in each of the billions of cells in our bodies. Worst of all, leaving a young mind unexposed to many of these areas and without proper training in them leaves him vulnerable to the many questions he will eventually encounter as he goes through modern life. He will not be prepared to deal with evolution, cosmology, philpsophy etc that he will surely encounter no matter how well shielded he may be. In addition to the above, in our modern society some of the above may be needed merely to functional and earn a living in todays highly technical society and he will be severely limited in the types of parnasa available to him. I am sure that many will differ substantially from my position above. Please excuse my rambling and repetition at times and run on sentences in the above. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 12 10:20:51 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 17:20:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not utter the phrase with the congregation? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Apr 12 12:42:50 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:42:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "There is no way that a "Rabbinical committee (namely the Rabbanim/Poskim/Rebbeim of the respective chassidishe Yeshivos whom Simcha Felder is representing) decided that systematic secular education is forbidden by Orthodox Jewish law. The reason is that the Torah requires one to study secular subjects. I have posted part of an article by Dr. Yehudah Levi from his book Torah Study. " Of course there is. Dr. Yehuda Levi is coming from a Torah Im Derech Eretz point of view however, Chasidim and most Charedim have a different viewpoint, namely Torah only. You seem to be a classic case of someone living in an echo chamber. The only opinion/derech that you recognize as legitimate is Torah Im Derech Eretz. As I stated many times, Torah Im Derech Eretz is a small minority, the overwhelming majority of gedolim rejected it. So much so that Gedolim like R' Baruch Ber could not believe that R' Hirsch thought that it was lechatchila. R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch wrote a teshuva (end of Bircas Shmuel Kiddushin) where he explicitly forbid a secular curriculum: ?What emerges is (a) that according to the Torah the obligation of Banim Ubeni Banim means you must make your children into Geonei and Chachmei Torah ? and not merely to prepare them for life as a Jew. But rather, you must teach them and get them to learn the entire Torah, and if chas v?sholom you do not, you violate the entire Mitzvah of learning Torah as per Banim Ubnei Banim. ... (c) To learn secular studies on a regular basis is prohibited as per the Rama 246:4 ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 12 12:34:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:34:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu In-Reply-To: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180412193406.GA7972@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:20:51PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to : bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "barchu : hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in : order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait : and not utter the phrase with the congregation? See the Agur, Hil' Berakhos 98, which can be found at . The Maharam miRothenburg held the sha"tz needn't say it at all. R' Yehudah al-Barceloni says he should say. The Agur adds: and we are noheig to say it. The next source, the Avudraham (or to be accurate: Abu-Dirham), says that the sha"tz says it to be among the community of mevorkhim. He cites the Y-mi (Berakhos 7:3). And he adds that R' Yehudah b"r Barzili Barceloni (I assume the same source as the Seifer haAgur) writes in the name of R' Saadia that even though the sha"tz said "haMvorakh", and therefore didn't remove himself from the klal, he needs to return himself to the klal "legamrei" and day "Barukh H' Hamvorkh". Like in bentching, where the leader says "nevareikh" and yet repeats the responses of the rest of the zimun. No answer there. However, note that the assumption is that Borkhu doesn't need the sha"tz or the oleh to repeat it. The sha"tz needs to repeat it for his own sake, so as not to exclude himself from the kelal of mevorkhim. (Except according to the MmR, who doesn't believe the sha"tz has such a need.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 12th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Gevurah: What aspect of judgment Fax: (270) 514-1507 forces the "judge" into submission? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 01:31:53 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:31:53 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am surprised that you even bothered to quote him." And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his teshuva. There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 02:10:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 05:10:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: >"In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz >wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am >surprised that you even bothered to quote him." > >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with >his teshuva. If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in EY are pursuing higher secular education. >There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' >Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and >Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through >this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not >with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to >learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a >book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the >Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of >issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even >happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas >and poskim. Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat and Yom Tov (holy days) - and furthermore, it is better to occupy oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). >And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but >Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after >them." as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as >the Mishna Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of >people are capable of studying Torah all day. Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? The following is taken from Rav Schwab on Chumash, Parshas Acharei Mos. "At all times the Torah's unchanging teachings must be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, attitudes, relationships to man and beast, and positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and evaluation of the Torah. "What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the 'ways of the Earth.' The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world that surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities that confront him. "What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more crucial it is that this wisdom be conveyed to the Jewish contemporary world. It must be transmitted in a language that our generation understands and that will attract the searching youth, the ignorant, the estranged and the potential ba 1al teshuvah to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah leader must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. "There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose life task is to enlighten and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those 'messengers of G-d' the highest respect and a loyal following. These are the kohanim and levi'im of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. "Yet education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore it becomes mandatory for the present day 'Tribe of Levi' to initiate and encourage an educational system that can serve the other "eleven tribes who comprise the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meets its challenges, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head-on the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. "The Divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Sun Apr 15 05:53:59 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:53:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Micha Berger) In-Reply-To: References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com>, <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org>, Message-ID: This reply was sent earlier to R' Michah and is still valid: I agree. With respect, I did allude to ?learning skills and a mode of thinking? in both of my previous posts: ?the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education?, ? to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory?, and my reference to ?the [lack of] overall intellectual integrity?. Related to this: Is it incorrect to posit that a lot of ma?amorei Chazal was formulated in accordance to their understanding and cultural absorption of sciences of their day? Can we not further Torah with our understanding of modern science, both peripheral and integral ? even though clearly lacking their sya?ato dishmayo and Ru?ach HaKodesh? Is that not the derech taught both by the Ba?al Shem and his disciples, and the GRA and his school [to use the chochmoh of the world..]? Another q: Do we view Torah SheBa?al Peh on a par with Torah SheBiKsav, in the sense that it must be learnt ?as is?, without consideration of the worldview that shaped those comments? [I rather think we can see two views in the Rishoinim.] Dovid Rubin ________________________________ From: Micha Berger Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 5:20:06 PM To: Moshe Yehuda Gluck via Avodah Cc: Moshe Yehuda Gluck; 'D Rubin' Subject: Re: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:39:19 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:39:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:45:43 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:45:43 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 3:01 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a > regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance > secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > > > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > > The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he > already knew shas and poskim.? > > > Can you verify this assertion? > Not really but given that the Gra was a super genius and the stories that abound about how much he knew as a child it is certainly plausible to believe so. The fact is that no one really knows how old the Gra was when he learned these things so your assertion that he learned mathematics as a youth is unprovable as well. > > > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > > Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in > 1518? > > > Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there > would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. > > > And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple according to the Rama, the study of Torah is what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get us into the world to come and the study of secular studies will not. That fact remains the same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 03:39:38 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:39:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >> And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his >> teshuva. > If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who > attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend > the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in > Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today > offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. Touro College was established against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim see http://haemtza.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/yosefs-folly.html for example for details. > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in > EY are pursuing higher secular education. Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a pig with a streimel (see http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html ). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: " *Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the other nations, she didn't want to burn them, rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need any outside wisdom and therefore she was priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the world with his wisdom which was solely torah based. * *We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt."* >> There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch >> Ber. The Rama writes: >> "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >> and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will >> acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other >> wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all >> other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called >> by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the >> Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he >> knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >> regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance >> secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles > Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also > learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He > taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning > of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is > permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this > excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible > and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh > De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his > decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy > only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat > and Yom Tov (holy days) -- and furthermore, it is better to occupy > oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). Not sure what you point is here, the Rama is quoted exactly as I wrote, you cal leanr secular studies only now and then and only after you know shas and poskim. > And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but > Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them." > as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as the Mishna > Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of people are > capable of studying Torah all day. > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in 1518? From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 05:01:14 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:01:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:39 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. >R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a >pig with a streimel (see? >http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html >). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak >Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: > >" Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn >them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the >other nations, she didn't want to burn them, >rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need >any outside wisdom and therefore she was >priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the >world with his wisdom which was solely torah based.? > >We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish >home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish >wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt." Too bad this statement does not differentiate between un-Jewish and non-Jewish. as RSRH did. I agree that we do not want un-Jewish influences in the Orthodox world. However, there is no problem with non-Jewish influences. I wonder if they are against the use of, for example, modern medicine or electricity or running water, and countless other things that are "non-Jewish wisdom and come into Chareidi homes. >>There is no question that the simple reading of >>the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: >> >>"But it is not for a person to learn anything >>but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >>decisors that come after them and through this >>they will acquire this world and the world to >>come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >>In any case, it is permitted to learn through >>happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >>isn't a book of heresy.? This is what called >>by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person >>should not take a trip in the Pardes until he >>has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] >>and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> >>The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >>cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >>only that, but he writes that even happenstance >>secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > >Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > >The Gra was sui generis, when he studied >mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim.? Can you verify this assertion? >>And how many people are capable of capable of >>learning "anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >>and the halachic decisors that come after >>them."? ? as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah >>in Koheles as well as the Mishna Brurah make it >>clear that only a very small percentage of >>people are capable of studying Torah all day. > >Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > >Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah >less in 2018 then it was in 1518? Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 09:44:37 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:44:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:45 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not >for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna >and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come >after them and through this they will acquire >this world and the world to come. But not with >learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple >according to the Rama, the study of Torah is >what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get >us into the world to come and the study of >secular studies will not. That fact remains the >same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person >should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. The facts do not remain the same in 2018 as in 1518. The day school movement in the US as well as all of the Orthodox schools throughout the world where secular studies are routinely taught from kindergarten on show that things have changed. Please spend the time to read "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 ? 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 The Jewish Press, July 6, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916)" "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1786-1879)" "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1654 ? 1785) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 08:07:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:07:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi >world agrees with his teshuva. > >There is no question that the simple reading of >the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything >but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >decisors that come after them and through this >they will acquire this world and the world to >come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >In any case, it is permitted to learn through >happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by >the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should >not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and >he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >only that, but he writes that even happenstance >secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. I must admit that I do not understand your assertion against secular studies in conjunction with Torah studies even for boys at a young age.. The day school movement in the US was founded on the principle of a dual curriculum. The model was RJJ. Today in the US the vast majority of yeshivas follow this model save for some of the Chassidic yeshivas. Gedolim like Rav Yitzchok Hutner (Chaim Berlin), (Mr.) Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz (Torah Vodaath), Rav Avraham Kalmanovitz and Rav Shmuel Birenbaum (Mir), Rav Dr. Yosef Breuer and Rav Shimon Schwab (Yeshiva RSRH) , to name just a few, headed yeshivas in which boys were taught Torah and secular studies in elementary and high school grades. I am sure they were well aware of what the RAMA wrote and paskened that it did not apply today. Even in Europe in the 19th century there were some places where secular and Torah studies were taught along side each other. The Kelm Talmud Torah was one. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelm_Talmud_Torah "In addition to Jewish subjects, students studied general subjects such as geography, mathematics, and Russian language and literature for three hours a day. The Kelm Talmud Torah was the first traditional yeshiva in the Russian empire to give such a focus to general studies. " There was the L?mel-School in Jerusalem where both Torah and secular subjects were taught. So I really do not understand why you focus on the RAMA when it is clear that yeshiva education in many places, since the 19th century and throughout the 20th century involved a combination of Torah and secular studies. What are you arguing about? YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 11:16:15 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:16:15 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> On 4/15/2018 11:10 AM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, > in EY are pursuing higher secular education. I just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different story entirely). From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 10:14:25 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:14:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916) ... There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in have secular studies: 1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would have had no students 2. The law mandated secular studies Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a bdieved. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:22:23 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:22:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:14 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in >have secular studies: >1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send >their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would >have had no students >2. The law mandated secular studies When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young people. >Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but >as a bdieved. Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! YL From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:29:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:29:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <4C.65.18065.A7C83DA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:16 PM 4/15/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I Just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went >through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these >colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or >should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different >story entirely). And many of those who attend these institutions find their secular knowledge woefully inadequate and probably wish they had a stronger secular education when they were younger. Look at the first part of the video at https://goo.gl/WKrKyT and see what he says about his own yeshiva education. At about 2 minutes in he says he discovered that he didn't know anything when it came to being prepared to work. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 15 05:48:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:48:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria Message-ID: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> The leprosy mentioned here was special kind of leprosy which only the Jewish people suffered from only in Israel. It never occurred outside of Israel, even in a Jewish home. The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical but rather a spiritual disease. The Rabbis comment: b?sorah tovah hee l?Yisroel ? "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and mortar to act as if it were alive. It would be most unusual for a house to become sick just like a human being. Such an illness borders on the miraculous. Why does the Torah say that a house may be afflicted with leprosy? It means that a Jewish home is different from other homes; it has life and spirit attached to it. When the people who live in these homes are sinful, the very bricks of the home reflect that sinfulness. The Rabbis tell us that leprosy is a sign of evil and sin; therefore, it is natural that house would manifest leprosy as a sign of its inhabitants evil. Now we can understand why the rabbis say it is good news when a house is stricken with leprosy. If one can notice the disease before it spreads, he has a chance to cure it. When the disease goes unnoticed, the real trouble ensues. Since in today?s world we don?t have the warning of leprosy attached to our houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. The Bible will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible Dwight L Moody -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 11:02:08 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:02:08 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sunday, April 15, 2018, Prof. Levine wrote: > When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 > there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young > people. > Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a > bdieved. > Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 15 12:45:46 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 19:45:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. _______________________________________________ Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 13:08:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 16:08:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <13.9E.29097.691B3DA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:02 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >This is not something to be happy about. This is >more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu >torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very >difficult decision to violate the Halacha in >order to save the next generation. This was not >uncommon in America of that time. Young >Israel???s sponsored mixed dances for the same >reasons. However, now that the Torah community >is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. ? On the contrary, this is something that is appropriate for our time and the future. Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? See my article "Frum or Ehrliche?" The Jewish Press, October 20, 2006, page 1. This article is also available at "Frum or Ehrlich". Letters to Editor Also see "The Obligation to Support a Family" The Jewish Press, February 18, 2015, front page. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 15:35:12 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 18:35:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the > community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the > congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l?olam vaed" > and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included > with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not > utter the phrase with the congregation? Incidentally, the same situation and question applies by the Borchu prior to Birchos Krias Shema, as per S"A 57:1. I can't bring any source, but in my mind, the simple answer is that if the oleh would say it together with the congragation, he might not be heard. The delay is to insure that no one mistakenly thinks that the oleh is excluding himself. I was going to ask a related question about Kaddish that has bothered me for some time. Namely: When the Kaddish-sayer says "Yhei Shmei Raba" himself, why does Mishne Brurah 56:2 tell him to say it *quietly*? But I am *not* going to ask that question, because RJR's post has forced me to compare these tefilos carefully, and I have found a difference that might help to answer his question. RJR was very correct when he used the word "command" to describe what the oleh is saying. The word "Borchu" is indeed the tzivui/imperative form of the verb. But no comparable command exists in Kaddish. Yes, the Kaddish-leader does command them "v'imru", but he even specifies what it is that he wants them to say. Namely, a simple "amen". And so they do. May I suggest that the "Yhei Shmei Raba" is an impromptu addition, that the tzibur adds of their own accord, NOT commanded to do so by the Kaddish-leader. Thus, there is no fear of causing any illusions that he is somehow excluding himself. Indeed, he himself added to the praise by saying "Yisborach v'yishtabach", which (one might say) is simply an expanded version of "Yhei Shmei Raba". So I guess the real question on MB 56:2 is not why the leader says Yhei quietly instead of loudly, but perhaps we could ask whether the leader really needs to say Yhei at all. Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 20:59:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:59:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <54519ad6-5f2a-1c69-4e5f-2d8f0fa2f2a5@zahav.net.il> 1) Is the community as strong as it was back when Torah was transmitted orally? 2) Who is the rabbi who is going to overturn decisions made by the Ta'naim (as opposed to overturning decisions made by school administrators in the 50s)? On 4/15/2018 9:45 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es > laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. > KT From hankman at bell.net Sun Apr 15 18:13:32 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:13:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> R? Marty Bluke wrote: ?R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah.? My response to R? Marty makes a number of assumptions that may not be universally accepted but that I firmly believe. The times are different, the level of knowledge is different both in the physical sciences and in Torah hakedosha. Dare I say that these as a function of time seem to be moving on trajectories that are unfortunately inverse to each other ? particularly in the latter time frame that we live in ? most intensely over the last 10 to 12 decades but can already be clearly seen over the last 4 centuries. With each dor we can see an ongoing diminution in the level of our Torah havanah while a commensurate level of greater scientific understanding has come about (with perhaps the exception of a very few yechidei de?ah such as the Gra and a few others who may have achieved levels more common in much earlier times before them). While Chazal tell us ?haphoch v?haphoch d?kol bah? and that certainly for those who are capable of a great level of Torah understanding such as those of Chazal who were doresh all the essin or all the taggin in the Torah probably could have been able to find quantum mechanics or tensor analysis or molecular biology in the Torah if they so chose. Certainly if the scientists of our day were able to discover these facts, Chazal certainly were able to as well. But I would point out that there is no maimre in Chazal that relates to having discovered any of this knowledge through their pilpul and passing this on to us. Perhaps they did not feel it important enough to report. But this level of understanding in Torah in our times is sadly not available in our times. Given the level of limud for the average person (unlike for some of the gedolim of our times) in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics. The average person (maybe I am just giving away my matsav) will not find much yira or emuna from learning that which is typical of our yeshivos (say a sugia in shas say ?succa govoah m?esrim ama or a sugia on movuy or on tumas negaim ? of hilchos melicha or muktsa in shulchan aruch etc). For the average person these are not awe inspiring subjects and unfortunately only a true godol or great talmid chochom could extract yira and emunah from these cut and dry subjects. Such inspiration for the average yid are fewer and much further in between from most of his limud of Torah. This as a result of our sad diminution in our Torah learning ability. Today, given our greater abilities in understanding the Borei?s briah it is much easier for us to find yira and emuna from our hisbonenus in them. So ?of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none? is Torah, but a very solid adjunct in our times for a vehicle to further inspire yira and emunah would very effectively be math and scientific knowledge. Part of the mitsva of emuna, is not simply belief, but to go out and prove to your satisfaction (to be doresh v?choker) the truth of the Borei and his achdus and that he is the Borei olam and revealed Himself to us at matan Torah and so on. To the extent that science facilitates this search it is a MITSVA and not just mere secular studies at the cost of Torah studies. Clearly the experience our ancestors experienced at yetsias Mitzrayim, al hayam (ma sheroaso shifcha al hayam etc) and revelation on sinai etc was more than enough to inspire tremendous yira, awe and emunah without the need for any help from science (which was not great in their period in any case) and on through the period of the nevi?im and the batei mikadash and later Chazal inspiration was possible through there havana of Torah alone. But I do not see that to be the case in our generation and times. ?So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah?? Because in our day it may be another additional (I hesitate to say ?more? effective way b?avonoseinu harabim for most people) very effective way for most average people.? So today, for the yechidei olom the tried and true method of attaining great yira and emunah through limud Torah may be the best way to go as we have witnessed these great traits in our great gedolim, but that recipe may not work so well in our times for everybody else without additional help. I am also not comfortable with the notion that there are certain areas of knowledge that are off limits to even our gedolim. I feel quite confident to assert that in our time, non of even our gedolim come to discover the great advances in science through there limud hatorah. If they know these subjects it came from sources outside of their linudei kodesh. But Chazal was not constrained in their knowledge. They were required to know shivim loshonos, they studied kishuv and astrolgy and the chukos hagoyim and certainly the science of their day (sometimes even quoting chachmei ha?umos and cf the Rambam quoting Aristo often etc [I also imagine the Rambam learned his medicine in the conventional way mostly including sources outside of Torah]). I feel sad for many talmidei chachamim in our day who lack the background in (sometimes in even minimal) math and science to grasp that they are saying a peshat in a sugia that could not be, and to seek out another peshat therein or to at least realize there is a problem they need to deal with to get a proper havana. Also the chiyuv to teach a son an umnus, obviously means, other than the chiyuv to teach one?s son Torah. We do not assume that his limud haTorah will suffice to teach him an umnus as well. The conventional ?secular? methods of teaching an umnus are to be followed. If you want your son to be a carpenter, send him to carpentry school ? do not expect him to come from yeshiva a talmid chochom AND a carpenter just from his limud haTorah. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 16:30:43 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:30:43 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: Is it not likely that the prohibition is against non-Torah learning which serves no purpose other than engaging in those studies for their own interest and excitement? There is no prohibition against learning any skills for earning a livelihood. Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and research. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 18:06:13 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:06:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. It seems to me that there is indeed one very obvious exception, namely, the chometz which the Rav has not yet sold to the non-Jew. (I suppose that one could avoid this situation by delaying the bittul until the very end of the fifth hour, but the danger of missing that deadline scares me.) I have not seen any sifrei halacha, nor any pamphlets or bulletins or websites, that mention this point. Perhaps everyone just presumes that people have this exception in mind when they say the bittul? Here's a better way to phrase my question: Would a mental reservation be valid in this case? Perhaps halacha ignores the mental reservation, and only cares about the actual words of the bittul - which explicitly refers to ALL the chometz. If halacha does allow this exception - and people do have this exception in mind either explicitly or implicitly - then there is no problem. But I would like to hear that this is confirmed by the poskim. Some might say, "What's the problem? There is chometz in his house, but he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" No, I can see two very serious problems. But before I go further, I must reiterate that these problems would only arise in the case where one does his Bitul Chometz BEFORE the Rav transfers ownership to the non-Jew. (If the ownership transfer occurs first, then at the time of the Bitul, there is no problem, because the only chometz still in his possession is really and truly nothing more than the chometz that he is unaware of.) 1) If there is still chometz in his home, and he is expecting for it to be sold to a non-Jew several minutes or hours later, but the words of the bittul - "All the chometz in my possession, whether I know about it or not" - are to be taken a face value, doesn't this case aspersion on the sincerity/validity of the bittul? 2) Perhaps even worse: After Pesach, when it is time to re-acquire the chometz, he can no longer rely on "he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" Rather, a determination must be made. If he got rid of it via mechira (despite happening after the bittul), then the chometz may be eaten. But if, in the final analysis, he got rid of it via bitul, then it is assur b'hanaah (Mechaber 448:5, MB 448:25). So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? Akiva Miller From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Apr 16 06:35:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 23:35:36 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: I enjoy reading smatterings from the philosophical musings of the great scientists. But I suspect, that is the very reason they are banned. It is because they are NOT boring. And I suspect that unless it may assist me in my Parnassah even reading about new tech developments etc, is likely to be prohibited, not as a corrosive Hashkafa but simply as a time waster. But as the saying goes, Nobody's Perfect [which is sometimes followed by - I am a Nobody] Furthermore, the loud protests that I can already hear, are voiced by those who live in this world which is influenced by non-Torah energies. If we experience boredom when learning Torah - then is it not true that we are still far from the truth of Torah? Reb Avigdor M said - ever noticed how people yawn during Bentching? And would then wryly observe, They were not yawning a minute earlier during the ice cream. I have a friend, a Sefaradi Satmar Chossid, V Frum V Ehrlich, who asked R A Miller if he should learn ShaAr HaBechicnah in the ChHalevovos, R A asked him if he reads the newspapers, to which he replied, No - to which Reb Avigdor responded You need to learn it anyway because the streets are infiltrated with the HashpaAh of the newspapers. I apologise if I seemed to be dismissive of the scientists and their philosophical musings - and the truths that they may discuss Sure, I agree, truth is truth no matter the source. I was merely reflecting upon the reason for the ban on Alternative Wisdoms A] they are unnecessary - they are not required for Parnassah B] they waste time from Torah C] they may well harbour and cultivate life-concepts that are alien and contrary to Torah, amongst the granules of truth Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 06:51:02 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:51:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: <20EAE8A6498E468ABF14517EBCFFBC8A@hankPC> R' Meir G. Rabi wrote: > Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to > various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. > Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote > extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and > research. Do not ignore the truth of the message because you (and we all) do not like the like the lifestyle of the messenger. Pythagoras' theorem is a central truth to much of mathematics and science, and the truth of Einstein's science has withstood the test of time and been subject to much experimental verification. So what exactly is your point -- ignore the truth because you do not like its source? Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Apr 16 11:33:13 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:33:13 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <100f9bef-3e84-6df0-e91d-87b4c01ee3c7@zahav.net.il> Last year I read the document that one signs with the Rabbinate about the mechira. It was quite clear - you sell everything.? Everything includes things that you may have forgotten about? and even things that you have no idea if you own, like stocks in some company that deals in chameitz (even if your ownership is via your pension fund). Everything? means everything. I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". On 4/16/2018 3:06 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the > chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. > > > > So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? > > Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 16 11:07:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:07:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria In-Reply-To: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> References: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180416180705.GG23200@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:48:58AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical : but rather a spiritual disease. I like calling it spirito-somatic, coining a term to parallel "psychosomatic". Just as it stress can turn the presence of Helicobacter pulori in the stomach into having an ulcer. : The Rabbis comment: b'sorah tovah hee l'Yisroel -- : "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." : Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and : mortar to act as if it were alive... But they also say it's purely theoretical (Sanhedrin 71a). Although that's tied to R' Elazar b"R Shimon's side of a machloqes in the mishnah (Nega'im 12:3). R' Yishmael and R' Aqiva (the other two opinions in the mishnah) would apparently disagree. In any case, as with the rest of the cases in the gemara of laws that exist only for learning (ben soreir umoreh and ir hanidachas) it continues with tannaim saying they saw something local tradition said was evidence of one. Nowadays, house mold is known to be all too common. The actual physical side of tzara'as habayis needn't be miraculous. However, unlike tzara'as of the body, one can't invoke a soul - mind - brain causality. It would be pretty direct evidence of Divine Providence if tzra'as of the sort that would cause tum'ah struck only appropriate homes. Which is how I saw the quote. It requires people living on a level where blatant hashgachah peratis is approrpriate. As opposed to an era where even tzara'as of the body requires far more spirituality than people achieve. : Since in today's world we don't have the warning of leprosy attached to our : houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be : able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. There is a discussion of the role of learning Torah, and whether studying Torah that is non-applicabile is of value. Because of ideas like this one, it is hard to believe there can be Torah that is non-applicable. Even if the case isn't, "derosh vekabel sekhar" could refer to taking home lessons for the general principle. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 16th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Tifferes: What type of discipline Fax: (270) 514-1507 does harmony promote? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Apr 16 06:55:47 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:55:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzorah Message-ID: <672ECAA3-45E8-4B5C-A040-0A47C6B91FE2@cox.net> The second verse of this portion (14:2) states: "This shall be the law of the metzora on the day of his purification..." Since the Torah mentions that his purification takes place during the day, the Sages expound that the Kohen's declaration, which alone permits the metzora to begin his purification ritual, may be made only during the day (Rashi; Sifra). The observance of Taharat Hamishpacha has been a central feature of Jewish life for millennia. One finds Mikvehs in medieval Spain, in ancient Italy and in the famed desert outpost of Masada. This is consonant with Halacha which mandates that even before the town synagogue is built, a Mikveh must first be established. The source of the laws of Mikveh and family purity is found in this week's Torah portion. The Torah commands that when a woman has a menstrual flow, she and her husband must stay apart from one another. During this period she is "tameh," a Hebrew term that has been incorrectly translated as "unclean." In point of fact, the word tameh has nothing to do with uncleanness. When one is tameh it means that a person has had some contact with death. In the instance of a menstruating woman, it is the death of the ovum. Similarly, when a man has had physical relations (which inevitably involve the death of millions of sperm), he too is tameh. Implicit in this Biblical tradition is a great sensitivity and awareness of the natural life cycle. After a week has passed since the cessation of the woman's menstrual flow, the woman goes to the Mikveh where she undergoes a "spiritual rebirth." Various aspects of the Mikveh experience reinforce this notion of rebirth. The Mikveh itself must have 40 seah of water, the number 40 alluding to the 40th day after conception when the soul of a child enters the embryo. The woman must have no ornaments or barriers between herself and the water, for her emerging from the Mikveh is like that of the newborn leaving the waters of the womb with no ornaments or barriers. A child is the mirror of the family, he reflects the moral purity of his parents. Anonymous From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 16 08:34:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:34:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Kriyas HaTorah, Aseres Ha'dibros Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Rambam (Teshuvos HaRambam 60) writes that one who is seated should not stand up for the reading of the Aseres Ha'dibros (Ten Commandments). However, the general custom today is that the entire congregation does stand during this reading. Why is it that this ruling of the Rambam is not followed? A. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt"l pointed out that there are two versions of cantillation for the Aseres Ha'dibros. The first is called ta'am ha'tachton (lower cantillation) which punctuates the Aseres Ha'dibros into sentences in the same manner as the rest of the Torah. The second is called ta'am ha'elyon (higher cantillation), which punctuates following the order of the commandments, reconstructing the manner in which the Ten Commandments were received during matan Torah. There are two reasons why someone would wish to stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros. If one's intent is to show extra honor to this portion of the Torah, this is inappropriate. The entire Torah was given to Moshe on Har Sinai, and therefore all of Torah is equally precious. Standing for the Aseres Ha'dibros might lead some to the erroneous conclusion that only the Ten Commandments were received directly from Hashem. However, there is a second reason why one would stand during the Aseres Ha'dibros and that is to recreate the assembly at Har Sinai. We stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros in the same fashion that all of Israel stood during the original acceptance of the Torah. Today, the general custom is to always read the portion of the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'elyon. This indicates that this is not merely a reading of the Torah, but a recreation of matan Torah. Therefore, it is appropriate to stand. Rav Soloveitchik posits that the Rambam read the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'tachton, equating it to every other Torah reading, in which case, it would indeed be inappropriate to stand. The custom of Rav Chaim Soloveitchik, zt"l was to read the Aseres Ha'dibros both on Shavuos and during the weekly portion with ta'am ha'tachton, following the practice of the Rambam. Some, however, have the custom to read the Aseres Ha'dibros on Shavuos with ta'am ha'elyon, since this reading is a recreation of Sinai, but when parshas Yisro and parshas Va'eschanan are read on a regular Shabbos, the Aseres Ha'dibros are read with ta'am ha'tachton. In such a shul it would be best to stand from the beginning of the aliyah so as not to show more honor to one part of the Torah than another. From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 17:58:57 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 19:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: In my previous post responding R? Marty Bluke I wrote: ?in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics.? Upon reflection I wish to add to my previous thought about ?the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly? can lead to great awe and yiras harommeimus and emuna. I have no doubt that the pasuk jn Iyov (19:26) ?umibesori echezeh eloka? is a direct expression in Nach of this idea that my very tissues (biological systems) are great evidence and testimony to the the existence of the Borei Olam and His careful and intricate design and continuing hashgacha of the very smallest and finest, myriad intricate details of every living thing. It basically is the old argument that the existence of a complex system such as a clock implies that there must be a clock maker ? but ever so much in spades. Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 17 10:59:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:59:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> Message-ID: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a : bdieved. Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. The wave of rabbis coming in when the big drive for day school education started were predominantly a particular kind of Litvak. Look who the big voices were in the Agudas haRabbanim of the first half of the 20th century. RARakeffetR makes a strong case that one of the differences between RSRH and RYBS was just how lekhat-chilah secular studies are. RSRH held that our insulation from general culture and general knowledge was a tragic consequence of ghettoization. And that we never chose that life, it was forced upon us. The Emancipation was seen as a boon, allow the full expression of Judaism again. RYBS, in RARR's opionion (and of course, others vehemently disagree) only saw secular studies as the ideal way to live in a suboptimal situation. Secular knowledge in-and-of-itself as well as its ability to help one live in dignity is lekhat-chilah only within this bedi'eved world. But had we all been able to move back to Brisk, it would be all the better. Which gets us to the eis la'asos discussion. Shas too is lekhat-chilah and a great thing. What is bedi'eved is the reality that forced Rebbe, Rav Ashi, Ravinah to canonize official texts and (according to Tosafos) the geonim to write it down. But since we are still in that reality, we still publish TSBP -- lekhat-chilah. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? : Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, : "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of secular studies. Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. I would stick to discussing financial crimes: Yafeh Talmud Torah im Derekh Eretz sheyegi'as sheneihem mishkachas avon. VeKhol Torah she'ein imahh melakhah, sofahh beteilah vegoreres avon. - R' Gamliel beno shel R' Yehudah haNasi (Avos 2:2) But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the am hanivchar means. I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does not produce people less prone to these things. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 17th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Tifferes: What is the ultimate Fax: (270) 514-1507 state of harmony? From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 17 17:25:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 20:25:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz Message-ID: . I had asked: > On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat > before Biur Chametz? I thank those who responded. I still haven't found any poskim who deal with this exact question, but the Magen Avraham does mention something very close: "All melachos are assur once the time for burning has come, until he burns the chometz, just like above in Siman 431." - Magen Avraham 445:2, at the very end Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Apr 17 22:27:14 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 07:27:14 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Omer and Koolulam Message-ID: A Post by Rabbi Alex Israel. In this essay (originally posted on Facebook for public consumption), Rav Israel talks about his feelings about participating in a Koolulam sing along. If you don't know, Koolulam is an organization which gets hundreds, even thousands of people together to teach to sing one song in unison. They took this idea from the US with the twist of having regular folks and not just stars singing. For an example of what Koolulam does, here is their Yom Atzmaut video (described by many as a tefilla b'tzibbur): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxzR9Z-kG6Q (Al Kol Aleh by Naomi Shemer). Rav Israel's post is an excellent example about how people are dealing with inner conflicts of the Omer (and Three Weeks) mourning period and living in modern Israel. Note: There are rabbanim who wouldn't have allowed participation, during the Omer time or any other time. You can read the comments and discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/alexisrael1/posts/10157199448378942 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ If you have been following me on FB, you will know my obsession with Koolulam, especially their ??70th Yom Haatzmaut event. Prior to the event I was asked by 7 or 8 people, friends or talmidot/im, ?whether they could attend during the Omer. (If you watched the video, about half the participants ?were religious-looking.) ? I am generally halakhically conservative (small "c"!) and I try to keep halakha even if it disrupts my lifestyle. I ?am committed to halakhic practice and I don't knowingly contravene the law. So was it forbidden?? On the one hand this was a live event. So is it a problem? The Shulchan Arukh restricts weddings ?and haircuts as modes of marking the death of Rabbi Akiva?s 24,000 talmidim. Magen Avraham ?adds dancing and revelry to the list and I grew up not even going to movies in the Omer. Koolulam ?isn?t a wedding and did not include dancing, but was very much a public celebratory event. Could I ?go and allow others to go? I went to consult. One authoritative Posek said to me "It's not really assur (not dancing); it's not really muttar (public mass event). Go if it is ?important to you." ... But is that satisfactory?? The fundamental issue is deeper than the technical definition of ?music?, dancing? etc. In truth, ?I was going as part of my Yom Haatzmaut experience, as a celebration of life in Israel, of a people ?revived. This was not simple entertainment. Having participated in Koolulam, it was incredibly ?uplifting. My wife has described the evening as ?tefilla betzibur,? as the song?s words are essentially ?a prayer! - Just watch the "kavanna" in the video of the event! This was not merely a fun night out, although it was great fun. It was for us a Zionist ?expression, it touched a far deeper chord; it reflected faith, national unity, pride, hope, and so much ?more.? On the one hand, I see Halakha as embodying values which we aspire to imbibe. As such, I fully identify with the mourning of the ?Omer. It recalls Rabbi Akiva?s students who did not regard or interact with one another respectfully. In Israel ?today, we desperately need to be reminded annually about the need for a sensitive and respectful ?social environment and public discourse. The Omer contains a critical message. We wouldn't want to be without it. The mourning of the Omer, especially for Askenazi kehillot, also marks ?massacres and Crusades throughout the ages; another important feature, (although they may have tragically been eclipsed by the Shoah.?) But here is the problem. These practices totally fail to absorb the huge historic shift that is Medinat ?Yisrael. There is a gaping dissonance between the traditional Omer rhythm and our Israel lives. The ?traditional Omer rubric doesn't match the modern days of commemoration. For example, one ?does not recite Tachanun on Yom Hashoah because it falls in Nissan. If there is one day to say ?Tachanun, it is Yom Hashoah (I wrote about my struggle with this here ?http://thinkingtorah.blogspot.co.il/?/davening-on-yom-hasho?). And is Yom ?Haatzmaut merely a hiatus in a wider period of mourning? Moreover, in general, on a daily basis, ?as I read the Siddur, I wonder how we can ignore the huge chessed of HKBH in our generation of ?Jewish independence and the restoration of land and nationhood. How can my Siddur be the same ??(excluding the prayer for the State) as my great-grandfather? ? In this period of the year, we should be thanking God, celebrating our good fortune, revelling in ?the gifts that we feel as we move from Yom Haatzmaut to Yom Yerushalayim. Fundamentally, the ?Omer is a happy time; Ramban perceives it as a ?chol hamoed? of sorts between Pesach and ?Shavuot where we mark ?the love of our youth, our marriage with God, how we followed God ?through the wilderness? (Jeremiah 2) as we followed God from Egypt to Matan Torah at Mount ?Sinai. Where is the joy? ? So, I felt that this was a sort of Yom Haatzmaut event which yes, contravened the traditional Omer, ?but in some way lived up to our new reality. I keep the Omer - not shaving; watching how I speak ?to others and how I interact in a positive and respectful way - but we are not in the terrible era of ?Bar Kochba when the Romans massacred Rabbi Akiva's talmidim, and we are not in the period of ?the Crusades. We are in Medinat Yisrael, our thriving sovereign State, and I want to praise Hashem and celebrate my people for ?the ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ????, ?? ???????? ????? ?????? ??????? - and so I went to Kululam. ? I don't know how to square the two systems.? Later I saw a post by an amazing Rav, Rabbi David Menachem, whose post reflected similar sentiments, going even further than my thoughts. See his post here: ?https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=963243270498844&id=276752372481274 ?(h/t Yael Unterman) I?m sharing these thoughts without the ability to articulate a solution. Maybe time will change ?things. Maybe we need to push these questions to halakhic authorities and thinkers greater than ?myself.? From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 17 12:56:42 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 19:56:42 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> There have been many many posting recently about the desirability of secular education, but no one has, so far, mentioned an exceedingly important point. Bammaqom sh'eyn anashim hishtaddel lihyoth ish, so I have to step in and point it out. We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have. `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater". This is preposterous; someone who knows xokhma yvanith knows that "epi" means "above" and "tropos" means to move, or to act. An epitropos is someone who acts above someone else, i.e., a guardian, who acts above, and on behalf of, his ward. `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Posqim, especially, need to have a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages. Any poseq who is not willing to be `oqer a din in the Shulxan `Arukh is no poseq (you may attribute this quote to me). But ordinary Jews also need to know this. It is always dangerous to believe things that are untrue. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 17 15:00:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 18:00:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >: Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a >: bdieved. > >Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up by Shearith Israel in the 18th century taught secular as well as Torah subjects. The day school set up by Rabbi Avraham Rice did the same. While it is true that the level of Torah subjects taught was low, still there were secular subjects almost from the beginning. Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects and so did RJJ that was founded around1902. The high school that Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started in the second decade of the 20th century taught secular subjects as well as Torah subjects. The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. Please see my articles "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 "Bringing Torah Education to Baltimore" The Jewish Press, October 3, 2008, pages 57 & 75. >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? >: Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, >: "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." > >So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of >secular studies. The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. >Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of >secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. He knew in detail how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, he did value mathematics. Once he moved to NY he enrolled his children in yeshivas that gave its students a secular education. He received special permission not to send his eldest son to public school in Chelsea, MA, since there was no other alternative at the time. (His eldest daughter did attend public school in Chelsea, MA.) Lazar Miller, his eldest son, told me when he was sitting shiva for his mother that his mother used to help him with his math. However, she used Hebrew terminology for fraction, numerator, and denominator, since she had studied at two Yavneh schools in Lithuania where everything was learned in Ivrit. >: How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? > >Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat >haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. > >I would stick to discussing financial crimes: ... >But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding >of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the >am hanivchar means. What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal. I will take Erlichkeit with aberrance to mitzva practice over Frumkeit any time. >I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, >have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does >not produce people less prone to these things. I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to those who possess it. Originally, higher education in America was tied to religious education, and there was an attempt to instill morality in the students. Today, there is no such attempt. Indeed, if anything, higher education is in many cases anti-morality from a Torah standpoint. Parents contemplating sending their children to a secular collage should keep this in mind. YL From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 18 13:05:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:05:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:00:38PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: :> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a :> : bdieved. :> Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. : This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up : by Shearith Israel in the 18th century ... : Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects ... : The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. None of which led to the dayschool movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? .... :> So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of :> secular studies. : The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member : behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. But you haven't shown a connection between the lack of limudei chol and the extent by which people are not living according to some derekh's understanding of "true Torah values". :> Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of :> secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how : science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. ... And yet would have felt a student who studied science as a full time endevor to be a cause fo a cheshbon hanefesh. And consequently, due to his own lack of formal study, much of the science he uses in his examples is just plain wrong. (And similarly, someone who knew the then-latest theories of cosmogony, geology and evolution would not have found is arguments for Creationism very convincing. If you don't know what the other side of the debate believes, you end up knocking down strawmen.) : how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is : true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, : he did value mathematics. Leshitakha-- Why aren't you asking how R' Miller could ignore RSRH's paean to Schiller? :> But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding :> of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the :> am hanivchar means. : What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on : externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal... Frumkeit is about ritual and a drive to satisfy one's need to be holy. Ehlichkeit is about wanting to do G-d's Will. A frum "baal chessed" wants his gemach to be the biggest in town. An ehrlicher one is happy those in his town in need have so many sources of help. See Alei Shur vol II pp 152-155 A translation of an excetp by R' Ezra Goldschmiedt My blog post on the topic . And if that's not your definition, it's the one I intended when I said that the main cause of the chilulei hasheim you raised (and the mindset that least to them which is in-and-of-itself un-Jewish) is frumeit. :> I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, :> have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does :> not produce people less prone to these things. : I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to : those who possess it... So then why bring up immoral behavior as proof that there are problems with a lack of secular education? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 18th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 balance? From driceman at optimum.net Wed Apr 18 13:30:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:30:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > RAM: >> On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat >> before Biur Chametz? > Burning hametz is a b?dieved. In an ideal world we would eat all of our hametz before zman issuro. So Hazal gave us time to eat hametz in the morning, and instituted biur hametz soon enough before noon that we wouldn?t violate any issurim, but not much before that. Otherwise why not do the biur right after bedika? David Riceman From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 18 16:25:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:25:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95.6C.08474.004D7DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: None of which led to the day school movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Etz Cahim had secular studies in the late 1880s. see below. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started a high school with secular studies around 1915. . R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? This is not true. > From my article "The Founding of Yeshiva Etz Chaim" The Jewish Press, May 2, 2008, pages 48 - 49. From the amount of time allocated to secular subjects, it is clear that the directors of the yeshiva considered these far less important than the students? limudei kodesh studies. Abraham Cahan, who would eventually become the editor of the Jewish Daily Forward and a prominent figure in the Socialist movement in America, became one of the first teachers in the English department in 1887. Cahan records that the curriculum was loosely drawn to provide for the study of grammar, arithmetic, reading, and spelling ? all within the ?English Department.? But because the directors of the school had no clear idea of what should be taught, the English Department functioned haphazardly, more out of a perfunctory acknowledgement for these subjects than a sincere desire to ?provide the children with a modern education.? The English Department was divided into two classes. The first was taught by a boy about fourteen, who had just graduated from public school and the second was taught by Cahan, who was a little less than twenty-eight years old. The students ranged from the ages of nine or ten to fifteen and many were exposed to the formal study of secular subjects for the first time. One of the native students received his first lessons in the English language when he entered the Yeshiva after passing his thirteenth birthday. The young immigrants presented an immense challenge to their devoted teachers. The students drank up the instruction with a thirst centuries old. Cahan frequently remained long after the prescribed teaching hours to tutor his pupils, who were uniformly poor in reading and mathematics and who regarded grammar as an exquisite form of torture. On these occasions, the directors would ask Cahan why he ?worked so hard,? saying that the students ?already knew enough English.? And from my article "The Founding of the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School" The Jewish Press, September 5, 2008, pages 26 & 66. Setting The Pattern For Future Yeshivas The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was unique in that it was the first elementary parochial school that taught basic Jewish studies as well as Talmud. Yeshiva Etz Chaim, founded in 1886, was an intermediate school that enrolled boys at least nine years old who already were somewhat proficient in Chumash and Rashi. Yeshiva Etz Chaim?s goal was to give its students a thorough grounding in Gemara and Shulchan Aruch. In addition, it provided some limited secular studies in the late afternoon. The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was different in that in addition to providing a first rate religious education, it sought to provide its students with an excellent secular education at least equivalent to that offered by the public schools of the time. Nonetheless, limudei chol (secular or ?English? studies) was considered much less important than limudei kodesh (religious studies), and this attitude was clearly displayed in the constitution of the school. It required that there be two principals, one for each department. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 18 17:35:48 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:35:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> R? Jay F, Shachter wrote: ?We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have.? To this I respond: First, I certainly would not wish to set myself up as one who is capable ?to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us,? despite having some modern math and scientific knowledge. I think such a broad statement goes much too far. Not having any significant knowledge of Greek, I will refrain from commenting on your second example. However the first example you cite regarding Pi and the Rambam is one that I am willing to challenge. You are of course correct about the dating of the formal proof[s] (there are more than one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_%CF%80_is_irrational), date to modern, post Rambam times. However, it is very possible and probably likely that the Rambam intuited this on his own, even if without the benefit of a formal proof, that Pi had to be or was most likely to be irrational. I know I did so and probably most reasonably good students of math do so as well, long before they are aware of any formal proof for that fact. One reason for this is the well known method to approximate the value of Pi to any precision desired (even if very slow to converge) that requires little more than the knowledge of how to analyze a triangle. Simply inscribe a polygon of N equal isosceles triangles in a circle and calculate its perimeter and then divide by twice the length of the long side (= diameter of the circle). then do the same for N+1, and N+2 etc. a process in theory you could do infinitely many times for greater precision. So to intuit irrationality is very plausible even if not proven in our modern sense. Practically, note, that no matter how far you carry this exercise you will not get a repeating decimal that is the mark of the rational number. So I think you are far from ?judging the credibility? of the Rambam based on this example you cited. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 18 15:33:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:33:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . R' Ben Waxman wrote: > I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth > of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real > need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know > about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." > > The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika > anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant was that once you sell your chameitz there is no *d'Oraisa* need to do a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, and that's why we say the bracha. This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the only reason. Mishneh Brurah 431:2 writes: "Also: Because people are used to chometz all year long, if there is still some in his house and his possession, they made a gezera because he might forget and eat it." Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of the chometz that we found. But this is an error, in my opinion, because the concern raised by the MB was that one might happen to come across some chometz, and thoughtlessly eat it. Mechira will NOT prevent this. Mechira will ONLY remove the chometz from one's ownership, but it will not help against forgetfullness. I would like to close by showing that Bedikah and Mechira BOTH have strengths that the other lacks, and that is why people should do both: Mechira removes all chometz from ownership, regardless of where it might be, and (I think) regardless of my sincerity, but if I didn't clean the house well enough I may have left some around. Bedika removes (or greatly reduces) the chance that I might come across some chometz accidentally, but the chometz that I didn't find is still in my ownership. A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had intended to type!) Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 00:09:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 03:09:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> Message-ID: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day. In his day it was considered acceptable to say "Look, pi is obviously an irrational number", and nobody would lift an eyebrow, because it *is* obvious. Only later did mathematicians start to say, well, yes, it is obvious, but let's see if we can actually prove it. And eventually they did so, and guess what, they confirmed what everyone including the Rambam already knew. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 18 23:13:45 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 08:13:45 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Ben On 4/19/2018 12:33 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant > was that once you sell your chameitz there is no*d'Oraisa* need to do > a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, > and that's why we say the bracha. > > This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do > Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 03:27:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:27:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam and Pi In-Reply-To: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180419102714.GA11722@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:09:29AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a : rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state : it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day... I fully agree. But there is an irony here. When it comes to theolgy, the Rambam holds the chiyuv is to know, ie to believe because they had proof -- not tradition, not pur faith, etc... I think the Rambam believed he had a proof that pi was irrational. However, he had a differnt definition of the word proof. Continuing on this tangent... I think the definition of "proof" and therefore of "Rationalism" changed so much since the Rambam's day, the Rambam really wouldn't qualify as a "Rationalist" in our sense of the word. For example, science wasn't invented yet. The things the Rambam believed about Natural Philosophy were not backed by anything comparable to the rigor of scientific process. (Which itself is only rigorous at narrowing down the search space. Actual theories are constructed inductively, patterns found from a number of examples, and only have Bayesian levels of certainty. There can always be a black swan out there that, once found, requires replacing the theory with a new one. But *disproving* theories? That black swan does with certainty. Jumping back to before this parenthetic digression...) Similarly in math. The Rambam didn't have a modern mathemetician's definition of proof in mind. Even though he knew Euclid. But he did and always expected knowledge to be backed by some kind of proof. Archimedes spent a lot of time trying to "square the circle", i.e. come up with a geometric way of constructing a square with the same area as a circle. Numerous people tried since. This is the same thing as failing to find the rational number that is pi. Say the square they were looking for had sides of length s. So, the are of the square would be s^2. To "square the circle" would mean to find a square whose sides, s, are such that the ratio between s^2 and r^2 is pi, so that the areas s^2 (the square) and pi * r^2 (the circle) are equal. Repeatedly failing to find s by geometric construction eventually led people to conclude it was a fool's errand. By the Rambam's day, it was taken as a given that geometric construction could not find an s, and therefore that the ratio between them, pi, was irrational. (Weirdly, there still could have been a "black swan", the geometric construction that hadn't yet been found. The level of confidence the Rambam had would parellel that of a scientist believing the results of repeated experiment, but not that of a modern methematician.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Apr 19 08:04:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:04:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day >schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a >post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied >began, but initially, it didn't have to. I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was never separate from the study of Torah. He emphasized the importance of unifying Judaism and secular studies. Often speaking of the, "harmonious union of culture and spirituality," he believed that knowledge of the liberal arts would broaden one's understanding of Torah. However, Revel's dedication to Orthodox Jewry was undisputed. For instance, he forbade the use of a female vocalist in the 1926 Music Festival, as a female singer is a violation of Orthodox Jewish law. He did not allow Reform Jews to serve on Yeshiva College's national board of directors. He was also staunchly opposed to mixed seating in synagogues. "He wrote: 'Yeshiva aims at unity, at the creation of a synthesis between the Jewish conception of life, our spiritual and moral teaching and ideals, and the present-day humanities, the scientific conscience and spirit to help develop the complete harmonious Jewish personality, once again to enrich and bless our lives, to revitalize the true spirit and genius of historic Judaism.'" From https://goo.gl/hbRw8S "Rabbi Revel's first step as the new head of RIETS was the creation of an affi liated high school. The high school, Talmudical Academy, had its fi rst entering class in September 1916." Regarding Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin please see "Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin, Torah Education Pioneer in America" The Jewish Press, April 4, 2008, pages 42 & 91. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 03:19:45 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:19:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> References: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <81715a05-f9f9-f57e-95b1-03dc5240cb96@sero.name> On 19/04/18 02:13, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there > is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Nor is there an issur in having hefker chametz sitting in your property, but you have to search for it and put it away or get rid of it, for fear that if you come across it during Pesach you may absentmindedly eat it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Apr 19 07:45:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:45:48 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . I just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this permission? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:33:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:33:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180419153325.GA3724@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:04:09AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. : : From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b : : "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was ... Before the wave in question, but not the cause of the day school explosion. I do not know why this is so hard of a point to get across. Being around first but not starting a trend does not make something the source of the eventual trend. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is flawed reasoning. In fact, he didn't run a day school. And for that matter TA wasn't fully seperate from REITS. It wasn't a HS model that caught on anywhere. The model of day school and HS that actually catches on across American O through the middle of the 20th cent was the product of compromises between R ("Mr") SF Mendolovitch and his parent body. When TA evolved into MTA and BTA, it was because other schools have already created different expectations of what a HS was. Being in the same track as the eventual college degree, so that going from TA to any other college but YC was more like a transfer, was not sellable. (Although it did make AP courses moot; just take a college course in your 3rd year, if you were ready to.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Apr 19 04:25:17 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:25:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach Message-ID: The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately precedes the Amidah. I gave the following response: Soncino gives a very poignant explantion. ?O Lord, open Thou my lips; and my mouth shall declare Thy praise.? David?s lips had been sealed by wrongdoing, because praise of God would then have been blasphemy. If, then, God opened his lips and he was again enabled to offer Him praise, it was a sign that he had been granted pardon. What a profound thought before one of the most prominent and central prayers of our entire liturgy. We are all sinners and hope for the same pardon that King David was granted. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:59:45 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:59:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180419155945.GA30717@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:25:17AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately : precedes the Amidah. Technically, it is part of the Amidah. That's why we say it between ge'ulah and tefillah in Shacharis and Maariv. Unlike "Ki sheim H' eqra", which is only said before the Amidah of Minchah and Mussaf, because there is no Birkhas Ge'ulah, and therefore no problem of interruption. This is particularly relevant to a Chazan, as Chazaras haShatz should begin with "H' Sefasai Tiftach", not Birkhas Avos. Tangent, since we're looking at what the pasuq is about. Safah is at the edge. The word is not only used for a lip, but also for the seashore (sefas hayam). The peh is what stands behind the sefasayim. So, when I say this pasuq, and when I have the time and yishuv hadaas to think about what I am saying, my thoughts are about Hashem removing the externalities that block me from expressing my real inner self. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 09:23:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20180419162328.GB30717@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:56:42PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: : We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct : judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. : ... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. : He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although : he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater"... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge to that we know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon am? Mind you, I believe in the value of secular knowledge in-and-of-itself. Not just what you need to increase the likelihood of paying the bills. But I just don't see this particular argument. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 09:25:22 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> On 19/04/18 10:45, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I? just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, > then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no > longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). > > But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I > MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is > no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not > destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this > permission? It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 11:55:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahMusings] The Best Charity Message-ID: <20180419185537.GA11736@aishdas.org> People who both know my own proclivities and read this to the end will understand why I just HAD to share this post by RGS. >From https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/04/the-best-charity/ Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings The Best Charity Apr 19, 18 by R. Gil Student My friend, Rav Shlomo Einhorn, is once again attempting a superhuman feat of Torah teaching. A little over two years ago, he taught Torah for 18 live-streamed hours to raise money for the yeshiva he heads. This year, on Lag Ba-Omer, he will be attempting to break that record by teaching for 19 straight hours. This is a cause worth supporting -- or is it? I. Which Charity? Many people in the Jewish community have achieved varieties of financial success, allowing them the privilege of supporting many charities. This raises questions of communal and philanthropic priorities. Others have limited charity funds but still want to allocate them effectively. The issue is a blessing but also a complex problem, with multiple angles. Rav Hershel Schachter discussed this with me a few years ago in [48]Jewish Action. I would like to explore a specific subject that I have seen discussed in the responsa literature -- what is the best charity if you have to choose only one? In mid-sixteenth century Turkey, a wealthy man passed away without leaving instructions for the disposal of his charity funds. The local rabbis decided that some of that charity money should be given to the deceased's poor brother but the sons of the deceased objected that they should inherit the money and decide what to do with it. The question was brought to the Maharshdam, Rav Shmuel Di Medina of Salonica (Responsa Maharshdam, Yoreh De'ah 158). Maharshdam says that we have to try to determine the deceased's desires for the charity fund. Since in this case we do not know his intentions, we should give the money to the highest level of charity. The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 259) quotes his father, the Rosh, as saying that a town may reallocate to a study hall money that was donated to a synagogue or cemetery. Maharshdam argues that if in a case in which we know with certainty that the donor intended for the money to go to a synagogue we can use it for a study hall, then certainly when we do not know the donor's intention we can use the money to support Torah study. If we give the money to a lesser charity, we risk misusing the donation. II. Higher Torah The question then becomes which Torah study organization receives higher priority. Maharshdam quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 119b) that the world survives because of the Torah study of children, who due to their age are free of responsibility from sin. Additionally, more people doing a mitzvah together has greater merit than fewer people. Therefore, concludes Maharshdam, the money should be given to ththe highest charity -- a large elementary school. Similarly, Rav Ephraim Navon in early eighteenth century Turkey addresses a related question (Machaneh Ephraim (Hilkhos Tzedakah 11). A man donated money to establish in a small town a part-time kollel of ten men studying Torah. However, the town could not find ten men willing to enroll. The donor wished to change the endowment from a kollel to a full-time elementary school teacher. Rav Navon permitted this reallocation for technical reasons but adds that this new purpose is higher than the original because the Torah study of children sustains the world. III. God's Place However, Rav Yosef Eliyahu Chazzan challenges this argument (Ma'arkhei Lev vol. 1 no. 25). He quotes the Gemara (Berakhos 8a) which states that nowadays God only has the four cubits of halakhah. Therefore, He loves the distinguished gates of halakhah more than all the synagogues and other study halls. According to this passage, high-level Torah study merits higher priority than any other study. This seems to contradict the earlier passage, which gives priority to children's Torah study. This question gains greater strength when we note that the priority of high-level Torah has practical implications. Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Tefillah 8:3) rules, based on the above Gemara, that it is better to pray in a study hall than a synagogue. Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 90:18) rules likewise. Since the two passages seem to contradict and the latter is quoted authoritatively, it would seem that an elementary school should not be given priority over adult Torah study. Rav Chaim Palaggi (Chaim Be-Yad nos. 64-65) favors the interpretation of Rav Chazzan. However, he struggles with the many authorities who side with the Maharshdam. Rather than taking a minority view against the majority, in an impressive act of intellectual humility Rav Palaggi adopts a middle position that gives due weight to the majority with which he disagrees. IV. Jewish Behavior Perhaps a reconciliation of the two passages lies in the Rambam's interpretation. Rav Chazzan and Rav Palaggi follow Maharsha's interpretation that the Gemara is praising high-level study of halakhah. In the introduction to his commentary to the Mishnah (ed. Kafach, vol. 1, p. 21), Rambam sees the passage about the four cubits of halakhah as a general declaration about the uniqueness of true loyalty to the letter and spirit of halakhah. Synagogues and study halls may be full of people studying Torah but not enough of those students apply these teachings properly to develop a faithful Torah personality. Only someone who internalizes the messages of halakhah can reach out fully to God. If so, the distinguished gates of halakhah may overlap with elementary schools. Schools that teach proper character traits seem to qualify as remaining within the four cubits of halakhah, whether for adults or children. An elementary school that trains its students to follow the law, to embrace and internalize the messages of Judaism regarding behavior and thought, serves in the same capacity as a high-level kollel. Both types of institutions are distinguished gates of halakhah. Elementary schools have the additional benefit of purity, discussed above. If this is correct, the highest charity would be an elementary school that emphasizes proper behavior and attitudes, a mussar-focused cheder that directs pure children on the proper path. About Gil Student Rabbi Gil Student is the founder, publisher and editor-in-chief of Torah Musings. From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Thu Apr 19 18:08:35 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 01:08:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> ?When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah?? One thing I learned in my years as an attorney is that a rhetorical question is not an argument. I, of course, do not know what Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue to be observant in a work environment. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Fri Apr 20 11:40:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:40:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> References: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20180420184026.GA7707@aishdas.org> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 01:08:35AM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : I, of course, do not know what : Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very : proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates : and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue : to be observant in a work environment. Historical (and hagiographical) accounts portray the request for secular education that would make college and professions possible options came from the target audience, a majority of the parents of Brooklyn, not R "Mr." Mendlowitz. His launching of the HS was by convincing 8th grade parents to keep their sons in TvD "just one more year", as the parents wanted their boys to go to Public HS. That was the importance of getting a real American education had to his customer base. Then, it was another "just one more year" into 10th grade, until he had his first graduating class. There wasn't an issue for him of getting secular education into TvD, it was an issue of getting parents to agree to commit time to limudei qodesh! So of course TvD made a big deal about the quality of their secular studies. The whole point their marketing had to make was that the son can learn Torah without parents feeling afraid their boys would be held back. Getting back to the main conversation: What R-"Mr"-SFM thought is more of a historical issue. My point was that the push for limudei chol in day schools at the time the movement (not the first day school!) was getting started came from the parents, not the idealogues. There is no indication the decision was lechat-khilah, as this wasn't a lechat-khilah situation. Limudei qodesh without a guarantee of pre-college quality education wasn't a vaiable option in most communities, not a choice on the table. Meanwhile, the big voice in American O Rabbinate of the time was the East European Rabbi, and not an ideological immigrant who had a pull to America, but someone who came fleeing either progroms or Nazism. We know the majority of them considered limudei chol an assimilationist force. Or is that too under question? (I used the name "R 'Mr.' SF Mendlowitz" [or misspelled as per the usual pronounciation "-olovitch"] because he asked people to call him "Mr." and therefore I thought it respectful to acknowledge it. Even though here, "R" is the default title for men. Then I was afraid people who didn't know the history would think insult was intended, so I am adding this parenthetic explanation.) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 20th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Tifferes: What role does harmony Fax: (270) 514-1507 play in maintaining relationships? From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:54:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:54:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Some thoughts on the passing of a teacher and friend Message-ID: <5f552137ab7f4015af43f057f925c5ae@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> With the greatest trepidation I will share a few thoughts. I knew (to the extent one can know someone) R'Ozer Yeshaya Glickman Hacohain Z"L for 40 years. In the early years we learned together. He certainly was far more able than I but we did discuss many tum issues over the years. I don't think he would be happy being held up as a unicorn even though his blending of both worlds was the reason he felt he was asked by the Yeshiva to be "on the road" so much. I believe he felt that anyone could do what he did at their own level. When the hurley burleys done the question the yeshiva needs to ask itself imho is have they encouraged (or perhaps should they-my uninformed sense is that RIETS looks at the separate mountain approach as a vision -a la r'ybs) broad lives( a la r'hutner) in any of their best and brightest? do they seek out role models of that nature or only exceptional examples in specific accomplishments (e.g big TC or big $ but not a balancer)? Balancing priorities is a big challenge in life, if one wants to honor R'OYG Z"L imho one might start with some cheshbon hanefesh looking at his balance and its message for us (no two of us will likely reach the same conclusions but that's what is to be expected-it's the process not the results) yhi zichro baruch KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:53:20 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:53:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?R=92YBS-Feminist/Talit_Story?= Message-ID: <9fc9dd88e16649d48fc183b298bbfe74@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I believe this version of the story told by R? S Mandel in Jewish Action-not the ?gotcha? version I?ve heard. When a group of feminists visited him and demanded that he permit them to wear tallitot, he listened to them, showed he understood their reasoning, and proposed that there first be a trial period during which they would wear colored cloaks as tallitot, but without tzitzit and without reciting a berachah. He asked them to note how they feel wearing them and to come back after two weeks and confer with them again. After two weeks, they reconvened, and when the Rav asked these women how they felt, they told him how inspired they felt when wearing the cloaks. The Rav replied that that was excellent, that they should definitely continue wearing the cloaks and praying with kavannah, and that there was no need to wear the tallitot with tzitzit that men wore. Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 22 11:27:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:27:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah is Not Religion Message-ID: We are counting towards Shevuous which commemorates the giving of the Torah. The question is "What is Torah?' The following is from RSRH's essay Sivan I that I have posted at Sivan I (Collected Writings I) The Torah, however, did not spring from the breast of mortal man; it is the message of the God of Heaven and Earth to Man; and it was from the very beginning so high above the cultural level of the people to which it was given, that during the three thousand years of its existence there was never a time yet during which Israel was quite abreast of the Torah, when the Torah could be said to have been completely translated into practice. The Torah is rather the highest aim, the ultimate goal towards which the Jewish nation was to be guided through all its fated wanderings among the nations of the world. This imperfection of the Jewish people and its need of education is presupposed and clearly expressed in the Torah from the very beginning. There is, therefore, no stronger evidence for the Divine origin and uniqueness of the Torah than the continuous backsliding, the continuous rebellion against it on the part of the Jewish people, whose first generation perished because of this very rebellion. But the Torah has outlived all the generations of Israel and is still awaiting that coming age which "at the end of days" will be fully ripe for it. Thus, the Torah manifests from the very beginning its superhuman origin. It has no development and no history; it is rather the people of the Torah which has a history. And this history is nothing else but its continuous training and striving to rise to the unchangeable, eternal height on which the Torah is set, this Torah that has nothing in common with what is commonly called "religion." How hopelessly false is it, therefore, to call this Torah "religion," and thus drag it by this name into the circle of other phenomena in the history of human civilization, to which it does not belong. This is a fundamentally wrong starting point, and it is small wonder that it gives rise to questions such as the following, which have no meaning so far as the Torah is concerned: "You want Judaism to remain the same for ever?" "All religions rejuvenate themselves and advance with the progress of the nations, and only the Jewish 'Religion' wants to remain rigid, always the same, and refuses to yield to the views of an enlightened age?" See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 22 04:12:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 07:12:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav Message-ID: . Tumas meis and sheretz, for example, are supernatural phenomena. If someone has been in contact with tumah, and is infected with that tumah, there is no physical evidence of this infection. We are aware of the tumah if and only if we know about the events that took place, and the status of the things in those events. Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses. But they are spiritual illnesses, not medical ones. And in fact, Torah Sheb'al Peh is chock full of spiritual reasons why a person would become a metzora - Lashon Hara being the most famous of these, miserliness and others being mentioned less frequently. My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve myself in general." (Please note: This post is NOT an attempt to categorize all the many kinds of tumah. The first two paragraphs are designed only to show a similarity between tzaraas and zav, and then to highlight a difference.) Akiva Miller From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:02:03 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:02:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Re: R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 RYL quoted R? Yonasan Eybeshutz: --quote-- For all the sciences are condiments and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impure and how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. ?end quote-- >>>>> ? Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual, or even for every member of the Sanhedrin, to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry.? It is not necessary for all these subjects to be part of the standard yeshiva high school curriculum.? It is only necessary that there be in the world mathematicians, zoologists, chemists, doctors, astronomers and so on.? It is not even necessary that they be Jewish.? It is only necessary that their expertise be accessible when needed.? It is not uncommon that poskim confer with physicians, for example, when they need certain medical information in order to posken shailos in specific situations.? The poskim don?t first have to go to medical school.? ? Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. ?It is necessary that they exist in the world. ?It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies. ? If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:55:19 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:55:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> ? In a message dated 4/9/2018 RYL wrote: ? >> ?There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf --quote-- R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. Hayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, ?through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash?. By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy?. R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): ?. It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. ?.He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. ?. ? --end quote-- To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw from this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL ? >>>>? ? ? To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn: ? [1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ? [2] If you can master the ?seven branches of secular wisdom? before your bar mitzvah, that?s fabulous!? Because after your bar mitzvah you have to be mindful of ?vehagisa bo yomam velayla.???But before your bar mitzvah, you can play ball, roller-skate, and memorize the encyclopedia to your heart?s content. ? [3] Funny you should quote R? Chaim of Volozhin.? The famous Yeshiva of Volozhin did not include any of these seven branches of wisdom in its curriculum.? Anyone happen to remember why and when the Yeshiva of Volozhin closed its doors? ? Let me add a passage written by Rabbi Dr. David Berger (who, BTW, was my Jewish history professor for four wonderful semesters in Brooklyn College): ? --quote? ? Although various Geonim were favorably inclined toward the study of philosophy, it is clear that the curriculum of the advanced yeshivot was devoted to the study of Torah alone?.The private nature of philosophical instruction in the society at large [early medieval intellectual Islamic society] made it perfectly natural for Jews to follow the same course; more important, the curriculum of these venerable institutions [the yeshivot] went back to pre-Islamic days, and any effort to introduce? a curricular revolution into their hallowed halls would surely have elicited vigorous opposition.? ? --end quote? ? [Above is from R? Berger?s essay ?Judaism and General Culture in Medieval Times,? in the book *Judaism?s Encounter with Other Cultures* edited by Jacob J. Schachter.] ? Please note these words:? ?the private nature of philosophical instruction.?? The Vilna Gaon studied secular subjects on his own, as many yeshiva students have done over the years. ? Elsewhere RYL has indicated his desire that the NY govt require chassidishe schools to provide a good secular education to their students. ? You don?t have to impose your preferences on others, or get the government involved to force changes in school curricula. ? I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 01:06:16 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:06:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <6b2084c852a745458c68c6f7836e4477@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn:[1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ================================== IIUC, the Gaon?s theory of limud torah was that there was no such thing as spare time (any time one does not have to be doing something else must be spent learning) Thus assumedly he felt time spent on secular studies was required. Unless one posits that he had a need for ?recreation? which was study of secular studies or that he really only studied them when Torah learning of any sort was forbidden. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 23 05:39:50 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:39:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halacha Yomis - Hafrashas Challah, At Large Factories Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. How does the OU separate Challah at Jewish owned factories that manufacture bread and related items that require Challah separation? Is there a mashgiach separating a piece of dough from every batch? Isn?t that impractical? A. For OU-certified restaurants and caterers, the mashgiach separates Challah from every batch of dough. However, in factories it is not practical to have a mashgiach present each time a batch of dough is made. Instead the OU uses what we call the ?Tevel Matzah system.? Open boxes of matzah that did not have Challah separated from them (i.e. tevel) are placed in these factories next to the mixers. The mashgiach declares that each time a batch of dough is made, a designated piece of the matzah should become Challah and exempt that batch of dough. Even though the matzos have already been baked and the mixer contains unbaked dough, we have already seen that one can separate from baked matzah on raw dough when both are obligated in Challah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Mon Apr 23 06:34:22 2018 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 13:34:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. On Sunday, April 22, 2018, 11:29:56 PM CDT, Toby Katz wrote: > Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. It is necessary that they > exist in the world. It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student > take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. > I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female > physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. How > fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn > Torah day and night that men have! ... > If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") > are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and > potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. Not that this is optimal, Those that have the ability, and desire should spend as much time as they want/need to achieve the Torah knowledge we all rely on to live our lives. We all need Gedolim that these kinds of people become to naser the difficult Shaylos that constantly arise as we progress through time. For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah. This that misdirect those strengths - being urged to use their strengths to learn Torah are in my view shortchanging them. They are discouraging Jews from serving God and his people in the best way they can. Where their strengths where they really lie. More to say - no time. HM Want Emes and Emunah in your life? Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/ From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Mon Apr 23 01:26:05 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:26:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 From: Micha Berger > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us > they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon > am? What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, and what they are teaching us, whilst simultaneously utilising our understanding of the era's terms and sciences to better probe the intentions of the original statements. Dovid Rubin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 08:15:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 11:15:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423151544.GD1065@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 08:26:05AM +0000, D Rubin wrote: : > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, ... : > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon : > am? : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) ... Just to clear up the word, I meant non-posqim. I needed something that meant someone who wasn't "from LOR on up", and therefore shouldn't be pasqening for themselves. : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper : understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, : and what they are teaching us... Yes, as I said, I too believe in a role for limudei chol beyond the utilitarian study of things that will eventually help you pay the bills. I was addressing what I thought was a flaw in a particular argument. There is enough Torah to keep one busy for a lifetime without topics that require a formal secular education. The question is what to do when "Mah shelibo chafeitz" is something like hil' qidush hachodesh. Which brings me to a totally new aspect of this discussion: formal vs informal education. Secular study in one's spare time was the norm in places like Volozhin and Slabodka. (Although Slabodka students were more likely to be reading Freud...) To the extent that RSRH thought Volozhin were "fellow travelers on the path of Torah im Derekh Eretz" and described them as such to his followers when fundraisers for the yeshiva approched Frankfurt aM. And yet the same Litvisher rabbanim and RY would campaign against university and formal education. Perhaps their primary concern was leaving the bubble prematurely leading to assimilation, rather than expecting their talmidim to define away the concept of "free time" or afraid of which ideas their students might be exposed to. Although the Alter of Slabodka would make a case-by-case diagnosis and give each student different guidelines, at least we could say there were stduents for whom he thought secular study on one's own was appropriate. And apparently the norm. Remember, these are the same bachurim for whom the leading pass-time when not learnig was chess. Yeshiva wasn't for everyone; the guys who went were a bunch of intellecturals. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From t613k at aol.com Mon Apr 23 09:33:07 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:33:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <162f35a0504-c8b-11ca6@webjas-vab001.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Mon Apr 23 12:43:36 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:43:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: << I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies.>> And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of science the women should pasken the question -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:00:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:00:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423210037.GA8959@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:43:36PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of : science the women should pasken the question Except that it's arguable that pro forma women can't pasqen. It means a poseiq needs to know enough to ask intelligent questions of the expert. Even if the experts would end up being women, BTs who studied the subject before accepting ol mitzvos, unobservant Jews or non-Jews. Which is a good deal of knowledge, but doesn't require years of formal education. When I brought this thread over from Areivim to Avodah, my intent was not to have a bunch of pro-secular education posts. Rather, my focus was on the eilu va'eilu of saying that even though I believe in the value of secular education, I cannot say it's the One True Derekh. For example, the gemara only says that many tried to follow Rashbi's Torah-only derekh and failed. Not that R Yishmael was right. But that pragmatically, one worked for the masses and the didn't. And if the context changes, so that the welfare state makes it possible for more to succeed toing things Rashbi's way? The gemara says nothing against it. Assuming they don't bankrupt the state that way or other Modern Israeli political, governmental and economic issues, but again, that's the balebatishe problem of the system failing. Even if it were chilul hasheim issues (just to pre-empt that line of reasoning), that's not about eschewing secular studies. I would say the gemara leaves both options open. And for today... For every kid who leaves chareidi life going OTD because they feel hobbled by the lack of secular education, or the lack of worldliness in general, or just plain constricted by the paucity of their choices of how to live as adults there is a Mod-O kid who leaves because of too much opennees, a lack of structure, an attraction to the other lifestyles they're exposed to, a feeling that their parents are fooling themselves with compromise... To survive, we need all our options. That said, I find it interesting that none of the arguments in favor of limudei chol actually involved what I consider their real value: There is too much we can't learn from Torah. Not that it's not there, just that we don't know how to extract it. Like when RALichtenstein saw the Chevra Qadisha try to rush the aveilim at one levayah through so that they could begin another, he commented that had they read Hamlet they never could have acted that way. Not that such middos aren't in Torah sources, but they're more accessible sometimes in literature. And for all the awe one may get from the Wisdom of the Author when learning Torah, it hits harder when you see Chokhmas haBorei in the physical world, outside the context of "religious studies". Also, by studying other topics one learns other modes of thought, and becomes more able to think in other ways, reach other conclusions. Mathemeticians, programmers and lawyers all learn a precision of thought and attention to detail that helps in real-life problem solving as well as learning. Vekhulu for other displines. In short... The value I find in limudei chol only starts with knowing more and having more data to put into the Torah and the parnasah mills. They change how one thinks in ways that improve both Torah and life skills. Simply by having more tools in the toolbox. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 11:08:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. When I was a kid, it was a big deal that we couldn't buy chameitz from Walbaum's, including the supermarket whose parking lot was directly across the street. It means that for a couple of months, I couldn't be sent to the store on Fri for many of those last-minute purchases. I presume (given who my parents would have asked in that era) that was R' Fabian Schoenfeld's pesaq. But as the broohaha over beer this year indicates, there is a machloqes. We could view the sale as valid, and the Jew wrongfully selling merchandise that belongs to someone else. Theft, rather than chameitz she'avar alav es haPesach. Which would imply that in our case, where bi'ur chameitz is done later than the rav's mechirah, we would view it as wrongfully destroying someone else's chameitz. Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? I would think the latter. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 14:07:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:07:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> On 23/04/18 14:08, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. > > With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim > who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) > that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to > treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But here your actions show that you were completely serious about the mechira, but you didn't intend this to be included in it. The shtar you signed doesn't specifically say this *is* included. Its description of what's included very much depends on your intentions as revealed by your actions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend to include ANY item? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 23 14:51:13 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:51:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <07.CD.29097.DC55EDA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:31 AM 4/23/2018, RN Toby Katz wrote: >I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a >reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I >never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would >never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the >option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? >? >? >? >--Toby Katz I find your terminology "normal Orthodox schools" somewhat surprising in the context of Chassidic yeshivas. What exactly do you mean by this terminology when contrasted with Chassidic schools? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 21:57:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:57:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/04/18 17:49, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be > : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from > : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a > : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. > > But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when > the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions > showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or > burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend > to include ANY item? Again, you are conflating two questions, one of which depends on your intentions and one which does not: 1) Is the mechira valid? Yes, regardless of your intentions. 2) What is included in the mechira. Certainly anything explicitly included in the shtar. But the shtar's language is vague; does it apply to *this* piece of bread? Only if you meant it to. That which you've set aside for breakfast is clearly not included, even if the mechira happened early in the morning. Ditto for that which you set aside to burn. Did it include an item on your store shelves, which you ended up selling just 20 minutes later? We can approach this two ways: a) It did, because you intended it to. Your intention was that your inventory should not become treif; this is inventory, you don't want it to be treif, therefore it's included. b) I bo'is eima, fine, let it be as you say, and the act of selling an item -- whether 20 minutes after the zman or 20 minutes before the end of Achron Shel Pesach -- shows that it was not included. Even if we were to accept this proposition (which I do not), whatever remains on the shelves that you did *not* sell remains included. Not only did you do nothing to indicate an intention to exclude it, you clearly did intend to include it, since your whole purpose was that it should not become treif. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 22:18:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:18:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name>, <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore > guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is > still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between > chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or > moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? > > I would think the latter. > ?????- Iiuc they sold the whole business, not just the stock Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 24 04:53:01 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 07:53:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira. There have been conjectures that the person's actions might reveal his intentions, or maybe not. But it seems to me that the starting point should be that which has been mentioned in writing. And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser degree of detail. In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this thread. But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other details. It seems to me that the "stam daas" of this person would be that he is selling only what is on the list, and the bittul is on everything else. Akiva Miller From hankman at bell.net Tue Apr 24 06:15:47 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:15:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: <0401042908D24434A2102FDD03A26A7A@hankPC> R?n T. Katz wrote: In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz I would go well beyond that and possibly suggest that when done ?the right way? that certain limudei chol? (read math and natural sciences) could be a better and more efficient way of attaining emunah including drosh vachakor and yiras harommeimus and the goal of understanding ?beHai? boro osom, or the gevuros of masseh bereishis, the intricacies of the olam koton and the actual vast olom not to mention the numerous sugios in shas and halacha that require knowledge of the real world and it science (its understanding). I propose a thought for consideration, that while for some yechidim their level of Torah learning is sufficiently high that Torah is the best and most efficient path to attain these goals. Unfortunately for many (most) of us, our level of Torah havanah is not even close to that level and as a practical fact a more direct path to getting a start on these Torah goals is through studying the briah and its science put there by G-d in the maseh beraishis. Someone like the GRA whose level of Torah study most of us can not even begin to imagine would relegate his study of science to only when it was not in opposition to his limud of Torah (such as the B?HK etc) as the best manner (for him) of achieving this goal was through his limud of Torah. But for most of us to take this as also applying to our situation is wishful thinking. As many times as I learn parshs Bereishis, my havana of ?beHai? boro osom has not really grown very much nor my level derosh vachakor. For us it may be a lekatchila outside the B?HK to set times for scientific study if done with the appropriate approach in support of our Torah understanding and growth in yira and emunah even when not just for parnasa. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 24 08:12:26 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:12:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Some_FAQs_about_the_OU=92s_=93Tevel_Mat?= =?windows-1252?q?zah_system=94?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Here are some FAQs about the OU?s ?Tevel Matzah system? that were described in yesterday?s Halacha Yomis. Q1. What would happen if the box of tevel matzos that was left in the factory was accidentally discarded? A1. If the matzo is discarded, the Tevel Matzah system becomes in-operative. Because of the concern that the tevel matzos might be lost, the OU also arranges a backup Hafrashas Challah each day in the OU offices to cover any factory that did not have a proper Hafrashas Challah done on premises. Q2. Is there any special reason that the OU chooses to use matzos for their tevel system? Couldn?t plain dough or bread be used instead for this purpose? A2. The main advantage of using matzos for Hafrashas Challah is that they have a very long shelf-life. A matzah can easily last from one year to the next and still be edible. Another obvious advantage of using matzah is that it can remain in the factories on Pesach. Q3. From how many batches of dough can one separate Challah using one box of tevel matzos? A3. When the mashgiach places the box of matzos in the factory, he declares that 1/5 of a gram of matzah should become Challah for each subsequent batter that will be produced. Considering that a box of matzos contains approximately one pound of matzos (454 grams), this means that a box of matzos will cover the Challah for more than 2,200 batches of dough. Even if a factory makes ten batches a day, a single box of matzos will last for over 6 months! Q4. Given that a box of matzah can be used to separate Challah for over 2,000 batches of dough, if a factory only makes one or two batches of dough a day, could a single box of matzos be used for several years? A4. No. One cannot take Challah from dough made from wheat that grew in one year on a batch of dough made from wheat that grew in a different year. The cutoff for determining which year the wheat grew is Rosh Hashanah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 24 08:24:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:33pm EDT, R Akiva Miller wrote: : This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do : Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer : to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the : only reason. I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? The MB's other reason (gezeira) and discussion thereof, elided. : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of : the chometz that we found... "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? ... : A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my : chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already : removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for : me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had : intended to type!) Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? A shade over 6 days later, on Tue, Apr 24 at 7:53am EDT, RAM wrote: : I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone : referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira... : And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two : major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person : who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller : must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser : degree of detail. I thought there are so many versions, referencing "the text" or even "a text" is meaningless. I therefore viewed the issue when you raised it last week (?) morein terms of: Does your LOR address this issue, and if so, how? : In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, : I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must : take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual : intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this : thread. Bitul and "all my chameitz" are mutually exclusive sets. It it's hefqeir, it's not mine. (BTW, in Israeli Aramaic the word was "hevqer", which I kept on reading as though it was "the cattle.") Espectially is we allow later actions as evidence of what was intent at the time of the sale. : But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that : he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", : and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other : details... Without "and any other chameitz which may be"? That version would solve all your problems, but affords less protection against issur. Since all the mechirah is belt-n-suspenders with bitul anyway, no big deal. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony? From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 24 09:03:23 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:03:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> References: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1df6ecc6-8417-7966-0620-412e6633fa66@sero.name> On 24/04/18 11:24, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of > hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? Yes, I think it is. Hefker, especially when the item is still in your property, depends on your willing renunciation. If you still regard it as yours then it's not hefker, regardless of your declaration. Either because the insincere declaration is defective, or because the moment you think of it as yours you regain it through kinyan chatzer. > : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point > : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) > : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of > : the chometz that we found... > > "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? Bedika != Bittul. By definition Bedika cannot get rid of what is not found. > Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? I don't see why not. If you inherited an unspecified estate you can surely sell it as a lot, sight unseen, and leave it to the buyer to discover what exactly is included in it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Tue Apr 24 23:26:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 06:26:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hand washing Message-ID: The gemara (Shabbat 62b) states that being derogatory (mzalzel) concerning ntilat yadaim(hand washing) causes poverty. Rava then clarifies that this is only talking about the case where one doesn't wash at all. The gemara then rejects Rava's interpretation based on R' Chisda saying that he had washed his hands with a lot of water and got a lot of good (in return?). As part of a broader shiur, I was wondering : 1. Is it possible that water was not as readily available then and so this focus on the amount of water might not be applicable today? 2. Why would the gemara accept a rejection of Rava without a more specific refutation source? 3. How is R' Chisda's statement a source of rejection? (Rava could well agree that using more than the minimum is praiseworthy but still hold poverty only comes for those who don't wash at all) That's enough to start :) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Tue Apr 24 10:57:13 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:57:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed during the Rav?s lifetime. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 24 05:30:39 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Apr 22, 2018 09:28:10 pm Message-ID: <15245910390.9bBE36.37982@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge [s]o that we > know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto > explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we > question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with > emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? > > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the > metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) > that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such > things. But the hamon am? > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- correction. At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that requires supernatural explanation. Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass them. There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 06:05:39 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:05:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <23688d43-325f-1109-9d85-fcb94a75b7e7@aishdas.org> On 4/24/2018 1:57 PM, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit > and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav's talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav's lifetime. The one that Rabbi Mayer Twersky quotes is in the name of an impeccable source, Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, who was personally involved. KT, YGB From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 07:25:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:25:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425142550.GB15047@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:57:13PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit : and others tell a different version. He believes one... Actually, you can go see RSM's version for yourself. No need to mix RJR into this. From the current Jewish Action: https://jewishaction.com/the-rav/observing-the-rav > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav?s lifetime. Actually, the "a woman" version was. I remember the discussion in shul, because I thought that the story as told belittled the woman too much. (Unlike RSM's impression, "Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances.") Tamar Ross (2004) records R' Meiselman and the Frimer Brothers telling the story https://books.google.com/books?id=vkvNNioH--4C&lpg=PA91&pg=PA91#v=onepage I found R' Meiselman (published Fall 1998) here (near the bottom of pg 9 [5th page of the PDF]): http://bit.ly/2HQBwHm And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 They say they were told the story by Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, former rabbi of the YI of Brokline, and that it happened in the mid-70s. Remember (unlike RSM) your "several of the Rav's talmidim knew the NY RY, not the Rabbi of Boston. There is really enough detail in R' Meiselman and R's Frimer version to rule out the story being legend. I would attribute RSM's version to memory drift; it has been some 40 years since the events, after all. 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? From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Apr 25 07:37:22 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:37:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Translation of Makkos / Binfol oyivcha al tismach In-Reply-To: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> References: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> Message-ID: Revisiting an issue that comes up repeatedly--do classical sources support the approach that we should feel sorrow for / not rejoice over, the suffering of our persecuting enemies. Yeshayahu (15:5) declares, ?My heart cries out? over the destruction of Israel?s wicked enemy, Moab. TargumYonason (and Radak and Metsudos) take this as the prophet quoting the enemy. But Rashi takes it as the prophet expressing his own heart?s thoughts, and he writes, ?The prophets of Israel are unlike the prophets of the umos ha-olom. Bilaam sought to uproot Israel for no reason. But the prophets of Israel [who had good cause to wish for their persecutors? destruction, nevertheless] mourn over the punishments coming upon the nations (miss-o-ninnim al pur-annos ha-ba-ah al ha-umos).?? (Artscroll cites both explanations, but adds a commentary by ''Sod Yesharim (I could not find it on HebrewBooks.org) who, like Rashi, takes the prophet to be referring to his own grief, but contra Rashi declares, ''The prophet had no cause to grieve over the downfall of the wicked nation of Moab, or of other unworthy nations. However, every nation had its own type of impurity that tempted the righteous and was a challenge that they had to overcome. When they did so successfully, they grew in stature. Now, with the demise of Moab, that particular challenge disappeared, and with it the potential for growth.) Also, I did have occasion to directly ask Rav Dovid Feinstein what he meant in the Kol Dodi Hagadah by ''shofchim l'eebud ha-makos and we don't drink them.'' Did he mean we pour out the wine out of sympathy for the Egyptians' suffering the makkos (as I had translated it), or did he mean that after taking the drops of wine out of the cups, we throw them (the drops of wine representing the makkos) out as waste, rather than drinking them (as R. Zev Sero insisted). And how that relates to the issue of ''al tismach.'' Sorry, but he did not commit to either way, comfortable with both approaches towards rejoicing over the downfall of Israel's enemies. Nevertheless, by my request, the next printing of the Kol Dodi Haggadah should have the translation changed to R. Zev's. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 08:32:13 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:32:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". Does _anybody_ here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? Perhaps a bar mitzvah boy the first time his tefillin "counts", or, perhaps the first time one dons a tallis at shul after marriage, or the first time one does birchas hachama? (As a baal teshuva, I have had a plethora of opportunities to do a mitzvah for the first time, and sometimes I get a spiritual high. And it's quite possible that I didn't do all of them correctly the first time, and that sometimes I wasn't even yotzie b'deived. No, I don't check my tzitzis every time I put on my tallis). Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce inappropriate? The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an inappropriate thought? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 25 13:03:11 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 16:03:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages Message-ID: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:26 AM 4/25/2018, Jay F. Shachter wrote: Let me begin with Daas Torah. Some years ago Rav Zelig Epstein, ZT"L was describing how the Mir Yeshiva left Vilna and got to Japan. He pointed out that almost all of the yeshivas were at this time located in Vilna and that almost all of the hanhalla of the yeshivas were opposed to leaving Vilna, because they feared that the Russians would arrest the yeshiva boys for trying to leave the "Communist paradise." However, several yeshivas boys were strongly in favor of leaving. The following is from my article Rabbi Aryeh Leib Malin And The Mir Yeshiva Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 154 The Jewish Press, February 2, 2018. "Rabbi Malin [a top Mir student] felt it was a matter of life and death that the Mir Yeshiva students leave Vilna. He is reported to have said, "I will get a gun and shoot anybody who tries to stop us from leaving!" (This was verified for me by Reb Zalman Alpert, who served as a librarian at Yeshiva University for many years and told me he heard it from two former Mir Yeshiva students.) " When one of the boys heard that the yeshiva students went against what the hanhalla said, he asked, "But what about Daas Torah?" Reb Zelig replied (and I do not know if he was serious or kidding), "This was before Daas Torah was invented." I was told that Reb Chaim Shmuelevitz, who was against the yeshiva leaving, later apologized to Reb Leib with tears in his eyes. The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. Regarding asking and following what a rov tells you, I am convinced that when they ask in the World to Come "Why did you do this or that?" and someone replies, "I asked a Rov and he told me to do this." the response will be, "You were given free will and expected to exercise it." Certainly one needs to ask a rov difficult halachic questions, but need one ask about most things in daily life? A friend of mine who is a therapist told me that some of his patients are afraid to do almost anything on their own. How sad. Even the Avos were not perfect and RSRH points this out. See his essay Lessons From Jacob and Esau (Collected Writings VII) where he points out that Yitzchok and Rivka made errors in educating Eisav. See also his commentary on what Avraham did when he said that Sarah was his sister. He follows the RAMBAN who says Avraham made a "big" mistake when he did this. Sadly there are some who do believe that whatever scientific assertions Chazal made must be valid. Rabbi Moshe Meiselman is one such person. His book Torah, Chazal and Science takes this position. It is hard for me to understand how a nephew of RYBS can hold this view. Regarding believing things that are not true, see my article "My Mind Is Made Up. Do Not Confuse Me With The Facts!" The Jewish Press, August 25, 2004 pages 7 & 77. YL >It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > >Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what >you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when >you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages >have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same >moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- >correction. > >At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the >moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the >dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on >yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, >the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and >advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly >caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). > >Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this >mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still >we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on >our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in >matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, >even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in >Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit >when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must >rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. >If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will >increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where >the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same >reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. > >That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know >already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, >and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, >and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take >literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and >you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that >requires supernatural explanation. > >Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, >and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes >you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like >them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a >Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your >abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is >a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some >of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. > >You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different >species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that >every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid >Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all >scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a >vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us >closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different >species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you >will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are >different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do >is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass >them. > >There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original >topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than >bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, >that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education >inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for >all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and >progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some >people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the >Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded >innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There >is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he >is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will >never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that >he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. > > > Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter > 6424 N Whipple St > Chicago IL 60645-4111 > (1-773)7613784 landline > (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice > jay at m5.chicago.il.us -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 14:03:32 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish Message-ID: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> >From The Jewish Press , by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev [literally, "the fish of the sword"] is kasher. Why is it widely considered to be not kosher, then? Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different consistency - or something like that - from those of other fish. So he decided it was a treife fish. But that's absolutely not correct. The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag hacherev is kasher. Professor [Shlomo] Sternberg, a big genius in learning and math, published an essay maybe 20 years ago in which he writes that Rabbi Soloveitchik asked him to conduct research on the status of swordfish. He did. He showed Rabbi Soloveitchik the scales of a swordfish and Rav Soloveitchik said, "It's a kashere fish!" Professsor Sternberg writes that he still has the envelope with the scales he showed Rav Soloveitchik in his Gemara Chullin. If the commentaries on the Shuchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev is kosher, how can Rabbi Tendler claim it isn't? Rabbi Tendler claims "dag hacherev" is a different fish. It's not true. But Rabbi Tendler did a service to the Orthodox Jewish community because at the time there were Conservative rabbis who were giving hashgachas, so he laughed them out of existence and said they don't know what they're talking because [they were giving swordfish a hechsher when] swordfish is really treif. So the Orthodox realized you can't rely on the Conservatives. L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue, but Rabbi Tendler accomplished his goal. Well, that's a lot of egg (roe?) on my face after what I said repeatedly in the 1990s in soc.culture.jewish[.moderated] O/C/R Wars... But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. "L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! There is a tie in here to what R JFSchachter posted here yesterday (? no time zone) at 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) under the subject line "Judging The Credibility Of The Sages": > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what > you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when > you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages > have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same > moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- > correction. I was okay attributing ignorance to Chazal, but not violating epstemic virtue like "making up an answer". I would think that by the end of the period, subconsious biases wouldn't have made it into the final result. > At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the > moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the > dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah... Except that daas Torah only requires belief that one is obligated to listen to halachic leadership on social and personal issues where the unknowns are not halachic (or even aggadic). Not that they are necessarily right, nor even that they are more likely to be right. (Infallibility was never Agudah doctrine; but you do find it among the population.) And I am not sure that when it comes to halakhah Chazal *can* be wrong. It's like saying that the house john built is inconsistent with the house John built. Pesaq is constitutive, not truth finding; expecially when you are the nation's authoritative halachic source (eg the Sanhedrin or shas as keSanhedrin, depending on when you think the Sanhedrin actually closed its doors). A pesaq made by CHazal based on incorrect science may still be correct halakhah because they define correctness. We would need to revisit our recurring tereifos discussion. But in any case: 1- I refuse to believe Chazal "made up answers" of had other epistemic moral failings (as a group, including peer review, what made it into shas, etc...) And I wonder how emunas chakhamim would work without that kind of assertion. 2- And yet, that may have happened here, among our contemporary posqim. No one is interested in fixing the science error (among those who believe it is in error) because C loses this way. 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? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 12:49:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 15:49:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425194944.GC6722@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:32:13AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 : > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 : : Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav : concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of : 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" : and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". ... : The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is : *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is : doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an : inappropriate thought? I think it's more that the high isn't from the halachic aspect of what they're doing. Rather than it having to be halkhah qua halakhah. I am not sure that "one is doing ratzon H'" is different than "being mequyam a mitzvah" anyway. As for "getting closer to H'", Litvaks would talk more about sheleimus than deveiqus. IMHO this is part of RYBS being, fundamentally, a Brisker. Here's a quote I feel is on a similar theme, from "The Rav: The World of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik", starting on pg 54: Judaism must be explained and expounded on a proper level. I have read many pamphlets that have been published in the United States with the purpose of bringing people closer to Judaism. There is much foolishness and narrishkeit in some of these publications. For instance, a recent booklet on the Sabbath stressed the importance of a white tablecloth. A woman recently told me that the Sabbath is wonderful, and that it enhances her spiritual joy when she places a snow-white tablecloth on her table. Such pamphlets also speak about a sparkling candelabra. Is this true Judaism? You cannot imbue real and basic Judaism by utilizing cheap sentimentalism and stressing empty ceremonies. Whoever attempts such an approach underestimates the intelligence of the American Jew. If you reduce Judaism to religious sentiments and ceremonies, then there is no role for rabbis to discharge. Religious sentiments and ceremonies are not solely posessed by Orthodox Jewry. All the branches of Judaism have ceremonies and rituals. This is not the only reason why we must negate such a superficial approach. Today in the United States, American Jewish laymen are achieving intellectual and metaphysical maturity. They wish to discover their roots in depth. We will soon reach a point in time where the majority of our congregants will have academic degrees. Through the mediums of white tablecloths and polished candelabras, you will not bring these people back to Judaism. It is forbidden to publish pamphlets of this nature, which emphasize the emotional and ceremonial approaches. There is another reason why ceremony will not influence the American Jew. In the Unitesd States today, the greatest master of ceremony is Hollywood. If a Jew wants ceremony, all he has to do is turn on the television set. If our approach stresses the ceremonial side of Judaism rather than its moral, ethical, and religious teachings, then our viewpoint will soon become bankrupt. The only proper course is that of Ezekiel's program for the priests: "And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and the common, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean" [Ezekiel 44:23] The rabbi must teach his congregants. He must deepen their appreciation of Judaism and not water it down. If we neutralize and compromise our teachings, then we are no different than the other branches of Judaism. By RYBS's standards, being moved by music at a kumzitz is "ceremony". Meanwhile, Chassidus, Mussar, RSRH, Qabbalah-influenced Sepharadim (following the Chida and Ben Ish Hai) and numerous other derakhim have no problem with ceremony. For that matter, before it became minhag, specifying specific patterns of hand washing (RLRLRL or RRLL) was also ritual once. And many of those Academics that RYBS foresaw want their Nesivos Shalom, Tish, kumzitz.... Neochassidus is a big thing in YU. This idea that ceremonies that aren't defined by halakhah are inherently empty and its sentimentalism is cheap rather than reinforcing the cognitive and halachic, is, as I said, only something a Brisker would write. Even within Brisk... RYBS went further in this direction than did the Brisker Rav (R Velvel, his uncle). The BR holds that one makes berakhos on minhagim that have a cheftzah shel mitzvah (eg lighting a Chanukah menorah in shul), and that the Rambam and Rabbeinu Tam don't argue about that. What they do argue about is whether Chatzi Hallel is close enough to Hallel to qualify for a berakhah. This is a non-started for RYBS, who requires minhagim have a cheftzah shel mitzvah or else they're ceremoial. RYBS even fit the minhagim of the 3 Weeks and 9 Days to fit this shitah by insisting they must follow what was already established aveilus and sheloshim, respectively. Oops. I just notied I'm repeating something I worte a decade ago. See . At least the berkhah-in-minhag part was posted in 2011, so that this post had the value of combining the two earlier ones. Beqitzur, I don't know of two many people (aside from our mutual rebbe-chaver) who would agree with RYBS on this one. 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? From zev at sero.name Wed Apr 25 14:37:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:37:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish In-Reply-To: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 25/04/18 17:03, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish > because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with > scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is > young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are > elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) > So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question > seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify > as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. There can be no question that a fish does *not* have to keep its scales to remain kosher. The posuk says fish only have to have their scales in the water, not when they leave the water. A fish that sheds its scales when caught is kosher, and no rabbi has the right to say otherwise. And I don't see a difference between shedding when caught and shedding on reaching adulthood. As I understand R Tendler's claim, it was that swordfish never have true scales, that even the ones they have as juveniles are not kaskasim. And this seems not to be true. BTW R Ari G and R Ari Z dispute the claim that adults swordfish (or landed swordfish) lose all their scales. They claim that this is the result of not examining adult landed fish closely enough, and that if one does one finds kosher scales still attached to the skin. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Apr 25 16:33:33 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 23:33:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: <06705270-E689-4937-BAAF-0C7AE035E469@tenzerlunin.com> I simply note that (a) all the stories were published after the Rav died and (b) all appear to be least first degree if not more hearsay. (It?s unclear how R. Mandel knows the story. His article doesn?t say if he saw it, heard it from the Rav, or heard it from someone else.) But the difference between the two ways the story is told is striking and, I believe, calls it into question. But I guess we?ll never know. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 26 05:25:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:25:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sifrei torah Message-ID: <6fef9ae673744a11a2ede85a210fb782@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Can anyone point me to information concerning the history of the difference between the physical element of Ashkenazi (atzei chaim) and Eidot Hamizrach (containers) Sifrei Torah? The differences in the timing and physics of hagba and glila ? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Apr 26 10:06:01 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 17:06:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Unknown Days of the Jewish Calender Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NZ9BN1 This coming week, an unsuspecting person wishing to catch a minyan, who walks into a random shul in many places around the world, might be in for a surprise. After the Shemoneh Esrei prayer on Sunday there will be no Tachanun. On Monday there will be Selichos; and on Thursday there again won?t be Tachanun! Why would this be? No Tachanun generally signifies that it is a festive day[1]; yet, no other observances are readily noticeable. As for the reciting of Selichos on Monday, they are usually reserved for a fast day; yet no one seems to be fasting! What is going on? See the above URL for more about this. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 19:43:43 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 22:43:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> On 4/25/2018 11:32 AM, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: >> And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at >> (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav > concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense > of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something > else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". > Does anybody here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? ... > Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah > was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce > inappropriate? > The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he > is thinking that he is being mekayum a mitzvah?... For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a problem. KT, YGB From meirabi at gmail.com Thu Apr 26 15:58:32 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 08:58:32 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach Message-ID: Yeshayahu (15:5) My heart cries out over the destruction of Israels wicked enemy, Moab. Rashi understands, the prophet is expressing his own agony - The prophets of Israel, unlike the prophets of the world, like Bilaam, seek to destroy us without provocation. Our prophets however, mourn for our persecutors when they suffer Divine punishments. As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness, that is certainly more of an intense and personal loss than the millions of Egyptians who perished - but we mourn them all from the perspective of lost potential, lost opportunity to be loyal to HKBH, and HKBH's failure to successfully persuade them to open their eyes and do what is right. That is why we spill wine from the cup we use for Hallel - HKBH's praise is incomplete, He was not fully successful - the gift He gave humanity, free choice, can, and was, used against Him. Obviously the cup should not be topped up. Each plague was a lesson and a plea from HKBH to all who witnessed these astonishing events - do the right thing, reconise that I am the King of all kings, The Master of the universe. Every Yid deserves 600,000 to attend his funeral. The Gemara explains - As it was given So it is taken away. Every Y, even the most Poshut or unlearned, is a potential recipient of the entire Torah and we must visualise their departure as the loss of that tremendous potential. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 26 18:35:26 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:35:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2499630f-df1d-04ef-9897-ef18103da093@sero.name> On 26/04/18 18:58, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of > descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness Where is this written? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri Apr 27 01:04:10 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 10:04:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> References: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> Message-ID: When I was in yeshiva, one of my rabbanim told us that we should dance when we "get" a Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Ben On 4/26/2018 4:43 AM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: > For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a > problem. > > KT, > YGB From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 29 07:49:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 17:49:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: A while ago we had a discussion about farfetched ukimtas. In yesterday's daf (Zevachim 15) the Gemara made a very startling statement about farfetched ukimtas. The Gemara has a question about whether Holachah without walking is Pasul or not. The Gemara brought a proof from a braisa If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher (even though when it spills, some if it spreads out towards the Mizbeach, i.e. Holachah without walking). The Gemara answered that none of the blood spread towards the Mizbeach.The Gemara then asked, surely, it spreads in all directions! The Gemara gave 3 answers 1: It fell on an incline. 2: It fell in a crevice. 3: The blood was very thick, and almost congealed. It did not spread at all. Then the Gemara made the following startling statement to reject these answers: It is UNREASONABLE to say that the Tana taught about such unusual cases The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? I brought an example from Bava Basra 19-20 which had at least as farfetched ukimtas and yet the Gemara didn't think they were unreasonable. Here is the example that I quoted from Bava Basra A Baraisa states that the following block Tumah, grass that was detached and placed in a window, or grew there by itself; rags smaller than three fingers by three fingers; a dangling limb or flesh of an animal; a bird that rested there; a Nochri who sat there, a (i.e. stillborn) baby born in the eighth month; salt; earthenware Kelim; and a Sefer Torah. The Gemara then proceeds to ask questions on each one that it is only there temporarily and the Gemara gives ukimtas, qualifications, for each thing to explain why it is not there temporarily. 1. Grass The grass is poisonous. The wall is ruined (so the grass will not destory it) The grass is 3 tefachim from the wall and does not harm the wall but bends into the window 2. Rags The material is too thick to be used for a patch It's sackcloth which is rough and would scratch the skin. It's not sackcloth, it's just rough like sacklocth 3. Dangling limb of an animal The animal is tied up and can't move. It's a non-kosher animal. It's a weak animal. 3. Bird The bird is tied down. It's a non-kosher bird. It's a Kalanisa (a very lean bird). It's not really a kalanisa, it's just lean like a kalanisa. 4. A non-Jew He is tied up. He is a ?????. He is a prisoner of the king 5. Salt The salt is bitter. There are thorns in it. It's resting on earthernware so it does not harm the wall. 5. Sefer Torah It's worn out. It's burial will be in the window. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 29 22:24:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 05:24:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? -/////---- One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the already known outcome. Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon Apr 30 01:22:56 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:22:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched >> ukimtas? ...` > One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition > as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the > already known outcome. It doesn't sound that way from the Gemara, The Gemara goes as follows: 1. Ula makes a statement that Holachah without walking is Pasul. 2. The Gemara brings a proof against him from a Mishna (where the blood spills, etc.) 3. The Gemara answers for Ula with an ukimta for the Mishna which doesn't contradict his din 4. The gemara says the ukimta is unreasonable Nowehere does it sound like we are reconciling sources with a known outcome. It sounds like a typical give and take found all over shas where ukimtas are simply accepted. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 29 18:59:29 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 21:59:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Question from the Book of Yechezqeil Message-ID: In Yechezqeil, 44:31, he writes that a Kohen shall not eat nevayla (or T?refah). Nobody can eat it so why is there a prohibition for just the Kohen? I?m aware of what Kimchi and Rashi say, but it seems to be a weak explanation. To say the Kohen needed a special warning is stretching it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:55:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:55:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:24:19AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition : as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with : the already known outcome. I don't know if that works here. I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and there are no counterveiling issues involved. Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish case. Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the floor of the azarah and not spread. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:51:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:51:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215105.GB12997@aishdas.org> My first thought was somewhat off topic but feel like it should be related... R' Yirmiyah's banishment from Bavel was over his habit of checking shiurim by posing implausible edge cases. He ends up in EY, and succeeds in the Y-mi. The final question (BB 23b) before his expulsion was whether we assume owned a bird that had one leg within 50 amos of the dovecote (ie within the shiur for the chazaqah for assuming that's its origin) and one leg outside? But there is also when he questions tevu'ah growing at least 1/3 before RH if harvested on Sukkos. Veqim lehu lerabbanan? How can you measure such a thing? (RH 13a) And his question on hashavas aveidah of 1/2 qav in 2 amos, or 2 qav in 8 amos? We assume yi'ush if we find less than 1 qas scattered across 3 amos. Is that a ratio? (BM 2a) How can you say that a revi'is is the amount of mayim chayim that the blood of a metzorah's birds would be niqar within? Wouldn't it depend on the size of the bird? (Sotah 16b) What if a kohein becomes a baal mum while the dam is in the air between his hazayah and it landing on the mizveiach? (Zevachim 15a) According to R' Meir, a miscarriage that was developed enough to have the shape of a beheimah causes tum'as leidah. (As opposed to saying it must be human shaped.) So, R Yirmiyah asked R Zeira, according to R Meir, what if a woman gives birth to such a baby, a girl and the father was meqadeish her to a man? R' Zeira points out that the child wouldn't live 3 years anyway, so bi'ah isn't an issue. R Meir asks: but what about marrying her sister? This one may or may not count, as R' Acha bar Yaaqov says that R Yirmiyah's point was to get R Zeira to laugh. (Niddar 23a) But it does reflect what kind of thing would come to his mind. (Tangent: There are a number of stories that indicate R Zeira needed chearing up. Like the golam Rava sent him. RMMS tied this to "Rav shachat lei leR Zeira".) But when he gets to EY, the Y-mi accepts his question. (Not that the Y-mi ever answers questions that involve guessing what the tanna / amora would have said...) A picker can eat a snack (quantity discussed) before tu"m was taken from the crop. As long as he is holing them. R Yirmiyah asked whether a picker can eat an olive he was juggling -- and thus didn't put down but also isn't just picked. (Maaseros 3:4, vilna daf 17b) Maybe the issue in the OP is about this time rejecting an absurd -- R Yirmiyahu-like -- oqimta is just the difference in styles in different batei medrash? Too haskala-ish to be satisfying? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Mon Apr 30 20:47:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:47:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tuesday, May 1, 2018, Micha Berger wrote: > > > I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is > the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and > there are no counterveiling issues involved. > > Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish > cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish > case. > > Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's > that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the > floor of the azarah and not spread. And it?s easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn?t seem more unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 06:47:36AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is :> the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and :> there are no counterveiling issues involved. :> Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish :> cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish :> case. : And it's easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a : prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn't seem more : unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. I suggest exploring if the distinction is between a din that could only apply in the farfetched case and dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from the distcussion. This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See . (He offered to send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. In a different post, I suggested another line to explore, if you prefer it. Diffierent batei medrash had different tolerances for R Yirmiyahu's questions, and those too also used farfetched cases. And if so, maybe there was one beis medrash during the course of the ccenturies of amoraim that simply had no patience for odd oqimtos; even though they were atypical that way. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 31st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Hod: What level of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 results in harmony and balance? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 1 03:34:33 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 13:34:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > > But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. > > I suggest exploring if the distinction is between > a din that could only apply in the farfetched case > and > dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated > in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from > the distcussion. > > This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought > in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See > . (He offered to > send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta > serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in > this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. > The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without walking from the equation. It would seem to be a perfect example to apply R' Michel Avraham's thesis and yet the Gemara rejects the ukimta as being unreasonable -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue May 1 04:40:42 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 11:40:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: Please see https://goo.gl/ESJERH for two links to a talk given by Rabbi Dr. Shnyer Leiman titled The Strange History of Lag B'Omer. Please see https://goo.gl/s2KHAVfor [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] The Spreading Fires Of Lag Baomer: Tempting Quick & Easy ?Spirituality? vs. Enduring Ruchnius goo.gl In the past we have discussed at length (5771, 5772, 5773A, 5773B, and 5773C) how Lag Baomer is marked in minhag Ashkenaz, and contrasted it with other, more recent customs, that have become popula? See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) No less an authority than Chasam Sofer was strongly opposed to Lag B'Omer celebrations. He argued that one should not make a new Yom Tov that is not based on a miraculous event, that has no basis in Shas and Poskim, and that is based on the death of someone. (See here for links.) See https://goo.gl/Zma8pS [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] No ? No ? No ? No ? No ? Minhag Ashkenaz & Recent Lag Ba?omer Innovations ? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ?????, ??? ?????, ??????, ?????, ??? ???? goo.gl Yes, it is that time of the year again. Lag ba?omer is almost here. And with it, all the hype and solicitations for trips to Meron, Chai Rotel Mashkeh donations, upsherin, bonfires, and the l? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:54:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:54:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:34:33PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter : (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that : blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The : ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without : walking from the equation... I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Tue May 1 04:25:47 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 14:25:47 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the > stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. > And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's > not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. The Gemara starts with Ula stating a din that holacha without walikng is pasul. The Gemara then brings down the following statment from a Mishna If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher. The Gemara then asks on Ula from this Mishna, namely that the blood must have moved towards the Mizbeach, e.g. holacha without walking and it is kosher. The Gemara then answers with the implausible ukimtos to explain the Mishna. In other words, it seems that the ukimtos are there to explain the Mishna namely that the Mishna provides a principle that blood that falls on the floor is kosher and the ukimtas are there to remove any extraneous factors such as holacha without walking. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 1 15:57:50 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 18:57:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ahava Eternal Message-ID: <2060439B-6A01-4D14-AC06-6D6675AC6381@cox.net> I heard a beautiful d?rash by Rabbi Yosef Shusterman (Chabad of Beverly Hills). He said the following: If you ask 20 people the definition of ?LOVE,? you will get 20 different responses. However, the best definition of love is the Jewish definition. He uses gematria. The gematria of Ahava is 13 and the gematria of Echod is 13. ?Love" is when you are at ?one? with whomever or whatever. Theologically, the love of God is when you are at one with God. Sometimes it takes an entire lifetime to reach that madreiga. I am in you and you in me, mutual in divine love. William Blake (18th c. poet, painter and printmaker) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 2 01:33:44 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 08:33:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of?= =?windows-1252?q?_Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/W49XHX Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. See the above URL for more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 07:10:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 10:10:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <64a22eb4-af1e-fab5-373f-889b1083cd08@sero.name> On 02/05/18 04:33, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From https://goo.gl/W49XHX > > > Toras Aba ?just put up an interesting post > discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to > similarity with ancient practice of idolators. > > See the above URL for more. And yet your precious Minhag Ashkenaz was to (have a nochri) make a bonfire and dance before it (or around it) on Simchas Torah. R Wosner was asked about doing so in camp, stam on a Wednesday, not on Lag Bo'omer when it is, at least in Meron, Chevron, and a few other places in Eretz Yisroel, a long-established minhog practiced by tzadikim and chachomim who were much greater than R Wosner or anyone else you can cite. I don't believe it occurred to him that someone might apply this teshuvah to those fires, and it's dishonest to do so. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 09:04:58 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:04:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:33:44AM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : From https://goo.gl/W49XHX : Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. Most of us have little problem with Israel's Moment of Silence on Yom haZikaron and Yom haSho'ah, at least not Derekh Emori problems. And we wear ties. There are limits to invoking Derekh Emori. To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last days too. And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah kekhol hayom". At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled later than the norm, this evening.) I don't know the origin. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 09:45:50 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:45:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> On 02/05/18 12:04, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag > baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) > and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas > simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo > velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than > waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the > Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last > days too. > > And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo > you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I > have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah > kekhol hayom". > > At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I > know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled > later than the norm, this evening.) > > I don't know the origin. The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. A cessation of mourning, such as the last day of shiva, obviously begins in the morning. Nor is it an occasion for joy; when one gets up from shiva one doesn't go dancing and singing. Thus the restrictions are lifted only after daybreak, and tachanun is said at mincha on the previous day, just as it is on the other three days whose observance begins in the morning, viz Pesach Sheni, Erev Rosh Hashana, and Erev Yom Kippur. But the celebration of Rashbi is a positively happy occasion, so it starts immediately at nightfall, and no tachanun is said at the previous mincha. The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and relies heavily on the Magen Avraham. (He later expressed regret over his over-reliance on the MA, which is one reason why he wrote a second edition, only a few chapters of which are extant.) So it's not surprising that this is the psak found there, however it is not the psak that was followed in Chabad, which means in practice he paskened differently. (Sometimes it means he changed his mind, but sometimes he never paskened in practice as he wrote in the SA, for the reasons I mentioned above.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 10:53:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 13:53:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : >I don't know the origin. : : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain how or when the older minhag was changed. And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. ... : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 11:25:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 14:25:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> On 02/05/18 13:53, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : >I don't know the origin. > : > : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the > : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of > : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the > : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. > > That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain > how or when the older minhag was changed. It follows that the minhag changed when the significance of the day changed. In other words, the minhogim of the day when R Akiva's talmidim stopped dying did not change, but on top of them came a whole new layer of minhogim for the new holiday that occupies the same day on the calendar. For a similar example, the significance of 3 Tammuz in Lubavitch changed dramatically in 5754. The earlier significance of that day and whatever practices it had did not go away, e.g. those who did not say tachanun on 3 Tammuz before 5754 still don't say it, while those who did still do, but the new significance, and the host of practices that came with it, overwhelmed the earlier significance and observance. > And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" > is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. Doesn't the Idra Zuta say that Rashbi asked for his hilula to be celebrated rather than mourned? > You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, > after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, > in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) > that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, > Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. Whether it's the correct explanation of the Pri Etz Chaim or not, it is the one held by the people actually doing the celebrating, and thus fully explains their practices. > ... > : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which > : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and > : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... > > I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to suppose they didn't exist in his day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 15:57:53 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 18:57:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> Message-ID: <4b464085-efab-7164-2d33-7726eba6a069@sero.name> On 02/05/18 14:25, Zev Sero wrote: >> >> : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which >> : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and >> : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... >> I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. > They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to > suppose they didn't exist in his day. PS: Indirect evidence that in the AR's day the night of Lag Baomer was already considered part of the simcha is that in his siddur (as opposed to his SA) he wrote that tachanun is not said at mincha of erev Lag Baomer. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 3 07:01:56 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 03 May 2018 10:01:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?iso-8859-1?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= References: Message-ID: At 12:04 PM 5/2/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag >baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) >and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas >simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo >velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than >waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the >Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last >days too. > >And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo >you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I >have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah >kekhol hayom". > >At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of Aveilus on the 34th day? If so, how can Sefardim go to Meron on the night of the 33rd? I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at Tzeis and who started it. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 3 06:04:34 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:04:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tzedaka priorities Message-ID: The S"A in O"C 152:1 codifies a prohibition against tearing down a synagogue before building a new one (one must build the new one first). The M"B (4) gives the reason for this prohibition as a concern that if one had not built the new one first, a case of pidyon shvuyim(captive's redemption) might arise requiring funds to be diverted from the new construction. 1. Why couldn't the chachamim make a takana in that case? 2. Why would the chachamim work around required priorities? 3. Doesn't 152:6 says you would sell a synagogue anyway in a case of pidyon shvuyim? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 09:03:10 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 12:03:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on the > night of the 33rd? The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve either of those things. (There is no issur on music during sefirah; that seems to be a modern invention, presumably because in modern times we've become lenient on the prohibition against music at any time, so we need to impose a restriction during sefirah, whereas earlier generations who were strict with the general prohibition didn't feel a need to strengthen it now.) > I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at > Tzeis and who started it. As I wrote earlier, it seems associated with the adoption of the Rashbi's celebration on top of the earlier marking of the end of the plague among R Akiva's students. Thus it would probably have started in Tzfas in the late 16th century and spread into Europe in the 18th century together with the AriZal's kabbalah. (Note that according to the AriZal, not cutting hair is not connected to avelus, and applies on Lag Ba`omer as well, except for upsherenishen. But not having weddings is because of avelus, so if we're celebrating Yom Simchas Rashbi they should be permitted.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 10:13:07 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:13:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on : >the night of the 33rd? : : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve : either of those things... An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 10:17:41 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:17:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> On 03/05/18 13:13, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on > : >the night of the 33rd? > : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are > : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve > : either of those things... > An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. For children, who are not obligated in aveilus anyway. But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and the answer is the same way they go by day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 11:56:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 14:56:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and : the answer is the same way they go by day. The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both Ashk and Seph? Yes, if the party happened to be during the day, I would have the same question WRT Sepharadim (only). So how does pointing out that fact help me any in answering it? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 33rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total Fax: (270) 514-1507 submission to truth, and what results? From simon.montagu at gmail.com Thu May 3 16:36:11 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 02:36:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 > > > Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is > > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did that before the 16th century. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 12:08:37 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 15:08:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> On 03/05/18 14:56, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and > : the answer is the same way they go by day. > > The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > Ashk and Seph? And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do so from nightfall. (b) The Meron celebrations, which the question was about, don't violate the sefira observances anyway. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 05:04:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 08:04:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer Message-ID: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:24 AM 5/4/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > > > >I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings >Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did >that before the 16th century. In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to show that it was not really part of the davening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 05:14:32 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:14:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Bow_and_Arrow_on_Lag_B=92Omer?= Message-ID: >From http://www.collive.com/show_news.rtx?id=50532 A 4-year-old son of a Shliach in Florida was hit in his eye by an arrow on Lag BaOmer. Please pray for Baruch Shmuel ben Chana. I do hope he has a refuah shleima. This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. >From https://goo.gl/kumYeX One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn?t even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a break from their Torah studies. It is also surprising that they should pass the time with such a martial activity, seemingly out of character with the day devoted to the man of peace. Rav Menachem Mendel of Rimanov, one of the early Hasidic Rebbes, explained that the custom is based on the Midrash which states that all the days of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, the rainbow didn?t appear in the sky. (Ketubot 77b the same is said there of Rebbe Yehoshua ben Levi.) Rashi explains that the rainbow is the sign of the covenant that the world will not be destroyed, and if there is a perfect tzaddik in the world there is no need of such a sign. (Cited by B?nei Yissachar on Lag BaOmer.) See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 07:58:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:58:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both :> Ashk and Seph? : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do : so from nightfall... You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something aggadic. But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from what I was raised to believe on that. I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and rishonim couldn't have known about? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 07:05:58 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:05:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Mysterious Origin of Lag Ba-Omer Message-ID: Please see http://www.hakirah.org/Vol20First.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 4 09:57:47 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 18:57:47 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Bottom line: They do it or they don't? Ben On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time,? and I > was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to > show that it was not really part of the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:41:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:41:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Let me begin with Daas Torah. ... : The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a : result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this : was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. So what are those formulations? Here are 3 I know of: 1- Given how the gadol's mind is shapeds by his learning, he is a useful resource for advice. He could be wrong, but aren't your odds better by asking? 2- Asking a gadol will get you the answer Hashem wants you to act on, whether it is the truth or not. E.g. the error of advising agaisnt fleeing the Nazis was because that was what Hashem wanted of us. But it was still pragmatically in error. I also see hints of this model in RALichtenstein's "Im Ein Daas, Manhigut Minayin?" but with the added caveat that RAL didn't expect to find daas Torah in practice. (Not since RSZA.) Again, just implications; I could be reading too much into the essay. 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, they are supposed to lead. RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like the same model. Notice that all advocate listening to gedolim even on non-halachic matters, but not because of any guarantees about accuracy. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:52:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:52:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180504165212.GC13247@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 07:12:36AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They : have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye : (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so : much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses.... The relationship to a kohein is trickier than that, as their is no tum'ah until after the declaration. He is more parallel to an eid qiyum than an eid birur. For example, Vayiqra 14:36 tells a person to remove all the items from his home before the kohein comes to inspect a potential nega in it. Even even if the kohein sees the same unchanged splotch and declares it a nega, those itsems are not tamei. It wasn't a nega until the declaration. ... : My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would : become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate : some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just : another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve : myself in general." Tum'as leidah isn't because something is spiritually awry with the mother. So I am not sure we have to assume that zivah is like tzara'as. Lefi RSRH, tum'ah comes from things that could make us overly identify with our bodies -- death, birth, the kinds of sheratzim that share our homes (in EY), niddah... Zivah and leidah would fit that pattern. So would tzara'as, because it too feels like the body is rebelling against the will. The difference is that chazal is saying the body really is rebelling (or made to show rebellion) against a tainted will. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From zev at sero.name Fri May 4 11:15:17 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:15:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 04/05/18 10:58, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > :> Ashk and Seph? > > : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in > : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus > : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't > : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do > : so from nightfall... > > You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, > nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new > information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. Nothing is being uprooted. Something new has come. Just as when a local "Purim" or lehavdil a fast is declared. > If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a > comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something > aggadic. > > But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind > the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous > revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from > what I was raised to believe on that. > > I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence > of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation > anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take > over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in > this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and > rishonim couldn't have known about? They didn't know about the Zohar, let alone the Idra Zuta and R Shimon's request that people rejoice at his "hilula". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 11:51:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 14:51:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:57 PM 5/4/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >Bottom line: They do it or they don't? > >Ben >On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >>Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and >>I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it >>to show that it was not really part of the davening. > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the beginning are said responsively. The Shatz stands at the table where leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 12:06:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 15:06:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <7E.8C.04381.0DFACEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:41 PM 5/4/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Let me begin with Daas Torah. >... >: The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a >: result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this >: was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. > >It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the >popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues >speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are >infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. Please see the article To Flee Or To Stay? at http://www.hakirah.org/vol%209%20bobker.pdf At the end of the article it says, "This article is excerpted from Joe Bobker's "The Rabbis and the Holocaust," to be published by Geffen Books in the summer of 2010." However, to the best of my knowledge this book was never published, and I have always wondered why. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 5 11:45:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 05 May 2018 20:45:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1ed3f3d3-7cb6-927c-da0f-e22d19aa3a4e@zahav.net.il> Bseder. We are all agreed that even Frankfurt changed their seider Tefilla sometime in the last few hundred years. Many shuls have someone, even a child, say (sing) the tehillim from the bimah. Ben On 5/4/2018 8:51 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the > beginning are said responsively.? The Shatz stands at the table where > leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over > he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun May 6 01:53:37 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 11:53:37 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: Yesterday's daf (Zevachim 22) has another wild ukimta that seems to just be there to answer a question on an amora and not provide a sterile environment to learn out a new principle. Here is the gist of the Gemara: R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina states if the Kiyor does not contain enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim, it is invalid - "v'Rachatzu Mimenu Moshe v'Aharon u'Vanav." The Gemara asks a question from the following Baraisa: One may be Mekadesh from any Keli Shares, whether or not it contains a Revi'is of water (this is much less then the water needed for 4 people) Rav Ada bar Acha answers: The case is, the Keli Shares was carved into the Kiyor (so the water comes from the Kiyor, which contains enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim). I don't see any way that you can say here that the ukimta is to remove extraneous dinim etc. The ukimta here seems to serve one and only one purpose, explain the Barisa that it is not a question on an Amora. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From saul.mashbaum at gmail.com Sun May 6 06:41:09 2018 From: saul.mashbaum at gmail.com (Saul Mashbaum) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 16:41:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: RYL >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. Saul Mashbaum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 05:28:41 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 15:28:41 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire Message-ID: << And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. >> Fore details about the printing error to give rise to the idead that Lag Baomer is Rashbi's yahrzeit see http://seforim.blogspot.co.il/2011/05/ changing subjects one of the weirdest experiences I had was a bunch of black coated Chevra kadisha dancing about a grave in Bet Shemesh at 12 midnight with just a flashlight for light -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 07:21:11 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 17:21:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: <> OTOH there is the gemara that when there was the dispute in Yavneh between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. This story took place many years before talmidim of R. Akiva (who was junior at that time) died. If so Rashbi was a known talmid many years before R. Akiva revived Torah . As an aside other taananim survived the bar kochba wars including talmidim of R, Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at mail.aol.com Sun May 6 11:22:13 2018 From: t613k at mail.aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 14:22:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bow and Arrow on Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16336b09884-c88-1c19@webjas-vaa039.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 5/6/2018 7:51:35 AM EST, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org writes: From: "Professor L. Levine" > This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. > From https://goo.gl/kumYeX >> One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is >> less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows >> and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe >> Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn't >> even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a >> break from their Torah studies..... Torah sages and their students learned Torah secretly in the woods, hiding from the Roman soldiers. They took bows and arrows with them and if they were found in the woods, they would say they were out hunting. That's what I was told when I was a little girl. I don't know if this is associated with R' Akiva and his talmidim, or with R' ShBY. As a child I thought the story was about young children and didn't realize until later that it must have been adult students with bows and arrows in the woods. (Yes I know Jews don't hunt for food or for sport, but maybe the Romans didn't know that. Or the Jews could plausibly say they hunted for hides and fur.) PS All my Areivims and Avodahs lately are deformed by great quantities of question marks. If anyone knows how to stop this from happening, please let me know. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com -- From driceman at optimum.net Sun May 6 17:58:21 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 19:58:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> RMB: > 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus > stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the > Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act > as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make > gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on > personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, > they are supposed to lead. > > RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before > RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who > carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the > names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked > questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like > the same model. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? David Riceman From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sat May 5 12:17:25 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 5 May 2018 22:17:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Sacrificies Message-ID: Question: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat had to bring the animal to as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result in hundreds -- Eli Turkel From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 7 04:19:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 14:19:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices Message-ID: R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he was permanently a Kohen; From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:37:00 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:37:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 06/05/18 10:21, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > This story took place many years before talmidim?of R. Akiva (who was > junior at that time) died. On the contrary, R Akiva was very senior at the time of these disputes. In the mishna in Rosh Hashana he was one of the two who counseled R Yehoshua to obey R Gamliel's order, and in Berachos when R Gamliel was deposed he was one of only three candidates considered to replace him. > If so Rashbi was a known talmid?many years before R. Akiva revived Torah > .?As an aside other taananim?survived the bar kochba?wars including > talmidim?of R, Yishmael What have Bar Kochva or his wars got to do with any of this? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:45:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:45:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> References: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> Message-ID: <44c411ba-2fee-9ae7-82d6-de3850c6417a@sero.name> On 06/05/18 20:58, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus >> stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the >> Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act >> as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make >> gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on >> personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, >> they are supposed to lead. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim who are to guide them. There need to be askanim because the chachamim have no time for klal work; they're busy learning and will neglect it. So those who lack either the head or the bottom for full-time learning can be the administrators, and when they need guidance they will consult the chachamim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Wed Apr 25 14:17:16 2018 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:17:16 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5AEFEEE1.1030601@biu.ac.il> Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: >>From The Jewish Press >, >by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): ... > Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if > he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi > Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called > up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different... ... >"L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! The attached has lots of relevant information. [Attachment stored at -micha] From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 08:00:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 11:00:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 07/05/18 07:19, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen > even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes > in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was > considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen > only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); > others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he > was permanently a Kohen; Thank you. Note the context: Rav stated outright that Moshe was a cohen gadol, and the gemara cites this braisa to show his source, that he was ruling like the Yesh Omrim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 8 12:40:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 15:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 3000 Year Old Mansion Implies a Sizable Malkhus Beis David Message-ID: <20180508194052.GA19392@aishdas.org> >From . What struck me is what appears to be the weakness of the objection -- some of the results are from a poor source, and even though they converge with other results, we'll question the whole thing? Does This 3,000-Year-Old House Confirm King David's Lost Biblical Kingdom? By Owen Jarus, Live Science Contributor | May 3, 2018 02:50pm ET Archaeologists have discovered a sprawling, possibly 3,000-year-old house that suggests a biblical kingdom called the United Monarchy, ruled by King David and later Solomon according to the Hebrew Bible, actually existed. The archaeologists who excavated the house, at a site now called Tel Eton, in Israel, said in an article published online March 13 in the journal Radiocarbon that the date, design and size of the house indicates that a strong organized government existed at Tel Eton around 3,000 years ago. They added that this government may be the United Monarchy. The site is located in the central part of Israel in a region called the Shephalah. ... In their paper, Faust and Sapir argue that evidence supporting the existence of the United Monarchy is often not studied because of a problem they call the "old house effect." The site of Tel Eton, including the massive house, was destroyed by the Assyrians during the eighth century B.C. As such, the house held a vast amount of remains dating to that century, but relatively few remains that date to 3,000 years ago when the house was first built. This "old house effect" is a problem commonly seen in Israel and at archaeological sites in other countries, the archaeologists said. "Buildings and strata can exist for a few centuries, until they are destroyed, but almost all the finds will reflect this latter event," wrote Faust and Sapir, noting that archaeologists need to be careful to dig down and find the oldest remains of the structures they are excavating so they don't miss remains that could provide clues to the United Monarchy. Israel Finkelstein, a professor at Tel Aviv University who has written extensively about the United Monarchy debate, expressed skepticism about the results. Two of the four samples used for radiocarbon dating are olive pits, which pose a problem, he said. "The single olive pits come from fills [material that accumulated on the surface of the floor before the floor broke apart]. They have no importance whatsoever [for] dating the building. At Megiddo, my dig, samples like this, single items/fills, are not being sent to the lab to be dated, because they enter bias into the dating system," Finkelstein said. "There is no connection whatsoever between the finds at Tel Eton and the biblical description of the United Monarchy." Faust told Live Science he expects that some archaeologists would be critical of the use of material found in the remains of the floors for radiocarbon dating. He noted that all the radiocarbon dates, those from the olive pits and from the charcoal, converge around 3,000 years. "The convergence of the dates suggest that we are on safe grounds," Faust said. He also noted that one of the charcoal samples is not from the floor but from the foundation deposit (the chalice), strengthening the conclusion that the house was built around 3,000 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 38th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Yesod: How does reliability Fax: (270) 514-1507 promote harmony in life and relationships? From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue May 8 13:05:25 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 23:05:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer Message-ID: >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag in the places I have seen -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Tue May 8 15:31:28 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 01:31:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 11:05 PM, Eli Turkel via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > >>> > In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some > places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is > leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. > This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. > >>>> > > This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> > > Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. > In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag > in the places I have seen > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Tue May 8 17:28:19 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 20:28:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Me > >> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? RZS: > > Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those > doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim > who are to guide them. Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. David Riceman From eliturkel at gmail.com Wed May 9 00:33:02 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:33:02 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: A while ago there was a debate about gebrochs while some condemned the minhag others defended it. I suggest reading an article by Brown https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 (4th on the list) It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those practices that can be traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a select few don't count. He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of elitism that only gedolim count. OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at most) His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in terms of protecting their communities from modernism. I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. Again see the above article for more details -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Tue May 8 21:46:46 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 14:46:46 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer & Rashbi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2700442c-cb3b-4267-b4bc-7e47e0d3efc8@yypwn-sl-yzhq-hkhn-blbyn> See also From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 02:53:57 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 05:53:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 01:31:28AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but : parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or : by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and : acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only : at Kaddish before Barechu At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night (in the US, mostly Syrian), everyone chants everything together. No shatz, and no one taking the lead even section by section. As per the first clause above. Somoene takes the lead for Bameh Madliqin from their seat. Chazan starts at pre-Qaddish material for Arbit. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:12:47 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:12:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 18:31, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: > > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but > parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together > or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing > up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame > Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu In other words, the same as pesukei dezimra, or the ashre and uva letzion before mincha. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed May 9 10:59:33 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 19:59:33 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> References: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At the Yemenite place I go to Friday night, everyone chants Kabbalat Shabbat together (same tune, every week, for the whole thing). An elderly person will get the kavod of saying the first line of Lecha Dodi out loud, but the rest is sung together. After Lecha Dodi, they say four lines from Shir HaShirim and then one person leads them in a "Bar Yochai" song (this kavod is auctioned off). After that, all together for BeMah Madlilin and Mizmor L'yom Hashabbat. On 5/9/2018 11:53 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night . . . From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:21:40 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:21:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 20:28, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: >> Me >> >>> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? > > RZS: >> >> Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those >> doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim >> who are to guide them. > > Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not the rav who guided him. Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. But at any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to do their job properly they can't be learning all day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:27:09 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 03:33, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 9 12:54:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 19:54:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation Message-ID: Many years ago when my two oldest grandsons were in elementary school in yeshiva, they began to speak in a derogatory manner abut non-Jews. They had heard these things from their fellow students. Their father, my oldest son, and I made it clear to them that this was not the appropriate way to speak about human beings who were created by Ha Shem with a neshama. Fortunately, they listened to us and changed their attitude. No one is saying that one must be "buddy buddy" with gentiles, but they are to be treated with proper respect. I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/letter_11.pdf While I suggest that everyone read the entire letter, below are some excerpts from it. MISHPATIM. All these insights, however, are of value only if you truly live your life according to what you, as man and Yisraelite in God's world, with your God-given powers, have recognized. The first requirement is, therefore, that you practice justice: -Respect every being in your surroundings, as well as everything within yourself, as a creation of your God, -Respect whatever is theirs as given to them by God or as having been acquired according to Divinely sanctioned law. Let them keep, or have, whatever they are entitled by right to call their own; do not be a source of harm to -others! -Respect every human being as your equal. Respect him, his inner self as well as his outer garment-his body-and his life) Respect his property, too, as a legal extension of his body. Respect his claim to property or services that you have to render to him, 1 properly measured or counted, as well as his claim to compensation for harm done to his body or property. -Respect his right to know the truth and his right to freedom, happiness, peace of mind,P honor and a peaceful existence. -Never abuse the frailty of his body, mind or heart/ and never misuse your legal power over him. The Chukkim require of you: -respect for all that exists, as God's property: do not destroy anything! do not misuse it! do not waste! use everything wisely -respect for all the species: their order was established by God-do not intermingle them;u respect for all creatures: they are servants in the household of Creation; v respect for the feelings and instincts of animals;w respect for the human body, even after the soul has departed;x respect for your own body: maintain it, as it is the repository, messenger and instrument of the spirit; -limitation of your own instincts and animal-like actions: subordinate them to God's Law, so that, truly human and sanctified, they can help you attain the holy goal of mankind and will not turn you into a mere animal; -respect for your soul, when you nourish its tool, the body: supply the body only with such nourishment that will enable it to act as a pure and willing messenger of the world to the spirit, and of the spirit to the world, rather than giving it food that will induce sluggishness and sensuality; -concealment and sublimation of the animal in you, rather than according it too much respect and attention: only thus will the conflict within you ultimately be resolved, and the animal in you will also aspire only to the truly human; -lastly, respect for your own person in its purest expression-your power of speech. In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources can express a derogatory view of gentiles. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 19:50:36 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 22:50:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 15:54, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters [...] > [...] > In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources > can express a [contrary view] How about because they are Torah sources, and are therefore not required to agree with your favorite 19th-century writer. On the contrary, you should ask how he could contradict Torah sources. (The answer being that he found some contrary sources which appealed more to him, so he adopted their view; that was his right, but nobody else is required to do the same.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From sholom at aishdas.org Wed May 9 08:15:51 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:15:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 20:09:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 23:09:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180510030910.GB2931@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 11:15:51AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : We know Rashi's famous question and answer: that shmita eitzel har sinai : here is to show us that this, too, and all the details, were also given at : har sinai. See my vertl at . That's the Sifra that Rashi is quoting. : My question, however, is: why davka _this_ mitzvah (shmita/yovel)? Other : mitzvos could have been used to demonstrate the point that Rashi mentions. Rashi mentions that shemittah isn't taught in Devarim. The Malbim explains that this is unexpected, since shemittah didn't apply until entering EY, and such mitzvos tend to be the ones introduced in Devarim. : Thoughts? I ran with it... Suggesting that the whole point is that the reductionist approach doesn't work to understanding Torah. This was brought to light bedavqa with a mitzvah that isn't needed to be known yet for its own sake. But the whole picture was given at Sinai, even shemittah, so that we can understand any of the picture. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 39th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliable person? From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 01:57:15 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:57:15 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? >> My apologies. See https://www.academia.edu/36530833/A_translated_chapter_from_The_Hazon_Ish_Halakhist_Believer_and_Leader_of_the_Haredi_Revolution_The_Gaon_of_Vilna_the_Hatam_Sofer_and_the_Hazon_Ish_-_Minhag_and_the_Crisis_of_Modernity_English_?auto=download&campaign=weekly_digest which has several articles besides the one by Brown, Alternatively, send an email to eliturkel at gmail.com and I can send the article -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 02:43:30 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:43:30 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya 3rd line in the widest lines near the bottom and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about 130-135 CE. Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died about 20 years earlier (see eg wikipedia on Gamliel II) It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 07:51:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 10:51:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Me: >> >> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. RZS: > > Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every > Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not > the rav who guided him. No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. > Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a > yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. Again the Reish Galusa determined public policy, the hachamim determined halacha. > But at > any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the > full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to > do their job properly they can't be learning all day. The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his role? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 10 09:08:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:08:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:51:16AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : The claim that "da'as Torah" is derived from din melech is precisely the : claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise : in other fields... That's NOT the way I understood R' Dovid [haLevi] Cohen at all. We want a melekh, separate from the beis din hagadol. Although one person can be in both roles, like when Chazal refer to "Shelomo uveis dino." However, ba'avoseinu harabbim we lost the melukhah. The obligation of obeying the melekh devolved into obeyind the Sanhedrin. (This would have to have been some time between Gedaliah and Ezra, inclusive.) Obeying the melekh wasn't based on the melekh's comptenecy, but the need for order in running a society. (And, I guess some reason(s) why HQBH advised monarchy in particular as the means of getting that order, except according to some readings of RAYK. But RAYK didn't hold of the shitah we're looking at, so ein kan hamaqom leha'rikh.) Then, we lost the Sanhedrin. Today's rabbanim fill in -- either as their shelichim, or . The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. And just as the melekh might not be the expert across all of society, the Sanhedrin or today's rabbanim might not be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 40th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Yesod: When does Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliability/self-control mean submitting to others? From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 10 06:30:06 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93normal_practice=94?= Message-ID: <4ee8a413f67f49da89acceed596b8f72@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I was bothered by the gemara-Megilla 26a where it says Jerusalem apartment ?owners? took ?gifts? by force as ?rental? from olei regal. The Beit Mordechai (2:16), who lived in the early 20th century, raises the same question and says since the normal practice in Israel was for renters to leave something for the innkeeper in addition to the rental payment, so innkeepers in Jerusalem would take it by force since they could not charge rent. He admits that it?s possible that this would be considered stealing but because of this ?normal practice? of leaving something, it?s almost like they had a legal claim and therefore they felt they could take the items. Interesting that I couldn?t find earlier authorities bothered by this but maybe I missed something. Any thoughts appreciated. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 08:15:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:15:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6f2cda5f-ce57-a7a3-36af-3cc0b767dc9f@sero.name> On 10/05/18 05:43, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh >> between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it wasRashbithat was involved. > > I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, > and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > > > Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya?3rd line in the widest > lines near the bottom > and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Thank you. > Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about > 130-135 CE. Why do you suppose he was killed around that time rather than much later? If he was killed then, then he would have been born around 10-15 CE, have started learning Torah around 15-20 years before the churban, and have come back home with all those talmidim 4-9 years after it. Doesn't it seem more likely that his Torah learning started after the churban, and after Kalba Savua had resettled somewhere and reestablished himself, which would mean his death was also several decades after Bar Kochva? > Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died?about 20 years earlier (see eg > wikipedia?on Gamliel II) > > It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the > story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. Why is this at all difficult to believe? What makes it difficult? > So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of > the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant If you assume both that the students died then and that he himself died then, then when did he have time to teach his five new students? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 10 05:57:21 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 08:57:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim Message-ID: At 10:44 PM 5/9/2018, R Eli Turkel wrote: >I suggest reading an article by Brown >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2Fu%2F0%2F%23search%2Fhillel%2F1633fd7c1ed2a4a7&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce7f2ed89c0b04a153b9008d5b61fe896%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C1%7C636615170523842613&sdata=KHDvBEGhAvUsiq8oxUjnwZDX%2Bt0hzpo7D25XR2o0CPA%3D&reserved=0 > > >It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish > >Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent >past >basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those >practices that can be >traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a >select few don't count. >He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that >the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even >communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of >elitism that only gedolim count. > >OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of >the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In >fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their >unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at >most) > >His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in >terms of protecting their communities from modernism. >I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between >litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. I believe you are referring to an article that recently appeared in Hakirah that is at https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjyg6mKmfvaAhVCuVkKHeutBeYQFggtMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hakirah.org%2FVol24Shandelman.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3XZQch0OGem-hvrLpivEHB (I cannot access the link you give above, because I do not have a google account.) I found this article most disappointing and sent the email below to the Editors of Hakirah Subject: The Gaon of Vilna, the Hatam Sofer, and the Hazon Ish: Minhag and the Crisis of Modernity To the Editor: I must admit that the title of this article truly attracted my attention. However, after reading it I was sorely disappointed. The author writes at the beginning of the article, "We have seen that from the 1930's to the 1950's at least, the position of the Hazon Ish remained consistent and unyielding: A minhag has no normative status of its own, and at best can only be adduced as evidence for an actual halakhic ruling, which in turn derives its authority strictly from corroboration by qualified halakhists." He then goes on to point out that both the GRA and the Hazon Ish did not observe many minhagim that most people do observe. However, he does not give us a list of the minhagim they did not observe nor does he give us a list of the minhagim that they did observe. Surely these should have been included in detail in this article. Later in the article the author writes, "These two Orthodox groups [the Hungarian Orthodox and the latter-day hasidic] turned minhag into an endless opportunity for the creation of new humrot. And this only goes to show that it is not always a broken connection with the 'living tradition' that facilitates the creation of a dynamic of humrot. Again, I think that the article should have included a detailed list of these Chumras. In my opinion, this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much substance. What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about nothing." Dr. Yitzchok Levine -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 10 06:58:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:58:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Wild Wild State of Kashrus Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/2bPRtq It was an innovative way of saving money. The municipality worked it out that they would outsource the financial cost of the Department of Health inspectors. From now on, it would be the restaurants themselves that would hire the health inspectors. The restaurants would pay them, they would take out the FICA taxes, the worker?s comp ?? the restaurant would handle it all. The move ?worked wonders? for the state of health in the restaurants. Eateries that were previously designated with a C minus rating were now rated A plus and health violation write ups were down too. The astute reader will detect an obvious problem here. This is what is called a classic conflict of interest. The upgraded rating and lowered violations are probably due to the unique financial arrangement. When an inspector is paid by the people he supervises there is a risk that his judgment and actions will be unduly influenced. The safety of the restaurant consumers has been placed at risk. Indeed, the general public has also been placed in danger. SAME FOR KASHRUS The same should be true in the field of Kashrus. The mashgiach is there to protect the public from eating non-kosher or questionable items just as the health inspector is there to protect the public from anything that can compromise their health and safety. RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN ZT?L Indeed, last generation?s Gadol haDor, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, in his Igros Moshe (YD Vol. IV #1:8) writes that the Mashgiach should not be paid by the facility receiving the hashgacha, but rather should only be paid by the Vaad HaKashrus itself. Indeed, he should have no direct monetary business dealings with the company. See the above URL for more. Keep in mind that when it comes to private hashgachos the person giving the supervision is always paid by the person or organization being supervised. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 09:28:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:28:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <2dd3576d-2d8e-762e-5afc-570ef2dbaa9c@sero.name> On 10/05/18 10:51, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Me: >>> >>> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. > > RZS: > >> >> Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every >> Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not >> the rav who guided him. > > No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert > on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted > on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. But if the rav paskened that they were wrong they had to obey him. >> But at >> any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the >> full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to >> do their job properly they can't be learning all day. > The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the > claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. And indeed it does; how do you see a contradiction from R Akiva? He didn't say TCh don't have the knowledge to run the town, but that they don't have the time. > Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at > all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his > role? Same story: He is qualified, but he has no time, so he will neglect the work and the town will suffer. That's why we need and have askanim to run things, but they have to know that they are not in charge but must defer to the chachamim. Note that not even the biggest haredi calls for the gedolei hatorah to sit in the knesset themselves, let alone to be mayors and city councillors. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 12:43:38 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 15:43:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: RMB: > > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. I already raised the objection of R Akiva?s advice to his son; RZS?s response is conceptually clean, but (a) it doesn?t fit the words of the text, and (b) according to you it is internally contradictory - - if the rabbis who run the city have a din melech how can they be supervised by others? There?s also the sugya of b'nei ha'ir kofin zeh et zeh ?. Naively the authority of the kehilla comes from din melech, but then why b'nei ha'ir, why not the town rabbi? David Riceman From saulguberman at gmail.com Thu May 10 11:51:40 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 14:51:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > RMWillig has a kezayis of 22.5cc, and writes that Middos veShiurei > haTorah pg 277 reports matzah has half the weight of an equivalent > volume of water. So, RMW says a kezayi matzah weighs 11.25gm. (1cc of > water weighs 1gm, by definition. So, the weight of 2cc of matzah is 1gm.) > We buy matzah by the pound, so you can estimate a kazayis pretty > accurately if you know how many matzos are in a 1lb box. (2lb boxes, > divide by 2, naturally.) There are 40.3 or so kezeisim in a pound. > > matzos / lb -> kezayis matzah > 6 -> 2/13 of a matzah > 7 -> 1/6 > 8 -> 1/5 > 9 -> 2/9 > 10 -> 1/4 > > :-)BBii! > -Micha I wish I had remembered to use this at the seder. My rabbi tells me that he got an electric scale this year and had the grandkids make shiurim bags for the sedorim on erev pesach. Has the benefit of having something for the kids to do and moves the seder along. When I mentioned to my Rabbi that I was looking into smaller shiurim,that are smaller than the plastic sheet that is so popular, he was not interested in continuing the conversation. My daughter informed me that one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in the base of their calculation. Saul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:13:50 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:13:50 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1be6e645-8a41-f71b-3d11-7c7d0823c398@zahav.net.il> IIRC the Ramban writes that David took a census because he made a mistake, he thought that the issur didn't apply anymore. I found that Ramban to be shocking. How is it that no one, no rav, no navi, came to David and said "No, you can't do that"?? Answer - David never bothered to ask and no one had the job of being his poseik. Similarly, there are certain acts that the chachamim praised Hezkiyahu for doing and others that they disagreed with him. I read that as meaning "after he made the decisions, the rabbanim weighed in". I don't get the feeling from any navi that they stood by the sides of the kings and told them "yes you? can do this, no, you can't do that". They only weighed in when society or the melucha was totally out of sync. or when they were specifically consulted or when God told them "Go to the king". I admit that there is an incredible tension between even the good kings, the ones trying to rule according to the Torah, and the prophets (forget the evil kings). The former? were not able to live up to the expectations of the latter. From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 11 03:50:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180511105019.GA17192@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:43:38PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : RMB: : > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took : > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. : : The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give : commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us : what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. Not "implies", we are talking about R Dovid [haLevi] Cohen's explanation of Da'as Torah -- it's the thesis he is trying to justify! However, unlike some other versions of DT, it only speaks of rabbis as communal leadership. Not as advisors on personal matters (whose open questions are not halachic in nature). It has this in common with [pre-Mizrachi] RYBS's version of DT, "hatzitz vehachoshen". : I already raised the objection of R Akiva's advice to his son... There is also the historical precedent of the leadership of the Vaad Dalet Aratzos. There is no record of rabbinic leadership on civil issues. They dealt with halachic matters, eg shochetim, batei din, a law to require haskamos on all published sefarim... :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 41st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Yesod: What is the ultimate measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 of self-control and reliability? From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:02:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:02:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The article is one chapter from an entire book. You walked into the middle of a movie, that's all. Ben On 5/10/2018 2:57 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > In my opinion,? this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much > substance.? What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about > nothing." From isaac at balb.in Thu May 10 21:23:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 14:23:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Eli Turkel asked: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, > from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult > for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat > had to bring the animal as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the > cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of > whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result > in hundreds I suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim. [The Ramban in the 3rd Shoresh there isn't happy with this] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 11 01:40:10 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 08:40:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Shiluach Hakein, Performance of Message-ID: >From yesterday's OU Halacha Yomis Q. How is the mitzvah of Shiluach Hakein performed? A. Before sending away the mother, one should have the intent to fulfill a mitzvah. There is a difference of opinion as to how one should send away the mother. According to the Rambam (Hilchos Shechita 13:5), one should grab the mother bird by the wings and send her away. Though the Torah prohibits capturing the mother-bird when she sits on the nest, when the intention of grabbing the mother is to send her away, this is not considered an act of capturing. However, Shulchan Aruch (YD 292:4) rules in accordance with the Rosh and the Tur that one need not grab the mother bird. Rather, one may use a stick or the back of one?s hand to send away the mother. According to these Rishonim, the important factor is not that you grab the mother but that you cause her to fly away. The Binyan Tziyon (Chadashos 14) writes that some Rishonim disagree with the Rambam on two points. They maintain that if one grabs the mother and sends her away, a) the mitzvah is not fulfilled, and b) one transgresses the prohibition of taking the mother-bird (even though the intent is to send the bird away). It is therefore best to use a stick or, as Rav Belsky, zt?l advised, to push the mother bird off the nest with an open hand, the palm facing upwards so that the mother bird is not accidentally caught. Once the mother bird is chased away, one should pick up the eggs or chicks and take possession of them. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Fri May 11 02:25:19 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 12:25:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: Instead of answering Zev's questions directly let me try and describe how I see the events. I fully admit that the sources of dates for Taananim seem very sparse and I welcome any more information >From the chabad site R Yochanan be Zakai dies in 74 The Sanhedrin under Rabban Gamliel moved about 86 Bat Kochba Rebbelion ended in 133 R Akiva put in prison 134 Mishna completed 189 ------------------------------------------ First most historians take the story that R Akiva (along with several others) lived for 120 years as an exaggeration. Typical dates given are 50-135. This also implies that magic split into 3 sections of 40 years each is also an exaggeration This would give his learning under Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua as after the death of R Yochanan ben zakai about the year 75 when he would be 25 years old I again stress that all dates are speculation. It seems unlikely that R Akiva would have 24000 students when so many older teachers were around. Hence, extremely unlikely that this happened while the yeshiva was in Yavne under Rabban Gamliel. The one date I saw for the death of Rashbi was 150. What seems to be clear is that Rebbe compiled the Mishna after the death of all 5 talmidim of R Akiva (of course we know that the compilation was done over a period of time beginning at least with R. Meir and probably R. Akiva and earlier). Pushing off the death of R. Akiva decades later would give little time for the activities of his talmildim after his death before the time of Rebbe who is the next generation. One date I have seen for Rebbe is 135-220 (again approximately) R Sherira Gaon lists the year 219 as the year Rav moved to Bavel The gemara (Kiddushin 72b) states that Rebbe was born when R Akiva died which gives the birth of Rebba as about 135 assuming he died as part of the Bar Kochba revolt (which the Chabad site seems to also assume) As an aside the dates of Rebbe would seem to be connected with the debate over who was Antoninus see Hebrew Wikipedia on Reeb Yehuda HaNasi This post started with my claim that Rashbi was a student in Yavneh years before the plague that kille3d the 24000 students and so he became a student of R Akiva later in life. I note that the other talmidim also had other teachers. Thus, the gemara notes that R Meir also learned with R. Yishmael and certainly with R. Elisha ben Avuyah though R. Akivah was his main teacher 'The students were given semicha by R Yehudah be Buba R Benny Lau claims that R. Yehuda bar Ilai was mainly a talmid of his father and R Tarfon and only secondary by R. Akiva. R Yisi ben Chalfta also learned mainly from his father and then R. Yochanan ben Nuri both of whom stressed the traditions if the Galil. We have no statements of R. Elazar ben Shanua in the name of R. Akiva. R Benny Lau concludes that the two "talmidim muvhakim" of R. Akiva are R. Meir and Rashbi but both of these also had other teachers besides R. Akiva. Hence, we cannot take the story literally that R. Akiva went to the south and found 5 youngsters who became his students. Rather all 5 were already serious talmidei chachamim before R. Akiva. In addition even later many kept up relations with R. Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 14 09:54:07 2018 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 12:54:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel Message-ID: I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential chillul shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:19:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 02:51:40PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : My daughter informed me that : one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even : smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook : It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in : the base of their calculation. But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be invalid anyway? We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more binding than historical reality? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 44th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Malchus: What type of justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 does unity demand? From saulguberman at gmail.com Mon May 14 12:28:24 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:28:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, > the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis > is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does > that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual > olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be > invalid anyway? > > We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai > and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people > causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more > binding than historical reality? > I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:06:21 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:06:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514190620.GC7492@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:33:02AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent : past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those : practices that can be : traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable... So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 15 04:05:47 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 07:05:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . Shemos 12:39 teaches us: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. Various meforshim deal with halachic problems of this pasuk. For example, they were commanded to eat matzah, and being rushed out had nothing to do with it. Or, chometz was forbidden, and being rushed had nothing to do with it. This thread WILL NOT discuss those issues. If you want to discuss those issues, please start a new thread. My questions have nothing to do with halacha. They relate to the sequence and timing of the events of that night. They relate to "lir'os es atzmo" - I try to imagine myself in Mitzrayim that night, and certain parts of the story don't make sense to me. I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: 1) When was that dough made? 2) When was that dough baked? We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for the trip. I find it difficult to imagine that the flour and water were not mixed until the last 17 minutes before morning. Another problem: Given that they DID take unbaked dough out of Mitzrayim, what happened when they finally decided to bake it? Obviously, if they were able to bake it, it must be that they were not hurrying out of Egypt any more. So why didn't they just wait a little longer, and allow the dough to rise? (Someone might suggest that it was only in Egypt that "it did not become chametz", and that they did let it rise after getting out, but the pasuk disproves that, by telling us that "they baked it into matzah", i.e. that the dough never rose at all, at any point.) There are other questions that could ask, in addition to those, but I'll stop here for now. advTHANKSance Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 15 05:11:46 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:11:46 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Issac Balbin wrote: " suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim." There is a fundamental difference between carrying the aron and the avoda in the mishkan. The Rambam writes explicitly there in the sefer hamitzvos that the mitzva of carrying the aron, was given to the leviim in the midbar "v'af al pi shezeh hatzivuy ba laleviim baet hahe". We do not find any such commandment in the Torah regarding avoda in the mishkan. The Torah ONLY commands/allows Aharon and his sons to do Avoda in the mishkan. Therefore there is no room to say that leviim did avoda in the mishkan in the midbar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at yahoo.com Tue May 15 09:53:47 2018 From: gershonseif at yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 16:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know.TIA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 12:31:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:31:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas In-Reply-To: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20180515193110.GB20847@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 04:53:47PM +0000, Gershon Seif via Avodah wrote: : Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked : many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know. The oldest usage Bar Ilan and I could find was the one I had initially thought of -- the AhS. In OC 494:7, RYME gives 3 reasons for not fasting on that day. #2: And more: On that day, Moshe told them to becom qadosh. Uregilin liqroso "Yom haMyuchas" because of this. Which makes me think the AhS was saying it's just mimetic. Otherwise, I would have expected "uregilin le-" to have been replaced by a source. More than that, his vanilla "uregilin" is more typical of his description of accepted Litvisher practice. He tends to report others' practices by saying whom, even if it's a recent import to Litta. For example, se'if 3 mentions that the Chassidim haQadmonim were up all night on Shavuos, as per the Zohar, "vegam agah harbeih osin kein" and in the morning they go to miqvah, all as a zeikher leMatan Torah. Staying up all night gets a "they", not a "we", and is labeled as lower-case-c chassidic / Zoharic custom. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 15 12:39:06 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:39:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bamidbar Message-ID: <24722D2C-AAFF-48C2-A4B0-144A6165528A@cox.net> THEY DID; SO DID THEY DO According to the Sages, not a single letter is superfluous in the Torah. Anything repeated is repeated for a definite reason and with additional meaning. We may not always comprehend the reason or meaning but that doesn't detract from its significance. Also, there may be various interpretations and reasons given by commentators but that is what makes the Torah so profound. This Shabbos we begin the fourth Book of the Torah, Bamidbar. This portion is read the Shabbat before Shavuot, with rare exception. This year it is read immediately before Shavuot. The reason it usually is read the Shabbat prior to Shavuot is because there is a connection between the subject matter of this portion and the theme of Shavuot. There is a verse in Bamidbar in which appears a seeming redundancy. I grappled with it for a while and came up with an interesting chiddush. The verse states (1:54) "The Children of Israel did everything that God commanded Moses, so did they do." The first part of the verse already says "they did everything," etc. Then at the end it again says: "so did they do." Why is it repeated? First, the Children of Israel did "everything that God commanded Moses" because that was what God commanded and they did it as it was a mitzvah. But then, when it states at the end of the pasuk "so did they do," it already had become part of them. In other words, the initial motivation for performing a mitzvah is because God has commanded it, but then after doing it, one does it automatically and out of love and joy (as opposed to being mandatory). It becomes part of the person -- ("so did they do)." Similarly, when the Jewish people accepted the Torah they said "Naaseh v'nishma" (Exodus 24:7) which means "We will DO and (then) we will understand." In other words, we first will do out of duty and obligation since we are accepting the commandments of the Almighty, and afterwards, we will be doing (observing the mitzvot) out of love and joy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 15:45:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 18:45:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos Message-ID: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> R' Mordechai Torczyner (CC-ed) gave 3 shiurim (chaburos?) on koseiv and mocheiq this past march. Including #2, available here . He raises an interesting (to me, at least) question: Catan, formerly The Settlers of Catan, is a game with a board that changes with each play. The board is tiled from hexagons (and played on the edges and corners between them), where each hexagon has a picture on it denoting a kind of terrain, and by implication the reasources one can get from that terrain. This honeycomb is then held in place by a hexagonal frame, which is assembled from 6 pieces, each of which has jigsaw-puzzle-like edges at the join to hold the whole thing together. See RMT cited in shiur SSJ 16:23 (source #5 on the resource page attached to the YUTorah recording). He says you can play a game with letters or pictures IFF one is placing letters or pieces of letters or pictures or their pieces next to eachother. But not if they are made qeva or put in a frame. And only if they do not attach or stick to one another. So, here is RMT's question... Catan's hexagons do not combine to make one picture, but they do combine to make one "message" -- a usable game board. Is assembling a Catan board mutar on Shabbos? And if not, I wish to add: What if the game is played on a pillow, making it hard to keep the pieces interlocked, and the players agree to end the game before Shabbos? If the assembly is neither made to last nor is there intent for it to last, would it then be mutar? Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:11:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:11:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos In-Reply-To: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> References: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> Message-ID: The frame that comes with the newer editions of Settlers is quite flimsy so I don't believe it can be regarded as "fixing" the hexes together in a way that could even raise this shayla. But leravcha demilsa one can simply lay out the board without the frame, as one does with the older editions (my set is close to 20 years old and therefore doesn't have this problem. From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:30:27 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:30:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Further to your question, we've discussed the time of yetzias mitzrayim before, and some have asserted that it was early in the morning, but the Torah says "be'etzem hayom", and Rashi explicitly says this means high noon. At the time of the discussion I couldn't find this Rashi, but it's in Devarim 32:48. So not only did they have all night to prepare food for the journey, they also had all morning. And yet we're to believe they didn't get around to it until just before noon. However, leaving aside the improbability of this timing, my understanding of the actual event is that they started making dough to bake bread, and would have left it to rise but immediately they got the announcement that they were leaving, so they shoved it straight into the oven and baked it there and then, as matzos. Alternatively, given that they had already been commanded not to bake chametz, we can say that because of this commandment they always intended to bake it immediately, but as it happened the command became irrelevant because the announcement came just as they finished kneading it and were about to put it in the oven, so even had they *not* been commanded they would still have had to bake it as matzos. Which of course is why the commandment was given in the first place. Either way, though, my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the perspective of before it was baked. From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 05:55:56 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 12:55:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? A. The Gemara (Avoda Zara 30a) discusses the laws of giluy (beverages left uncovered). Chazal forbade drinking certain beverages that were left uncovered, due to concerns that venomous creatures, such as snakes or scorpions, might drink from the beverage and leave behind some of their venom. Tosfos (Avoda Zara 35a: Chada) writes that in the countries where we live, this concern does not exist, and beverages left uncovered may be drunk. Ordinarily, once Chazal issue a gezeira (decree), the gezeira remains in force even if the reasoning no longer applies. This case is different since the original gezeira was only enacted for places where snakes were common. Accordingly, Shulchan Aruch (YD 116:1) rules that one may drink a beverage that was left uncovered. However, the Pischei Teshuva (116:1) writes that the position of the Vilna Gaon and the Shelah Hakadosh is not to leave drinks unattended. The commentaries to the Maaseh Rav explain that the Vilna Gaon held that there are secondary reasons for Rabbinic decrees that apply even when the primary reason is no longer relevant. Common practice is to follow the position of the Shulchan Aruch, though some adhere to the more stringent opinion -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:26:24 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:26:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me - perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:27:40 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:27:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Designer Babies? Message-ID: Assume that gene editing technology reaches the point that "designer babies" are possible to an extent. Assume that "intellectual acuity" genes can be identified and screened for. Would a Desslerian philosophy allow (require?) mass screening and eventual genetic tinkering to provide a gadol hador material baby? What if there was a clear tradeoff that this gene also resulted in a materially shorter life expectancy? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Thu May 17 08:29:01 2018 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (M Cohen) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 11:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <09af01d3edf3$c8a0bed0$59e23c70$@com> I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul Shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential Chillul Shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before Shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on Shabbos. ..at least 2 major differences between the two. A. the electricity you use is generated in real time, as you demand it (by turning on the switch) B. but the water you use was made and treated in the past, and now simply stored in water towers until you demand it (by opening your tap) (as the water is used, new water is pumped into the tower at intervals. only a gramma). No melacha is done when you use your water C. electricity production in EY typically involves d'orisa issurim of burning fossil fuels, boiling water to create steam etc D. but water production may only be an rabbinic prohibition (electric pumps and filters, adding chemicals, etc) ======= Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2894, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.22240) http://free.pctools.com/ ======= From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Thu May 17 09:00:40 2018 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:00:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: RMB wrote: 'So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here.' I think the point was there was a tendency not to value or keep minhagim, not an absolute rule. And they possibly gave different status to minhagim which clearly originated with gedolim not un-named masses, eg kabalas shabbos. As for the yamulka example, that's got a makor in shas and is mentioned by rishonim, no? Perhaps another example would be Shir hamaalos before bentching which was innovated by the Chida I think. You'd need a whole range of example and a list of who kept what in order to be more certain, I haven't read the rest of Dr Brown's book to know if he does that. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 12:48:18 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 19:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? Message-ID: The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of externalities at all. YL Unfortunately, the term "chasid," meaning a pious person, has become misunderstood because of misconceptions foisted upon us from without. A "chasid" is a person who totally gives himself in love, does not look out for himself but relinquishes his own claims on the world in order to live only for others, through acts of loving kindness. Far from retiring from the world, he lives in it, with it and for it. For himself, the chasid wants nothing; but for the world around him, everything. Thus we find the term applied to David, a man who, from his earliest youth, labored ceaselessly for the spiritual and material welfare of his people and left the shaping of his own destiny, including redress of the wrong done to him by Sha'ul, entirely to God. No doubt you are familiar with the saying shelach shelach v'sheli shelach - -"He who says 'That which is yours is yours and that which is mine also is yours' is called a chasid." Again, a life of seclusion, of only meditation and prayer, is not Judaism. Torah and Avodah (study and worship) are but pathways meant to lead to deeds. Our Sages say, Talmud Torah gadol she'mavi l'y'day maaseh- "Great is study, for it leads to action" - the practical fulfillment of the precepts. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com Thu May 17 13:03:16 2018 From: gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 20:03:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <306356533.2453717.1526587396833@mail.yahoo.com> On Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:48 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that > there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, > speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of > externalities at all. YL Indeed! See Hirsch's commentary to Beraishis 5:24 where he writes very strong words about this. He says that Chanoch lived a life of seclusion after giving up on his generation. Hashem removed him from the earth because "what use is he here" (or something to that effect). From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 17 20:24:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 05:24:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. At one time calling a child a girl did not mean that you were assuming the child's gender? (girl meant a young person of either sex). Ben On 5/17/2018 9:48 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters? I note > that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of > dress,? speaking a particular language,? etc.? Indeed,? there is no > mention of externalities at all. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu May 17 20:51:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 23:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . I had cited Shemos 12:39: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. R' Zev Sero suggested: > ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked > dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. > I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it > has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the > perspective of before it was baked. It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words to have that meaning, that's okay. But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, > their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Fri May 18 14:41:25 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:41:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: See Malbim, who suggests that according to R Yose Haglili, who says that the issur chometz that year was only for one day, that one day was the 14th, not the 15th, but since with kodshim the night follows the day it was from the morning of the 14th till the morning of the 15th. Therefore they started baking bread at daybreak, intending to let it rise, but they were immediately ordered to leave and had no time. Alternatively, since most meforshim understand the one day to be the 15th, he suggests that they mixed the dough intending to bake matzos, but they didn't even have time to do that and had to take the unbaked dough, which would naturally have become chometz during their journey, but miraculously it did not rise and when they got where they were going they baked it as matzos (or, according to pseudo-Yonasan, the sun baked it, which presents halachic problems of its own, since sun-baked bread doesn't have the status of bread). On 17 May 2018 at 23:51, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I had cited Shemos 12:39: > >> They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves >> of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were >> driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare >> any provisions for themselves. > > R' Zev Sero suggested: > >> ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked >> dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. >> I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it >> has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the >> perspective of before it was baked. > > It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the > pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words > to have that meaning, that's okay. > > But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > >> They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, >> their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. > > This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of > Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is > unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff > they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that > the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. > > Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS > for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why > didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. > > The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not > make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then > they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just > before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to > departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water > together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. > > Akiva Miller > _______________________________________________ > Avodah mailing list > Avodah at lists.aishdas.org > http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org -- Zev Sero zev at sero.name From doniels at gmail.com Mon May 21 03:55:24 2018 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 13:55:24 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Generators_on_Shabbos_in_Israel?= Message-ID: R' Ben Rothke wrote: > I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, > AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. Also, apparently, as a form of protest. > With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is > automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the > potential chillul shabbos? R' Israel Meir Morgenstern put out an entire Sefer on this - http://www.virtualgeula.com/Stock/Books/Show/11160 - and regular updates as booklets. According to him, it's not nearly as automated as they pretend. IIRC he did on-site research, not relying on what the Electric Company wants people to believe. > Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before > shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. There are those who do that too. Check the roofs in Charedi neighborhoods - those with huge black reservoirs are doing just that. That said, I asked his father, R' D. A. Morgenstern shlita about getting one of those water reservoirs and he said it wasn't necessary. (I didn't ask him about electricity.) - Danny From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 20 14:10:28 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 00:10:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance Message-ID: <> What effect does this have on shabbat -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon May 21 23:19:20 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 02:19:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 17/05/18 09:26, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) > one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? > What is the source of this practice? (Me ? perhaps the original practice > of only one person saying Kaddish). I assume you mean in a shul where most of the kadeishim are said by multiple people. If so, I have never seen or heard of such a practise until you described it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 03:52:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:52:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Please see Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part I at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FCT8ohf&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=CAO%2FIULzGszY4Io1E7bD7BDzBnrECxpPQX6SlNtHF%2BU%3D&reserved=0 and Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part II at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FKVjQ16&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=RY%2FzL7M3vLMiFdh1MlJcdiMfMVPVPkRXx%2FtVGOhRiWk%3D&reserved=0 If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 05:04:49 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 08:04:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on > a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking > their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me ? > perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). In all the shuls in Elizabeth NJ, the practice is as follows: If no one has yahrzeit, then there are no restrictions on Kaddish. If someone does have a yahrzeit that day, then the Kaddish after Aleinu is said only by him/them (including anyone still in shloshim). As RJR guessed, this is in deference to the original minhag (still practiced in German shuls) that no Kaddish is ever said by more than one person. [A gabbai usually calls out "Yahrzeit!" in addition to the table-banging.] In Shacharis, the other kaddishes (such as after Shir Shel Yom) are said by all kaddish-sayers. After mincha, an additional Tehillim (usually #24) is recited, so that the other kaddish-sayers will have the opportunity to say kaddish. This is done at maariv too, except for situations (such as in Elul) when there's another Tehillim anyway. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:12:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:12:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 06:52:26AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly : going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. But it could still not be worth the learning missed. There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more "nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. micha at aishdas.org Thus excellence is not an event, http://www.aishdas.org but a habit. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aristotle From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 04:01:35 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:01:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Birkat Kohanim Message-ID: 1) The Priestly Threefold Benediction had the following: The first blessing has three words, the second five, the third seven. They remind us of the foundation for all blessings: The tree Patriarchs, the five books of the Torah, and the seven Heavens. Bachya 2) Israel said to God: "Why do you tell the priests to bless us? We desire Your blessing alone!" Said the Holy One: "Although I have told the priests to bless you, I shall stand in their company to give effect to the benediction." Therefore, at the end of the section it states explicitly (verse 27): "I will bless them." Midrash Numbers R. (11:2, 8, end). 3) Why do we ask God first to bless us and then keep or guard us? Because, if He does give us material blessings, we need to be protected from the evil results such prosperity may bring. The Hasidic Anthology P.359 quoting the Tzechiver Rebbe. 4) There is an interesting connection between Parshat Naso, which is the longest parsha in the Torah, comprising 176 verses, and the 119th Psalm (of Tehillim), which also contains 176 verses and is the longest in the book of Psalms. This psalm carries the distinct title, "Torah, the Way of Life." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 03:57:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:57:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Who Sings In This World Will Sing Also In The Next." Joshua b. Levi, Sanhedrin, 91b Message-ID: <37067FE1-055D-4504-A143-8FB433E508DE@cox.net> LA'AVOD AVODAT AVODA VA'AVODAT MASA 4:47... Note the four words in a row with the same root. (Probably the only place in the Torah with four words in a row with the same root). Rashi says the Avodat Avoda (kind of a strange phrase) refers to playing musical instruments. As far as Avodat Masa (Work of burden) is concerned ? the Gemara in Chulin comments that only when there is heavy manual labor involved, then there is an age limit for the Leviyim (as with the others). And it seems that the age limit of 50 was only for the carrying. In other words, a Levi was able to continue serving in the Mishkan after 50, but only for SHIRA and SH'MIRA. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 04:29:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:29:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor Message-ID: We are told that Hashem spoke the words Shamor and Zachor together, and I have presumed that we heard them together as well. But the Ramban (Devarim 5:12) suggests that "He (Moshe) is the one who heard Zachor, and they (heard) Shamor." The ArtScroll Chumash (page 969) quotes Rav Gedalya Shorr as explaining: <<< At the highest spiritual level - the one occupied by Moses - the awesome holiness of the Sabbath is such a totally positive phenomenon that one who understands its significance could not desecrate it. Thus, the positive remembrance of the Sabbath contains within itself the impossibility of violating it, just as one who loves another person need not be warned not to harm that person. This was the commandment that Moses "heard." Lesser people, however, do not grasp this exalted nature of the Sabbath. They had to be told that it is forbidden to desecrate the sacred day; when they absorbed the Ten Commandments, they "heard" primarily the negative commandment *safeguard*. >>> Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue May 22 08:19:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 11:19:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 22/05/18 06:52, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going > there and seeing the falls is not nothing. Not at all. One says a bracha on many things that one would much rather *not* see, and that one would certainly not go out of ones way to see. Also consider the rainbow. If one happens to see it one says a bracha, and quite a positive one, but one still should not tell others to go outside and see it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:27:43 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:27:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet : he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. But AGAIN, no one obligated RAMiller to hold like RSRH. Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim around, etc... : R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or : taken a plane and learned on the plane. : Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the : world as it is, namely, mostly gray. But this isn't about how RAMiller lived now about life in general. It's advice to a school, an institution dedicated to learning. What I am actually taken by is the importance RAM is giving girls' education. Contrast that to the number of seminaries today that are so exclusively focused on inspiring that textual education is limited. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When we are no longer able to change a situation micha at aishdas.org -- just think of an incurable disease such as http://www.aishdas.org inoperable cancer -- we are challenged to change Fax: (270) 514-1507 ourselves. - Victor Frankl (MSfM) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:54:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:54:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522135452.GC14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 07:29:51AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be : understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so : supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", : I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Except that the Rambam believes the Qol had nothing to do with accoustics or physical sound to begin with. That the term is just being used as a metaphor to help those of us who never experienced such things. (Moreh 2:48) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 06:52:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:52:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:12 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >But it could still not be worth the learning missed. > >There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples >of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at >the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. >And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more >"nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. I know that Rav Schwab also went to Switzerland. Many gedolim in Europe went in the summer to vacation resorts, and there are pictures of Mir students at summer camp. See http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rkimble/Mirweb/YeshivaStudents2.html R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or taken a plane and learned on the plane. Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the world as it is, namely, mostly gray. I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:08:39 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:08:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522140839.GD14915@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 05:24:24AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. ... With that in mind as a caveat, let's look at Chazal's chassidim harishonim. Aside from famously spending 9 hours a day (12 on days when Mussaf is said?) on tefillah, Our sages repeated [in a beraisa]: The early Chassidim would hide their thorns and broken pieces of glass in the middle of their fields 3 tefachim [roughly one foot] deep, so that it would not [even] stop the plowing. Rav Sheishes would put them to the fire, Ravan would place them in the Tigres [the large river alongside which his home city of Pumbedisa was built]. Rav Yehudah said: The person who wants to be a chassid [he should take care] to follow the words of [the tractates on] damages. Ravina said: The words of [Pirqei] Avos. Others say in response [that Ravina said]: the words of [the tractate] Berakhos [blessings]. - Bava Qama 30a "Amrei leih" as the end is most ocnsistent with what we normally discuss about them. However, notice everyone else assumes a BALC definition of chassidus. They come up in Seifer Hakabiim I as among the bravest of warriors, and among the last to accept the permissibility of fighting on Shabbos. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:22:35 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:22:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522142235.GE14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:05:47AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about : the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: : 1) When was that dough made? : 2) When was that dough baked? We are talking about 600,000 or so homes. I assume there are a range of answers. And when the Torah says they didn't have time for it to become chameitz, it means that in many or most of those homes... enough that the haste came to characterize how we left. Just trying to aid the imagination by three-dimensionalizing the peopl involved. : We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally : irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as : Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the : Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to : leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for : the trip... Already in this discussion it was raised that in Shemos we're told we left "be'etzem hayom". And yet, in yesterday's leining, we're told "hotziakha H' E-lokekha loylah" (Devarim 16:1) Rashi ad loc (based on Sifrei Devarim 128:5, Barakhos 9a) says that we got permission from Par'oh at night (Shemos 12:31). So there was, as you write, PLENTY of warning. But they also had get their neighbors' valutables, pack, get the animals in hand, find Yanky's favorite bottle, figure out who was getting custody of those kids wandering around that neighborhood that choshekh obliterated... So, little things like what to pack for lunch was rushed, and in most cases, that meant they were left with matzah. (Despite likely promising themselves that if they ever got out of Egypt, they would never eat lechem oni again!) Your 1 mil assumption, BTW, might come from the matzah of the seder they were commanded to make, and that this matzah was not necessarily KLP. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 11:02:42 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:02:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <24.27.04381.9FB540B5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:27 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls >will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. >It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim >around, etc... The question was asked about girls' high schools, not yeshiva boys! Do you really think he was concerned about the reduction in learning for the girls! I think not! He held that Niagara is "nothing" something that makes no sense to me in light of the fact the Falls are one of Hashem's wonders. [Email #2.] Here is what R. Miller actually said in response to a question about going to Niagara Falls. the question was asked about high schools taking girls to the Falls. As you can see, his statement about Niagara Falls being "nothing " had nothing to do with bitul Torah. I find his response baffling to say the least. YL Rav Avigdor Miller on Niagara Falls Q: What is your opinion of the importance of a high school taking their students on a trip to Niagara Falls? A: My opinion is that it's nothing at all. You have to travel so far, and spend so much money to see Niagara Falls?! Let's say, here's a frum girls' school. So they have the day off, or the week off, whatever it is. And where do they go? To Niagara Falls. What's in Niagara Falls?! A lot of water falling off a cliff. Nothing at all. Nothing at all! It's the yetzer harah. The yetzer harah makes everyone dissatisfied. People who are really happy with what they have are almost impossible to find. They may say, "We're happy," but they're not. And therefore, they're always seeking something else. And so, they travel to Niagara Falls. You might say differently, but I'm telling you, that's the reason why people travel to Niagara Falls. It's the yetzer harah that is making you dissatisfied. So you have to go to see water falling off a cliff. But really it's nothing at all. Of course, you yield a little bit to the yetzer harah in order that more girls should come to your school. You have an outing every year to get new talmidos, new students. But really it's nothing at all. TAPE # E-193 (June 1999) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:41:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522184112.GC16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 03:28:24PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to : be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to : area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume : measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they : were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. >From what I posted in the past from the AhS (OC 373:34), is seems the definitions themselves were not constants. A person is supposed to be using their own thumb, fist or forearm when the din is only about them. And standardized numbers are only invoked for things like eiruv where one has to serve many people and "ameru chakhamim denimdod lechumerah" -- use an ammah that covers a very high percentile of the people relying on it. And I tried to discuss what this would mean for shiurim like kezayis, where a person isn't using his own body or something he could only own one of, as a measure. But the discussion went in its own direction. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, micha at aishdas.org if only because it offers us the opportunity of http://www.aishdas.org self-fulfilling prophecy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:33:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:33:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:10:28AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : > By 2025, 10,000 satellites will provide constant Israeli video : > surveillance of the Middle East sufficient to carry out targeted killings ... : What effect does this have on shabbat How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space that has security camteras? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue May 22 16:41:12 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 19:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> References: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 22, 2018, 2:33 PM Micha Berger wrote: > How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space > that has security camteras? No major difference except that some people still avoid security cameras. As they become more common it will be harder to do. It is already difficult to go to many hotels over shabbat. As these devices appear everywhere some argue that poskim will be forced to accept some minority opinions or else we all stay home From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 23 07:53:38 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 14:53:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: From today's Hakhel email bulletin. THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 23 10:12:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:12:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:53:38PM +0000, Professor L. Levine forwarded (from Hakhel, who were forwarding as well): :> THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted :> at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. :> http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg It's very al-menas-leqabel-peras collecting a list of havtachos and segulos.. There is the stretch from the Rambam onward talking about how davening haneitz is better, or how one should daven as soon after as possible. (Which implies kevasiqin is superior, but not actually saying that.) But the general tenor of the list is about mystical rewards; even the references to the gemara. I didn't think it would be your speed. Also, Hakhel pushed my button on a pet peeve. Whomever at Hakhel writes titles knows diqduq better than whomever sent in about the poster. (Compare the subject line of this thread'S "K'Vosikin" with the quoted text's "VASIKIN".) "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. The words are "kevasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. No "the" there to remove; omitting the "ha-" is just wrong. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The meaning of life is to find your gift. micha at aishdas.org The purpose of life http://www.aishdas.org is to give it away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Pablo Picasso From zev at sero.name Wed May 23 10:21:31 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:21:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2f7061f4-8f98-52f7-67af-3204e6dd8b76@sero.name> On 23/05/18 13:12, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. That would be davening *laneitz*. I'm not sure what "davening neitz" might mean, but whatever it is, it's not AZ. I wonder about those who, on a plane going directly to or from EY, daven out the side windows. Are they davening to the Great Penguin Spirit at the South Pole? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed May 23 10:23:14 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 17:23:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <0A36D278-B7B9-4326-9245-B993DE48CB97@tenzerlunin.com> ?I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you?? I am certainly no chassid if Rav Miller. But criticizing anyone, and certainty not criticizing a Talmid chacham, for personal feelings about a family matter, seems to me to be in poor taste. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed May 23 12:42:02 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:42:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin References: Message-ID: At 01:12 PM 5/23/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >The words are "KEvasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, >and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. I use the terminology K'Vosikin, but Hakhel used Vasikin so I left it. I have often quipped that the only people who know Dikduk are maskilim! >:-} (Note the wicked grin.) Regrading segulos, I found the following of interest. From a footnote to letter 15 of the 19 Letters of RSRH "Segulah" denotes a property belonging permanently to an owner, to which no one else has any right or claim (cf. Bava Kamma 87b). YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 05:59:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 12:59:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? Message-ID: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 06:01:44 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 13:01:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life by a community. Do you agree? It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit and then no more rain falls. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 24 10:39:09 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 17:39:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Does_Ru=92ach_Ra=92ah_=28negative_spiri?= =?windows-1252?q?ts=29_still_exist_today=3F?= Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru?ach Ra?ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra?ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra?ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye. Scientists have revealed the presence of numerous invisible forces in the universe, such as gravity and electromagnetic waves. In fact, scientists today theorize that dark matter, which no one has ever seen, accounts for 80% of the matter in the universe. Just as G-d created indiscernible physical forces in the universe which physicists have shown to exist, Chazal identified invisible spiritual forces that potentially impact negatively on both the body and soul (see Teshuvos Vihanhogos 1:8). The Gemara (Shabbos 109a) states that when awakening in the morning, a person must wash his or her hands (three times) to remove Ru?ach Ra?ah. Until one does so, one must be careful not to touch the mouth, nose, eyes or ears so as not to allow the Ru?ach Ra?ah to enter into the body. Also, one may not touch food, since the Ru?ach Ra?ah will spread to the food. Although the Maharshal (Chulin 8:12) questions whether any form of Ru?ach Ra?ah still exists today, the consensus of most poskim is that this is still a concern. The Halachos of removing Ru?ach Ra?ah from one?s hands are codified in Shulchan Aruch (OC 4:2-5). If one touched food before washing in the morning, the Mishnah Berurah (4:14) writes that bedieved (after the fact) the food may be eaten, but if possible the food should be rinsed three times. The Gemara warns us about other forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah (damaging spirits). However, the Magen Avrohom (173:1) writes that there are some forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah that no longer pose a danger. For example, the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru?ach Ra?ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru?ach ra?ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one?s hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Fri May 25 00:10:22 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:10:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were > all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, > a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype > (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and I cringe every time I go past. But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 04:51:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 07:51:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 03:10 AM 5/25/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: >This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards >went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing >towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and >I cringe every time I go past. > >But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" >from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun >"netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There >certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 >in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not found in TANACH, so why not this one? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 06:49:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 09:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 07:51:45AM EDT, Prof. Levine wrote: : Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not : found in TANACH, so why not this one? Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different topic. People are trying to "do halakhah" without understanding the language the categories they're trying to implements are labeled in. Without understanding the language of Chazal, we are missing a lot of subtlety about what they meant. With bigger problems (if less about din) if you don't know the workings of the language of Tefillah, Tehillim or Chumash. Judaism without diqduq is a paler, less nuanced, thing. I expect you have a LOT from RSRH in your cut-n-paste library on this. Earlier, at 10:10:22AM IDT, Simon Montagu wrote the post that Prof Levine was replying to: : But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from : the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the : root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word : meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's : description of his dream and in Hazal. Nitzotz. Yeshaiah 1:31 uses it to refer to a spark, as it's something that starts a fire. Comes up a number of times in Chazal. Most famously to people who daven Ashkenaz, Shabbos 3:6: nosenin keli sachas haneir leqabeil nitzotzos. There is a beis hanitzotz in the BHMQ. Libun requires nitzotzos coming out of the keli. "Nitzotzos ein bahen mamash". (Shabbos 47b) BUT... getting back to that nuance theme... Haneitz is when there is enough light to make things like that sparkle. It's before alos, which is when the first spark of the sun is visible. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, micha at aishdas.org Our greatest fear is that we're powerful http://www.aishdas.org beyond measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anonymous From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 07:38:32 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:38:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:49 AM 5/25/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This >is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. >There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh >and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from >English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different >topic. Sadly, with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and texting, the English language is, IMO, going down the drain. People do not spell properly, write things that are not words, etc. This is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 08:22:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:22:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525152241.GC9702@aishdas.org> This isn't an MO issue, even if the subject line mentions the affiliation of the mechaneikh. For many people in yeshivish minyanim I attend, davening with a tzibbur is something one does between gaps in looking at a seifer. And among the yeshivish-lite (Shababnikim?), minyan is an excuse to get together for the qiddush. We really don't know how to daven. And all the time we spend teaching how to learn contributes to that. Defining religious inspiration in terms of learning, new knowledge, makes it hard to find what the point is in saying the same words yet again. When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. We define it those terms, tefillah won't get anywhere. On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:01:44PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have : the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community : and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that : did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their : prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life : by a community. Do you agree? I think so, because gap year subtlely teaches the message that true spirituality is incompatible with "reeal life". And that's why they need to go to a 1 year religious experience, with no job, no secular studies, no other concerns, not even the usual setting, in order to get inspiration that is supposed to last year the rest of your life. I believe it's an underdiscussed factor (among the many others) as to why so many MO youth go yeshivish during gap year or upon return. That implied message is not fully compatible with TuM or TiDE. That said... There are other factors. Telecom means you can hear from a famous rosh yeshiva regularly, and don't need to "settle" for someone local as a role model. Never mind that you can regularly connect with the LOR, so that he is actually in a position to better model the role. Also, the whole universal post-HS yeshiva thing feeds the RY-centric view (outside of chassidishe admorim) of religious leadership now prevalent, rather than the rabbinate. The shift from Agudas haRabbanim to the Agudah's (or in Israel, Degel's) Mo'etzes haRabbanim. Secondary effects: There is less tie and sense of belonging to a particular qehillah. More and more people daven in a handful of places, because this one is more convenient Fri night, another Shabbos morning, a third for Shabbos afternoon, Sunday, weekdays... Qehillah could be a source of positive peer pressure when inspiration is running low. But only if you feel attached to one. (An LOR mentioned to me this effect as a factor in OTD rates...) As per the famous machgich line: It's chazaras hasha"tz, not chazaras haSha"s! : It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately : go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit : and then no more rain falls. Although it's less that no more rain falls as much as the crops no longer accept irrigation water. Okay, the metaphor doesn't really work. A good rav who one can interact with regularly may be more useful :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals micha at aishdas.org is not as important as http://www.aishdas.org what you become by achieving your goals. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Henry David Thoreau From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 25 08:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos Message-ID: Halacha L'kovod Shabbos - "Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos" According to some Poskim it is prohibited to intentionally tan in the sun on Shabbos. Nevertheless it is permitted to walk or sit outdoors on a sunny day even if there is the probability of becoming tanned (even if one would be pleased that this happened - so long as one is not intentionally tanning) because the tanning is not intentional. One may also apply a thin and pourable suntan lotion for protection against sunburn when walking or sitting outdoors. However, one may not use a cream. S'U Minchas Yitzchok 5:32, Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchasa 18:70, Sefer 39 Melochos YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri May 25 08:56:20 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:56:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Questions on Theologically Motivated Message-ID: <3CB5DF8F-56E4-482D-BA72-9328800F007E@cox.net> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. 1) What is the difference between ?The religious person? and ?the truly religious person?? 2) What exactly do you mean by "cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:11:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:11:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: In this case, the problem pre-dated the smart? (or cell) phone. On 5/25/2018 4:38 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Sadly,? with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and > texting,? the English language is, IMO,? going down the drain.? People > do not spell properly,? write things that are not words,? etc.? This > is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:05:52 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:05:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular Message-ID: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Ever wonder what is the nafka mina of deciding if secular people are tinok sh'nishba or not? Here is a biggy. There is (apparently) a machloket between Rav Kanyevski and Rav Edelstein if it is permitted to donate a kidney if it may end up in someone secular. RK believes it shouldn't be done because he paskens like Rav Elyashiv that no one today has the din of tinok sh'nishba and therefore they shouldn't get this type of help from the religious. RE paskens like the classic Chazon Ish psak that today's secular people do have the tinok din? and therefore it is permitted to donate a kidney to a secular person. See the article (Hebrew) for more details. http://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/558795 From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 09:31:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:31:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? In-Reply-To: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525163124.GF9702@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:59:56PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious : person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are : theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic : inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral : creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a : Supreme Law?" : Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would : be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a : judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? I think it's self-evident. If the gov't is "of the people and by the people" (regardless of "for the people", appologies Pres Lincoln), then the only way to really seperate church and state would be to separate church and people. And "church" here includes not only all religion, but all religious stances. Including atheism, agnosticism, apathy and Sherleyism. A person's vote should be informed by their values. And a person's values by their religious stance -- whether religious, "truly religious", or an atheist. After all, an atheist cannot phrase abortion or end-of-life issues in terms of souls and therefore their etheism will inform their vote when Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice is a key issue. (Looking at you, Ireland!) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man micha at aishdas.org is how he treats someone http://www.aishdas.org who can do him absolutely no good. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Samuel Johnson From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:11:20 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:11:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Professor L. Levine" T >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra'ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra'ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye....? .....the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru'ach Ra'ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru'ach ra'ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one's hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL ? >>>>> ? It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children.? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:05:24 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:05:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398431932-c8d-935e@webjas-vaa194.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Rich, Joel" >From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" ? Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich ? ? >>>>> ? There is no constitutional requirement, no legal requirement, no ethical requirement and no logical requirement for each individual to erect a wall of separation between church and state in his own heart and mind.? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:52:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:52:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> >>>>> It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ============= IIRC R? A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 12:26:01 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:26:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525192601.GC25353@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 05:52:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : IIRC R' A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. It was ruach ra'ah, as per our discussion. Thus, neigl vasr. I think RAS's understanding was that Chazal were using evidence-based reasoning. People were getting sick, and since bad vapors were believed to be the cause of disease, Chazal presumed there was a ru'ach ra'ah. Which means that given that we today attibute disease to microbes, we would transvalue ruach ra'ah to refer to germs. I don't think too many others understand ru'ach ra'ah as a physical threat. Rashi (Taanis 22b "mipenei ruach ra'ah") understands ru'ach ra'ah to be a sheid entering the person -- "mipenei ruach ra'ah: shenichnas bo ruach sheidah..." and then he might drown or fall and die. Perhaps psychiatric illness? In which case, there is no clear transvaluation to today's science, as minds kind of straddle the physica - metaphysical fence. Sheidim /are/ intellects; so how do we map sheidim talk to rationalist psychology talk? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. micha at aishdas.org If you want time, you must make it. http://www.aishdas.org - Charles Buxton Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 09:30:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:30:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2 Message-ID: It is often confusing when trying to determine whether an item is subject to bishul akum or not. This article should help. YL Click here to download "Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2" From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:50:45 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:50:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular In-Reply-To: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> References: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <8849942693d54a55aab7bd43e07dddc7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/901388/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/from-the-rabbis-desk-choosing-a-recipient,-diverting-tzedakah/ Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz-From The Rabbi's Desk - Choosing a Recipient, Diverting Tzedakah Listen to the 1st part-lots to discuss KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 26 12:17:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:17:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Ben On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Toby Katz via Avodah wrote: > >>>>> > > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? > So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their > children. From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 14:07:40 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:07:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? Message-ID: <1639920e25b-c96-3738@webjas-vaa110.srv.aolmail.net> From:?"Prof. Levine" Date:?Wed, 22 Aug 2012 Subject:?Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? One may download this article that appeared in Tradition at http://www.mesora.org/mezuza-gordon.pdf Towards the end of this article the author writes To claim, then, that the Divine inscription, which directs the attention of the Jew to God, is possessed of its own potency, generating protective benefits, perverts a spiritual instrumentality into a cultic charm.... YL >>>> ? I hope I will be forgiven for resurrecting an old, old thread -- from 2012.? But I recently came across something when I was preparing for my Pirkei Avos shiur, and it made me think of this old thread. ? This is from _Ethics From Sinai_?by Irving Bunim.? On Pirkei Avos 5:22 he talks about the difference between the disciples of Avraham and the disciples of Bilaam.? The former have a sense of security; the latter have no sense of security in the world.?? ? ---quote-- Today we have all sorts of insurance policies: fire insurance, flood insurance, life insurance. On one level they represent a wise precaution [but mainly] the man of piety places his trust in the Almighty. When he closes his place of business at night, he knows there is a mezuzah on the door, to betoken His protection. At bedtime he recites the Shema, to invoke His protection. This is his basic insurance policy.... . The Sages tell of Artaban IV, the last King of Parthia, who sent his friend Rav a priceless jewel, with the message, << Send me something equally precious>>; and Rav sent him a mezuzah.? The king replied, <> Answered Rav < >> --end quote-- ? In a footnote, Bunim explains that that last sentence is a pasuk, Mishlei 6:22, and it applies to the mezuzah. This doesn't make the mezuzah an but does say that the mezuzah is protective. . (I am using << and >> instead of quotation marks in the hope of minimizing the number of random question marks AOL strews in my path.? If anyone can help me solve this problem please let me know.) . --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri May 25 13:29:34 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 16:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: . R' Simon Montagu wrote: > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards > went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing > towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", > and I cringe every time I go past. > > But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. ... I used to cringe too. But then I thought of a different limud zechus, and it's not just an excuse. I really believe this: They are not speaking the language that you'd like to think they are speaking. We are in the process of developing a new dialect, or creole, ... I don't know or care what the technical term might be, but consider the following phrases: making kiddush will be davening had paskened was mekadesh Technically speaking, I do concede that "davening k'vasikin" is meaningful, while "davening vasikin" is bizarre. But the truth, whether you like it or not, is that when someone says "davening vasikin", EVERYONE knows what the speaker meant. In this new language, there's nothing wrong with saying "davening vasikin". It is (I think) EXACTLY like the phrase "Good Shabbos", when the first word is pronounced "good" (and not "goot") and the second word is pronounced "SHABbos" (and not "shabBOS"). What language is that???? It's not Hebrew. It's not Yiddish. It's not English. It's something new. (Where "new" can have values of 50 to 100 years. Maybe more.) I am reminded of going to the bakery when I was twelve years old, and the sign by the brownies said that the price was: .10? each (If your computer messed that up, it is a decimal point, followed by a one, and a zero, and a "cents" sign. You know, a "c" with a line through it.) Twelve-year old me looked at the decimal point, and noted that the sign had a cents sign, and not a dollar sign. So I concluded that the price for the brownies was one-tenth of a cent each. I tried to buy ten of them for a penny. It didn't work. And I was pretty upset about it too. I knew I was right. Plenty of people tried to console me, but no one could explain my error. I was right, and everyone seemed to agree. It took about 40 years, but I finally figured out the lesson of that incident: What people SAY is not nearly as important as what they MEAN. Focus on the ikar, not the tafel. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sat May 26 19:46:16 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 22:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <68109a23-b784-405e-60d5-b1c30853273a@sero.name> Think of saying "netz" instead of "honetz" the same way you do about saying "bus" instead of "autobus", "phone" instead of "telephone", or "flu" instead of "influenza". I recently saw "'bus" written with an apostrophe, but that's very unusual. Most people have no idea that these are abbreviations of longer words. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Sun May 27 05:00:54 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 12:00:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is the meaning of Cholov Yisroel? Message-ID: Please see the video at https://goo.gl/S5mPTn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat May 26 18:36:57 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:36:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Behaaloscha YOU CAN'T WIN 'EM ALL Message-ID: <89C443B9-BCD6-4E3D-A485-59F3CF2C7515@cox.net> Both dedications, the dedication of the Mishkan by the Nesiim and the dedication of the Menorah by Aharon were required. The Midrash mentions that Aharon was depressed that neither he nor his tribe was included in the dedication of the Mishkan. This brings to mind the time when I gave a student of mine a part in the family service that he considered inferior and unimportant. Convinced I had the perfect answer, I confindently and proudly informed him about the dedications of the Mishkan and of the Menorah and how God comforted Aharon by saying that his part of the dedication ceremony was the greatest of all, in that he was charged with the kindling of the Menora. I was sure that would make my pupil feel much better but without batting an eyelash, my student immediately retorted: "Yeah, but you're not God!" I ended up being more depressed than Aharon! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:25:32 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:25:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? Message-ID: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and Reuvain claims insolvency. Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an ongoing business for Pesach? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:27:43 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:27:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? Message-ID: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose. (The gemara in b"b is worth looking at-what exactly is the halachic force of "people don't sell their homes"). Two items: 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? 2. What if the other fundraising fails-would the community sell the Beit Knesset? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 31 11:22:30 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:22:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns > beer over pesach), one source quoted is S?A C?M 99:7, which deals with a > case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows > money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din > is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and > Reuvain claims insolvency. > Do you think it?s a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an > ongoing business for Pesach? Not at all, for two separate reasons. First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. So in this case where the Jew sold not the chametz but the entire business, there's nothing to indicate that the sale was anything but serious and effective. Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to "pierce" it in the name of equity. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 1 03:28:46 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 06:28:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra Message-ID: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> With discussed "Higher" Bible Criticism before, we've discussed the IE on the topic before, RGS went the next step -- the Ramban on the IE on Bible Criticism. I am includng the comment, and I would have written something similar. :-)BBii! -Micha Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student R. Avraham Ibn Ezra has long been a controversial figure. R. Shlomo Luria (Yam Shel Shlomo, intro to Bava Kamma) respectfully but strongly rejects his entire approach to Torah commentary. What does the Ramban, one of the classical commentaries whose work serves as a foundation for modern Jewish thought, think of his predecessor, Ibn Ezra? He certainly disagrees often with Ibn Ezra, sometimes sharply. But there may be a more fundamental reason for opposition. At the end of Ramban's commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim, he writes that anyone who says that Ezra the scribe added to the Torah -- such as Gen. 13:6 or Deut. 3:11 -- is a heretic (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 p. 548). Ibn Ezra famously suggests that four verses imply post-Mosaic interpolations -- Gen. 12:6, 22:14, Deut. 3:11, 31:22. Ramban, who shows clear expertise in Ibn Ezra's Torah commentaryn quotes two of these four verses in describing the heretic! Coincidence? R. Betzalel Naor, in his annotated edition of Rashba's Ma'amar Al Yishma'el (Orot: Spring Valley, NY, 2008, pp. 25-27) finds this correspondence convincing. The author of the commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim must have been condemning Ibn Ezra as a heretic. Even though some supercommentaries and scholars dispute the claim that Ibn Ezra ever intended anything other than that Moshe wrote those verses prophetically, many believe he made the more radical claim.[1] If so, this passage from the Shir Ha-Shirim commentary condemns him as a heretic. However, R. Naor points out that Ramban did not write that commentary. R. Chaim Dov Chavel argues cogently in his introduction to that work that it was written by the earlier, kabbalist R. Ezra of Gerona (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 pp. 473-475). If so, we can ask whether Ramban agreed with R. Ezra's evaluation. R. Naor (ibid., pp. 136-143) makes the following points and suggestions: 1- Even in his introduction to his Torah commentary, Ramban expresses his mixed attitude toward Ibn Ezra, which he calls "a public rebuke and private affection." This might be used to describe a commentary that is both brilliant but occasionally sacrilegious. However, Ramban calls him "Rabbi" Ezra, a term of respect. 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him about Ibn Ezra. 3- Ramban unquestionably rejected any post-Mosaic interpolations into the Torah, as seen in his general introduction to his commentary. While hiss attitude toward the level of prophecy of the Torah varies (commentary to Num. 16:5), that is nowhere near the claim that any verse postdates Moshe. 4- Rabbeinu Tam wrote a poem in praise of Ibn Ezra. Perhaps this influenced Ramban to judge him favorably as an inadvertent heretic, which was a status that, according to the Ra'avad (Hilkhos Teshuvah 3:7), even great scholars fell into. 5- The Chida (Shem Ha-Gedolim, part 1, alef 89) quotes R. Binyamin Spinoza, a late eighteenth century rabbi, who deduces from Ramban's failure to argue against Ibn Ezra's radical suggestions that those comments must be late forgeries (interpolations?). Had Ramban seen them, he would surely have objected. In the end, once we determine that the commentary to Shir Ha-Shirim is misattributed, we can only speculate about Ramban's attitude toward Ibn Ezra. Maybe he agreed with R. Ezra of Gerona's condemnation or maybe he felt the belief was wrong but not heretical. Or maybe, as R. Naor suggested, he rejected the belief as heretical but not the person. (Republished from May '13) [1] On this disagreement, see R. Yonatan Kolatch, Masters of the Word, vol. 2 pp. 310-318. ------------------ J. C. Salomon May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late addition to the text. I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 1 08:03:13 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:03:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <70c7cc6f-c870-c610-b592-25a81940172f@sero.name> I find the entire idea that RABE's "secret of twelve" was a secret heresy to be without foundation, and think it more likely that this is wishful thinking by heretics who would like to find "a great tree" on which to hang their heresy. We don't know what the secret was, because it was a secret, but his comment on Vayishlach makes it unlikely to be what the "bible critics" claim it is. On Bereshis 12:6, he simply says: "If it is not so, then there is a secret here, and the intelligent person should be silent". On Bereshis 22:14, and Devarim 3:11 and 31:22 he makes no comment at all, and indeed there's nothing unusual to hint at, no reason to even suppose these pesukim might not have been written at the same time as what surrounds them. The "secret of the twelve" is in Devarim 1:1, on the words "Eleven days out of Chorev", which makes me think whatever this secret is relates to that, and perhaps to a mystical "twelfth day". It's there that he cryptically mentions these four pesukim, with no context or explanation; the theory that he was hinting at a deep secret heresy in his heart is therefore pure speculation and should be rejected. The Ramban's (or whoever wrote it) comment in Shir Hashirim only means that there existed such heretics in his day; there is not even the hint of a hint that RABE might have been among them. These are the same heretics who claimed him; there's no reason to suppose the Ramban agreed with that claim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sat Jun 2 20:49:06 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2018 23:49:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: >From R'Micha (Avodah V36n64): > When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? > We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. < If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; and "vaya'as kein Aharon." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 00:42:20 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 10:42:20 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua Message-ID: In last weeks parsha we have the Torah stating that Moshe's nevua was unique that Hashem spoke to him directly (see Rambam Yesodei Torah for the list of differences). However, I was bothered by the following question. A number of times the Torah writes Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe v'Aharon leimor where certain halachos are given over to both Moshe and Aharon. The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? In Behaalosecha it is clear that Aharon and Miriam dd not know that Moshe's nevua was different then theirs, yet, if Aharon heard these like a regular nevua as a vision not clearly then how did he not realize that Moshe got a clearer nevua then he did? The first thing Moshe did after getting halachos from Hashem was go over them with Aharon and his sons. Also, the pasuk says that Hashem called out to all 3, Moshe Aharon and Miriam to go out, and Rashi comments that it was one dibur something that a person cannot do. If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 01:54:52 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 11:54:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? Message-ID: At the beginning of Bamidbar the Meshech Chochma asks the following question. A Baal keri is prohibited from being in the machane leviya, if so how could the Leviim ever live with their wives (in the machane leviya) and become a baal keri? Ayen sham his answer. Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A Baal keri is prohibited from going there. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Jun 4 11:24:18 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:24:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> Message-ID: On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns >> beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a >> case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows >> money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din >> is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and >> Reuvain claims insolvency. >> Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an >> ongoing business for Pesach? [Zev Sero:] > Not at all, for two separate reasons. > First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones > property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a > going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and > continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected > to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. AIUI there was no change in the business other than the 'titular" ownership > Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get > away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently > made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of > the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that > the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he > still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity > the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the > Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that > he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So > none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not > an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own > chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, > and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that > CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to > "pierce" it in the name of equity. https://headlinesbook.podbean.com/mf/download/reyy6b/headlines_6-2-18.mp3 6/2/18 Owning Businesses in Halacha and Hashkafa: People who are making a difference- Freddy Friedman, Elchonon Schwartz, Rabbi Yosef Kushner, Nesanel Davis, Shimon Webster, Mr. Sol Werdiger The first half deals with a similar type of arrangement for nursing homes-so aiui you're saying it's up to the Rabbis to evaluate the "need" in each case to determine if haaramah is allowable? KT Joel Rich From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 13:46:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:46:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180604204625.GA25546@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:28:46AM -0400, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : : Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student ... : 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, : as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could : agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him : about Ibn Ezra. ... : J. C. Salomon : May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm : Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that : the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, : before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late : addition to the text. : I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that : certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might : have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate : extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight : verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. Except that the tell-tale idiom is "sod ha-12", not 8. From Devarim 1:1: ... And if you understand sod hasheneim asar... Pit stop: the standard text doesn't even say that, it says "(hasarim) [tz"l hashneim] asar". So there is a slight chance it doesn't even say 12. Back to the IE: ... also "Vayikhtov Moshe" (31:22), "VehaKenaani as Ba'aretz" (Bereishis 12:6), "Har H' Yeira'eh" (Bereishis 22:14), and also "arso eres barzel (Devarim 3:11), you will regonize the truth. If it does refer to the last 12 pesuqim (from Moshe going up Har Nevo), then there are 5 quotes in discussion. 4 refer to the future, likely quotes for someone to say were actually written later. But Og's iron bed? And besides, it's the last 8 pesuqim that amoraim argue how and if Moshe could have written them. Now, if Moshe couldn't write "and Moshe died", then it makes sense to argue that he couldn't write "and Moshe went up Har Nevo" if he never came back. But that is more conjecture, that this "12" is "12 pesuqim", and the last 12 pesuqim at that, and that it is related to chazal's discussion of last 8 pesuqim, and all this despite one of the quotes not having this "problem" of not being true when Moshe left us. And for all we know, the secret could be about prophecy. Even if all 5 were about the future, who knows what secret the IE posited to explain them? One of the parts of the Torah that is NOT in this list is the list of kings of Edom "lifnei melokh melekh liVnei Yisrael", Bereishis 36:31. On which the IE qrites: Some say that this parashah was written bederekh nevu'ah. And Yitzchaqi says in his book that this parashah was written in the days of Yehoshafat, and he explains the generations as he wished. This is why his name was called Yitzchaq -- kol hashomeia yitzachaq li. .. Vechalillah chalilah that the matter is as he said about the days of Yehoshafat. His book is worth burning... And he explains that the kings ran in rapid succession, this being warrior tribes of Edom. And the melekh Yisrael in the pasuq was Moshe, "vayhi bishurun Melekh. A lot of work if the IE was okay with later interpolations of narrative snippets of 12 pesuqim or less. In 2002, RGStudent reposed something from Cardozo at . See fn 50: Most enlightening is Spinoza's observation that some texts of the Torah, such as the ones in Genesis 12:6; 22:14, and Deuteronomy 1:2, must have been written many years after Moshe's death, since they reveal information that refers to latter days. Spinoza relies here on the famous Jewish commentator Ibn Ezra (1088-1167), who wrote that these verses were "mysteries" about "which the wise should be silent" (on Deuteronomy 1:2). The traditional understanding of Ibn Ezra, as also confirmed by the modern Jewish scholar Samuel David Luzzatto (ShaDaL) (1800-1865), is that these passages must be understood as prophetic and anticipating the future. .... However, in RGS's own essay on that web site writes: Also, phrases and even verses were added to the texts that perhaps even these prophets could not have written. For example, Ramban explains (Genesis 8:21) "G-d said in His heart" as meaning that this was only revealed to Moshe at the time of the writing of the Torah. See also Ralbag there and Moreh Nevuchim 1:29. Another case is Genesis 32:33, "Therefore the Children of Israel are not to eat the gid hanasheh." According to the Mishna and Gemara in Chullin 101b, as explained by Rashi, this verse was a later insertion by Moshe. See the Radak's commentary to this verse. It is possible that Ibn Ezra, in his "secrecy", believed that many more verses fall into this category and were inserted into pre-existing narrative by G-d to Moshe. His thesis there is that the Torah was redacted from pre-existing scrolls during the Exodus; that it was this redaction that was dictated to Moshe in Sinai. Since such megillos are named in a few places, it's a pretty hard thesis to totally dismiss. The only question is how much was already given in writing in texts like Seifer Milkhamos Hashem (cf Bamidbar 21:13). Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 14:21:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 17:21:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 11:49:06PM -0400, Michael Poppers via Avodah wrote: : If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two : recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; : and "vaya'as kein Aharon." But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. Y-mi Nedarim 9:4 (violna ed. 30b) has the famous machloqes between R' Aqiva and Ben Azai about whether the kelal gadol baTorah is "ve'havta lerei'akha" or "zeh seifer toledos adam". In the version in the introduction to the Ein Yaaqov, he quotes Ben Zoma, attributes Rav Akiva's opinion to Ben Nanas, and then adds a new opinion: Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi says: We have found a more inclusive verse than that, and it is, "The first lamb you shall sacrifice in the morning and the second lamb you shall sacrifice in the evening." Rabbi Ploni stood up and said: The halachah is like Ben Pazi as it is written, "As all that I show you, the structure of the Mishkan and all its vessels: so shall you do." That makes constancy kind of important. FWIW, here is how my discussion (ch 2. sec. 3) of that quote goes: There are two interesting implications to Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi's and Rabbi Ploni's words. First, Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi could be making the point that Rabbi Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov found in Ben Azzai's position -- the role of personal development. After all, there are a number of verses that discuss this offering; Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi chose a verse that discusses its constant and regular nature. In his opinion, this is the most important verse in the Torah -- even in his or our day, after the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash and there are no korbanos. Perhaps the point here is consistency in avodas Hashem in-and-of-itself, not limited to this one mitzvah. Just as service in the Mishkan has its schedule and routine, so too our observance must be a discipline with well-defined structure and consistency. Second, the anonymous rabbi endorses this view by quoting a verse about the Mishkan and its vessels' structure, their composition, not their service. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi statement is about something done in the Beis HaMikdash as part of its daily service, but the proof is about its structure. This rabbi is relating "so shall you do" not only to following the description of that structure Hashem gave us when building it but also to the discipline of the ritual within it. The discipline in avodas Hashem of the previous implication is a taken as fundamental part of what the building is. At least homiletically, we can say this is true of both microcosms -- not only the Mishkan, but also the human soul, as Rav Shimon ben Pazi is giving importance to structure and consistency even in our era, without a Mishkan or Beis HaMikdash. Discipline in avodas Hashem is not only part of the structure of what the Mishkan is, but also our own soul's structure. This homily would be consistent with Rav Shimon's statement ... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search micha at aishdas.org of a spiritual experience. You are a http://www.aishdas.org spiritual being immersed in a human Fax: (270) 514-1507 experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 15:06:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:06:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180604220616.GC25546@aishdas.org> On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Rn Toby Katz Avodah wrote: > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be > bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before > feeding their children. According the Tosafos (Yuma 77b) and the Yam Shel Shelomo (Chulin 8:31) there isn't any ru'ach ra'ah anymore. Unsurprizingly, the Rambam (Rotzeiach 12:5) doesn't mention ru'ach ra'ah when he discusses not putting food under your bed, his reason is "shema yipol bo davar hamaziq". If it is a modern and mundane issue, I would think ru'ach ra'ah is depression, not a physical illness. The day after Shaul learns he lost his throne, "vatilach ruach E-lokim ra'ah el Sha'ul". (Shemu'el I 18:9) On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:17:24PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Actually, you need to do both for neigl vasr, as you need to get rid of chatzitzos. AhS 161:1, MB s"q 7,10. So the question might be... What's the problem with chatzitzos? Can someone make an argument that it's about places where disease can hide? Then why haqpadah? I really don't know what to do with RASoloveitchik's suggestion that ru'ach ra'ah can be things like germs. If it's a saqanas nefashos thing, then pesaqim should indeed be more maqpidim about things like soap than about using a cup, koach gavra, etc... BUT... this is RAS. I am assuming he did indeed have an explanation. Keeping the discussion alive (and CC-ing R Harry Maryles) to see if we can get down to one. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water micha at aishdas.org that softens the potato, hardens the egg. http://www.aishdas.org It's not about the circumstance, Fax: (270) 514-1507 but rather what you are made of. From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Tue Jun 5 19:06:11 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 22:06:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. < Agreed, and both examples I mentioned are examples of doing, not knowing. The point is that not just "v'halachta bidrachav" but also that "v'halachta" in the path of the noted examples, that one should imitate paragons of *derech H'*. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 05:07:43 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah Message-ID: The article below gives many halachas that are applicable to situations where gentile workers are employed in one's home. IMO it is worth reading carefully. YL Click here to download "Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 6 10:49:54 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:49:54 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Why I support the private kashrut initiative of Tzohar rabbis Message-ID: <628e074c-450f-a464-ed95-2eca5d3ed825@zahav.net.il> Placing this article in Avodah because Rav Melamed uses the model of the 70 elders to show how differences in community leadership should be handled. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22250 A few critical paragraphs: But when groups and institutions try to impose their opinion on members of another circle, and abolish the status of their rabbis (and to boycott them from becoming rabbinical judges and rabbis) we are no longer speaking of a situation where the rabbis of Tzohar should also establish a kashrut organization, but rather a situation in which it is almost obligatory for them to establish one, just like other accepted rabbinic organizations, in order to give halachic and Torah expression to their part in the Torah. If they do not, then they are similar to a prophet who suppresses his prophecy, or as our Sages said: ? Yea, all her slain are a mighty host? ? this refers to a disciple who has attained the qualification to decide questions of law, and does not decide them? (Sotah 22a). How Does a Difficult Dispute Develop? At first, there is an argument over a focused halakhic issue. However, when an agreement is not reached, instead of agreeing to disagree and continuing to respect each other, one side thinks that the other has no authority to retain his position, because, essentially, his position is inferior, since he belongs to a liberal circle, or his position differs from that of most rabbis. Then, that same party departs from the particular halakhic issue they have debated, and moves on to a more acute arena, in which the main argument is that the rabbi against whom he is arguing with is not authorized to express a halachic position, for in any case, who appointed him to be a rabbi who can express a position at all? Since this argument is not convincing enough, and the rabbi who is being attacked remains in his position, consequently we are now moving over to a dispute of a different magnitude ? since we are no longer dealing with a person who rules on a matter without authority, but with a person who undermines the foundations of authority as a whole, and thus, it is compulsory to wage an all-out war against him? From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 11:31:07 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 18:31:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: Please see the article at Eretz Yisroel, Zionism,and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH This article is from The Jewish Observer Vol. 23 No. 6 September 1990/Adar 5751 and is available at https://goo.gl/LNRpZZ YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 7 01:06:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 08:06:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra Message-ID: The letter below appears on pages 113 - 114 of this week's Flatbush Jewish Journal. It is not clear to me that all FJJ readers appreciate the gadlus of Rabbi Shamshon Raphael Hirsch when it came to Torah. Indeed, last week MW (whomever this may be) referred to RSRH as "Reb Shamshon Refoel Hirsch" rather than as Rabbi or Rav or even Rabbiner. Therefore, I feel that I should refer FJJ readers to Rav Yaakov Perlow's article Rav S. R. Hirsch - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra that appears in The World of Hirschian Teachings, An Anthology on the Hirsch Chumash and the Hashkafa of Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, Published for the Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer Foundation, Feldheim, 2008. Reading this article will give one a true understanding of how great a Torah scholar RSRH was. Moreover, the following is from page 102 of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, Architect of Torah Judaism for the Modern World by Rabbi Eliyahu Meir Klugman. We also have the assessment of the K?sav Sofer, Rabbi Avrohom Shmuel Binyamin Sofer, Rabbi of Pressburg and leader of Hungarian Jewry. The K'sav Sofer first met Rabbi Hirsch in Vienna, not long after the latter assumed his post in Nikolsburg. On the first Shabbos after his return to Pressburg, a large crowd came to his home for Shalosh Seudos in order to hear his observations about the new Chief Rabbi. Their curiosity was understandable, since, as followers of the Chasam Sofer, the K'sav Sofer's father, they harbored deep suspicions of anyone versed in secular studies, which they considered a potent danger to the Jewish people. The K?sav Sofer described his meeting with Rabbi Hirsch in the following terms: ?We spoke at length on Torah subjects with the new ?Rosh Medinah? and whatever topic we discussed, his reply showed that he had Shas and poskim on his fingertips. We, the rabbonim of Hungary, have to consider ourselves very fortunate that he holds us to be his superiors as scholars, for if he were only aware of the extent of his own scholarship, we would have no rest from him.? Finally, a talmud muvhak of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, ZT"L, told me that Rav Hunter once told him that anything that Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch wrote is Kodesh Kedoshim. Based on this It should be clear to all that what RSRH wrote about one going to see the wonders of nature is to be taken very seriously. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 7 06:02:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 13:02:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? Message-ID: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, how else might the desired result be accomplished? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 7 07:48:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 10:48:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: [VBM] Chassidic Service of God (continued) Message-ID: <20180607144830.GA19716@aishdas.org> This is where our compartmentalization into camps holds us back. The Piaseczner Rebbe (the "Aish Qodesh", R' Kalonymous Kalman Shapiro zt"l Hy"d) is largely reinventing Mussar. Admittedly his goals are different; the elements of the ideal Jew that are emphasized in Chassidus and Mussar differ. But he procedes to build and advocate from scratch a toolset for somthing that another tenu'ah invested the lion's share of their effort on -- self-awareness. To quote RYGB's loose translation of REEDessler (MmE vol 5 pp 35-39), cut-n-pasted from : In our times: The qualities of "Emet" that personified the Ba'alei Mussar [Mussar Masters] are already extinct. We no longer find individuals whose hearts are full with profound truth, with a strong and true sense of Cheshbon HaNefesh [complete and rigorous reckoning of one's spiritual status and progress]... Contemporary Chassidus lacks the component that was once at its core: Avodas Hashem with dveykus... For today's era, there remain only one alternative: To take up everything and anything that can be of aid to Yahadus; the wisdom of both Mussar and Chassidus together. Perhaps together they can inspire us to great understandings and illuminations. Perhaps together they might open within us reverence and appreciation of our holy Torah. Perhaps the arousal of Mussar can bring us to a little Chassidic hislahavus. And perhaps the hislahavus will somewhat fortify one for a Cheshbon HaNefesh. Perhaps through all these means together we may merit to ascend in spirituality and strengthen our position as Bnei Torah [adherents of a Torah centered lifestyle] with an intensified Judaism. May G-d assist us to attain all this! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight, micha at aishdas.org and he wants to sleep well that night too." http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok Fax: (270) 514-1507 Yeshivat Har Etzion PHILOSOPHY > Great Thinkers > The Piaseczner Rebbe > Shiur #24: Chassidic Service of God (continued) Dr. Ron Wacks Ways of Achieving Hitragshut (continued) The Importance of Self-Awareness One of the primary keys for entering the gates of inner service is self-awareness. Remarkably, although a person is generally concerned for his own wellbeing, he is not always aware of what is happening in his own inner world. His psyche is in constant movement, expressing its will and its aspirations, but even though the person may sense something going on, he is not equipped to interpret it and to take the appropriate steps: The hiddenness and imperceptibility of what is happening inside him distances a person greatly from himself. He is unfamiliar with himself and ignorant of what goes on inside him. Even the psyche of the simplest person never ceases its restlessness and writhing, crying out in supplication over its lowliness, and over all the blows and trials and tribulations that he causes it through his foolish actions, speech, and thoughts. The fact that he senses none of this is because he gives no thought to listening to this tempestuous wretch.[1] A person naturally tends to occupy himself with matters external to himself; he is not attentive to his own inner workings. It is easier to engage with the outside world, with its affairs of greater and lesser importance, than it is to listen inwardly. Even when he detects inner movement, he is unable to decode and make sense of it: For that is the way of man: he always strive for that which is extraneous to himself, the affairs of the world, both those that are vital and those that are not. He interests himself in what happens at the end of the world, but he pays no heed to his own psyche, and does not listen and give attention to the business that is within him. Or he may sense it, but since even at the moment that he senses it his desire, his attention, and his thought are turned to the lowly muck of this world, he hears the moaning and its voice only weakly. This may be compared to a person who is asleep and a mosquito bites him on his forehead. If he is a merchant, he dreams that a bag of his merchandise has fallen on his forehead and struck him; if he is a tailor, he dreams that his needle has pricked his forehead, etc. Each individual perceives his inner workings in the guise of his own dreams.[2] The psyche expresses its longings in different forms, but often a person is unable to decode any of these spiritual needs, such as a desire for teshuva and the fear of God. Sometimes, when he feels something oppressive inside him, he goes to the refrigerator and takes out a bottle of sweet drink and some cake, or he tries to distract himself by joking with his friends. Often, a person makes the mistake of thinking that it is his body that is suffering physical hunger, and he believes that he can satiate it by filling his stomach - while in fact it is his psyche that is starved and crying out in distress: Sometimes the psyche of a Jew is animated by regret, teshuva, submission, fear of God, and so on, and the person feels some sort of movement and restlessness within himself, but he has no idea what the problem is. He thinks he may be hungry, or thirsty, or in need of some wine and wafers, or he may think that he has fallen into melancholy, and in order to lift his spirits he chatters playfully with the members of his household, or goes over to a friend to joke and engage in lashon ha-ra, gossip, foolishness, etc.[3] R. Kalonymus's grandfather, author of Maor Va-Shemesh, also addresses the connection between an unhappy psyche and stuffing oneself with food. Attention should be paid to the chain of wrongdoing: Bnei Yisrael complain, convincing themselves of how bad things are for them. This leads them to melancholy, which gives rise to the craving for meat and the punishment that follows: "And when the people complained, it displeased the Lord" - This means that they fell into melancholy... and the Lord's fire burned amongst them, for black bile is detestable and abhorrent, for it is a tinge of idolatry... and for this reason they were punished. And Moshe prayed, and the fire subsided, but it continued through their melancholy, for they felt a lusting and they said, "Who will feed us meat?" For as we explained, the lust for food is drawn from black bile... Therefore, one has to distance oneself far from melancholy, for it brings a person to all sorts of sins. And despondence begins with a growing desire to eat, as we see when a person is mired in black bile, heaven forfend, he eats with lust, ravenously, and very quickly.[4] When a person tries to "quiet" his inner distress with sweets and snacks, not only has his psyche not received what it really wanted, but it is greatly pained by his failure to understand its true needs. Sometimes, after a person continually ignores and steamrolls his inner voice, it simply grows silent: Sometimes, after all of these actions which he has done, he still feels inner discomfort, since with these worthless medicines not only has he not cured the sores of his psyche, nor given it relief from the blows that he has administered to it, but he has in fact added further injury and assault. But sometimes it happens that after these misguided actions he actually feels better, and his spirit is quieted within him, because the blows and injuries and sores that he has added through his actions have rendered his psyche unconscious, or he has piled mounds of dirt and refuse over it to the point that it is completely hidden. Then he will no longer hear even the slightest peep out of it - and he can relax.[5] The psyche also transmits signals of joy, not only distress. A person often misses these signals too, failing to give them expression. For example, when a person fulfills a mitzva or rejoices in his prayer, and his psyche awakens with joy and hitragshut, he will fail to notice this - both because of his general insensitivity to his inner world and because his attention is oriented elsewhere. R. Kalonymus argues that the way to achieve hitragshut and hitlahavut is not by "importing" new feelings from outside of oneself; they are already to be found inside him. However, they must be given more powerful expression and allowed to effect a greater influence on his consciousness: It is not new excitements that you need to seek, nor a heavenly-initiated awakening. First and foremost, the work is required of you yourself, for everything exists within you. You are capable of hitragshut, and you are a person who is able to attain fervor; you simply need to try to get to know yourself and what is going on inside. Your psyche is full of signals, shouts, and supplications, and all you need to do is to provide space within yourself within which it can be revealed and strengthened. Then you will come to know and feel your natural hitragshut, with no need to garb yourself and your needs.[6] R. Kalonymus not only demands self-awareness, but also explains how to attain it. A person has to learn to listen to his own inner world and ask himself questions: Is my psyche happy, and if so, about what? Is my psyche sad, and if so, why? What are the inner feelings that accompany me in this situation, and how did they come about? At first, this work will involve only the major movements of the psyche. It is not advisable to start with weaker movements, since, owing to their delicate nature, their meaning is not always clear. Attention should therefore be paid to the stronger signals, and when one notices them, he should "provide space" and allow them expression. This is facilitated through paying attention to them, strengthening them, and allowing them to reveal themselves through our power of imagination. We will now elaborate on each of these tools individually. (To be continued) Translated by Kaeren Fish _______________________ [1] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 29. [2] Ibid., p. 40. [3] Ibid. [4] R. Kalman Kalonymus Epstein Ha-Levi, Maor Va-Shemesh (Jerusalem, 5748), Parashat Beha'alotekha. [5] Ibid., p. 29. [6] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 30. Copyright ? 1997-2017 by Yeshivat Har Etzion From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 7 21:17:05 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 06:17:05 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <950f4b82-36d2-0f57-abef-73c113119730@zahav.net.il> RSH's third objection to Rav Kalisher is the key one (RSH couldn't imagine that non-religious Jews could be the vehicle for redemption). Once you say that "I can't imagine. . . " than everything else has to fit into that paradigm that you just set up for yourself. The author's conclusions are also strange. To mention all the benefits and great things that have come from the state but to still look at it as if it is a treif piece of meat boggles my mind. I would also add that if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - he should move here. Like I always tell my Reform Jewish friends - If you move here, you get a vote which is 10,000 times (at least) more important than Facebook posts. Ben From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 07:09:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:09:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi Sacks on 'The Great Partnership' Message-ID: <20180608140928.GA11777@aishdas.org> R/L J Sacks on Science and Religion. In short: It's Gould's notion of non-overlapping magesteria -- they can't contradict, the discuss different topics. But RJS says it so well, giving the idea emotional "punch". And sometimes even maaminim need a reminder that the point of religion isn't to fill in the gaps in our scientific knowledge. (I know I do.) Our rishonim offer answers to the question of why an Omnicient and Omnipotent G-d would create a universe that requires His intervention once in a while. His Wisdom inheres more in the things science CAN explain than in the miracles that even in principle can't be studied scientifically. (Pace the Ralbag, whose actual position on nissim is a longer discussion.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LltoUg_WL2k That said, I think this is overstatement, as they do overlap when it comes to discussion of origins. I would instead posit "barely overlapping magesteria" -- they only overlap at the fringes, where no open question can threaten my trust in either. Yahadus explains the "why?" of life to well to question, and many scientific theories do too well at the "how?" I have a question about where they seem to contradict? Nu nu. Scientists believe that quantum gravity has an answer, and don't expect either QM or Relativity to be overturned just because we have a question where their fringes overlap. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 09:19:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 12:19:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? Message-ID: From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) apply only to male Kohanim, or does it also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V?kidashto applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K?Hilchaso 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash. This description applies only to men and not to women. Although the daughters of Kohanim are entitled to eat Teruma and may eat from certain Korbanos that are designated only for Kohanim, they are not eligible to serve in the Beis Hamikdash. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:48:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:48:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? Message-ID: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> I wanted to talk this out here, as this se'if in the AhS appears to use the kind of reasoning that is exactly what I argued for decades with C rabbis (and more recently with one or two of the more innovative OO rabbis) isn't how halakhah should be done. AhS CM 89:2 discusses the reason for a taqanah that if a sakhir and the BhB disagree about whether the sakhir had been paid, the sakhir can make a shevu'ah binqitas cheifetz, and the employer would have to pay. Normally, f two sides make conflicting unsupported claims, the rule would be that the defendent (the nitba) would make a shevu'as heises (which is a less demanding shevu'ah than the shevu'ah BNC) and not pay. A taqanah beyond the usual hamotzi meichaveiro alav hara'ayah to disuade liars. The stated reason for treating the sakhir as a special case is that many times the employer has many workers, and it's more likely he wouldn't remember the details of who he paid what than the employee not remembering the details of getting paid. However, the AhS continues, this doesn't explain why chazal worried more about employers than salespeople. Someone who has a lot of customers is prone to the same parallel likelihood of confusion. So, he explains that the iqar haataqanah is because employees have a lot riding on getting paid, "nosei es nafsho lehachayos nafesho venefesh benei beiso, chasu chaza"l alav..." And therefore even if it's a boss who has only one employee, and he isn't overhwlmed keeping track of vay, lo chilqu chakhamim. Doesn't this sound bad? Chazal really had some social end in mind, so they invented some pro forma excuse to justify their conclusion. I guess that in dinei mamunus, Chazal can do whatever they want -- hefqer BD hefqer -- and therefore on /that/ ground they can force payment of a worker for the sake of social justice. But that's not what the AhS invokes. Thoughts? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 12:15:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:15:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din but a takanah. By definition, takanos are ends-driven; they're made not because this is what we believe Hashem ordered, nor to avoid some issur, but in order to achieve some desirable goal. The same applies to the usual shvuas hesses that Chazal instituted; it's to achieve the two desirable goals of creating a disincentive for defendants to lie, and of assuring the plaintiff that the courts are not biased against him. So I see no problem with Chazal making a special takana for the benefit of employees, since the Torah itself gives their needs priority, and gives the reason that employees often risk their lives for their livelihood. And just as the Torah does not distinguish between those employees who actually do risk their lives and those who sit on comfortable chairs in air-conditions offices and risk nothing more serious than a paper-cut or RSI, Chazal saw no need to distinguish between a lone employee and one among many. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 12:53:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:53:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:35PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din : but a takanah... Not just a taqanah, a taqanah that needs an justification for why they're not following the din deOraisa. And so simply saying "it's a taqanah" doesn't really satisfy me. DeOraisa, the employer would have the right to not pay the money. The usual taqanah for conflicting claims would require he make a shevu'as heises first. Here, we're putting the power to extract the employer's money despite the deOraisa. Had the taqanah not violated the deOraisa, but went "beyond" it, I wouldn't have asked. And as I said, had the AhS invokved hefqer BD hefqer, we would need no excuse for how Chazal can move money despite the deOraisa. But he doesn't. Instead, he says they came up with a justication that isn't real. That opens a whole pandora's box of ascribing hidden "social justice" reasons for legislation that has an explicit explanation already given. And it makes it sound like legal mechanism can indeed be nothing more than a hopp to jump through, rather than justification in-and-of itself. So my question isn't "how did they make this taqanah", but "how can you claim that they wanted to ignore a deOraisa because they thought they had a 'more moral' alternative, and then just found some way to legally justify it?" :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the micha at aishdas.org second time and as if you had acted the first http://www.aishdas.org time as wrongly as you are about to act now! Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 12:15:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 15:15:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:52 PM 6/8/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's >OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: >: A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto >: applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso >: 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he >: offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... > >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to be "honored" like all other Kohanim? I recall that there was a Kohein when I lived in Elizabeth who had a deformed hand. However, I think that he still got the first aliya. However, I do not think that he duchened. He left the shul right before duchening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:52:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:52:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: : A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto : applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso : 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he : offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 13:21:23 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:21:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:09PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to : >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. : : If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability : that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to : be "honored" like all other Kohanim? ... I think aliyah laTorah is different than duchaning because it's not about the kohein as a kohein, but mishum tiqun olam. So, we divy out the kavod according to strict rules, so that society runs smoother. Not based on qedushah. Maybe it's even kavod vs qedushah. Tangents: BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not a kofer. There is also a separate discussion is someone who is wheelchair bound can get an aliyah at all, or if the chiyuv for an oleh to stand is me'aqiev. From the pasuq "amod imadi". The accepted pesaq really only permits calling someone who can't stand if their reason for not being able to stand is obvious or known to the tzibbur. IOW, oneis Rachamanah patrei for his non-standing, but the kavod haTorah is an issue if it looks bad to the tzibbur. I didn't spend the same time researching this tangent, as you can tell by the lack of a single source. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe micha at aishdas.org you can be certain of improving, http://www.aishdas.org and that's your own self. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aldous Huxley From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:41:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9e545852-4e47-2e1a-0f1b-f6fe418d3daa@sero.name> I don't think it's accurate to say that mid'oraisa he doesn't have to pay. If he really does owe the money then mid'oraisa he has to pay, and has an *additional* obligation to pay this debt over all other debts, because of "lo solin". The only question is whether he really owes the money or not. Normally, the way the Torah left things, we can't be sure he owes it, so we can't *force* him to pay; we have to leave it up to his own conscience. But his obligation (or lack thereof) is unchanged. Now Chazal come along and meddle with that setup, for social reasons. In order to discourage defendants from falsely denying their liability, and in order to give plaintiffs a sense that justice has been done, they instituted the sh'vuas hesses. If you don't swear we'll make you pay, despite the Torah saying we can't. According to you, how could they do that? Here Chazal went a bit further: We can't make the defendant swear, because he may honestly have forgotten or got confused, so we tell the plaintiff that if he's willing to swear, not just hesses but binkitas chefetz, then we'll believe him, and once we do believe him the *Torah* says the defendant must pay. Comes the Aruch Hashulchan and asks, what about the exceptional case where the defendant is not confused and unlikely to have forgotten? And what about other defendants who may be confused or have forgotten? And he answers "lo plug" because there's a deeper reason for the takana here. It's not just that we're worried about the defendant inadvertently making a false oath; if he's really worried about that let him pay up, but if he's not worried we won't be. The deeper reason why we've given the plaintiff a slight edge here is that we're emulating the Torah itself, which made the "takana" of "lo solin" for the explicit reason that employees *in general* risk their lives and so deserve extra protection. And just as it did not distinguish between employees, so we won't either. I have a bigger question, though: This takana seems to be biased *against* the employee whose employer is a yerei shamayim. Without the takana the employer would decline to swear because he can't be sure he's right, and he'd have to pay. Now we say no, you don't have to pay until we test the employee, more rigorously than we were going to test you. So mah ho'ilu chachamim betakanasam? It seems as if our real concern here is not for the employee's welfare but to protect honest employers from employee fraud! That's surely a worthy goal, but opposite to the one the AhS posits. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 9 20:19:14 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2018 23:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Korach "There's Good Even In The Worst Of Us" Message-ID: The rabbis saw a hint that while the Korah rebellion ended so tragically, it had the seeds of redemption. In the Shabbos Maariv we recite Psalm 92: Tzaddik katamar yifrach, the righteous will blossom like the palm tree (v. 13). The last letters of those 3 Hebrew words (kuf, reish, chet) spell Korah. Although blinded by anger and envy, Korah's egalitarian vision will indeed be established. Then the "righteous will blossom like the palm tree, and grow mighty like a cedar in Lebanon, planted in the house of the Lord." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:47:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <36fd05b2-e021-0e98-cdcc-6e84353eb84b@sero.name> On 08/06/18 16:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. > Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the > first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not > a kofer. This is not just RMF, it's the plain halacha. A kohen who eats treif and breaks shabbos can even duchen, let alone get the first aliyah. Even if he's living with a nochris he can still duchen. But the moment she converts and marries him he can no longer duchen. And if he can't duchen then of course he can't get the first aliya either. (The baal mum is different. The only reason he can't duchen is because the deformity is in his hand; if it were anywhere else he could duchen. And even so he still has a *chiyuv* to duchen, which is why he has to leave before retzei in order to avoid it. A cohen married to a grusha doesn't have to leave, since he is a temporary chalal and thus has no chiyuv.) It seems to me that "vekidashto" *does* apply to the wives of cohanim, because for purposes of kavod the general rule is ishto kegufo, and a wife who marries up gets her husband's social status. As for his unmarried daughters, it seems to me that they too are included in their father's status for this purpose, since they are called by his name. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 11 08:07:53 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:07:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. There are two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Should the Kohanim be asked to leave the shul during Kriyas HaTorah, so that both Yisroelim will receive aliyos? A. The Mishnah Berurah (135:9) writes that a Kohen may not give up his aliyah because we are obligated to honor a Kohen. This is the case not only on Shabbos or Yom Tov when the Shuls are crowded and it will be noticeable, but even on a Monday or Thursday when it is less obvious. However, many poskim, including Igros Moshe (OC 3:20), write that if there is a pressing need on a Monday or Thursday, a Kohen may be mochel (forgo) his kovod and give up his right to the first aliyah. In such a situation, the Kohen exits the Shul before the Torah reading so as not to cast any doubts on his lineage. In contrast, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt?l held that it is not proper for a Kohen to relinquish his aliyah. Aside from the issue of the Kohen being mochel (forgoing) the honor of receiving the first aliyah, there will also be a deficiency in the Kriyas HaTorah itself. The Gemara (Megilla 21b) states that the three aliyos on Monday and Thursday and on Shabbos Mincha were instituted to correspond to the three categories of Jews: Kohanim, Levi?im and Yisroelim. If a Kohen is not called up for an aliyah, the Kriyas HaTorah is lacking this kiyum (fulfillment) of reflecting the three categories of Jews. Therefore, one should not ask a Kohen to forgo his aliyah, since this would diminish the fulfillment of the mitzvah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Jun 11 19:53:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:23:36 +0930 Subject: [Avodah] Kashrus - Wooden Sticks and Feathers Message-ID: If a wooden stick is used to stir a hot pot of non-K meat, it becomes non-K. It will in turn, render a pot of hot Kosher food non-K, if it is used, whilst fresh, to stir that pot. But, wood is not a food. May one eat the shavings of that wooden stick? Probably yes. Hog hair is not a food and it cannot be deemed to be non-K. Therefore one may sprinkle hog hair on ones food, or cook it in ones soup. Does it get worse if the hog hair is first cooked in a pot of non-K meat? Probably yes. This is an issue faced today by Kashrus agencies regarding food ingredients/additives that are extracted from non-foods, like bird feathers. In order to facilitate plucking, the dead, non-Shechted birds have been plunged into a tank of boiling water. Thus the feathers have absorbed the non-K taste of the birds. Although the feathers are dissolved in acids in order to extract what will be used as food additives, this consideration is not accepted regarding gelatine since gelatine is a 'food' at the conclusion of its processing, and it is similarly not accepted by the Kashrus agencies for feathers. Some suggest that there is a difference between the two. Gelatine is worse because it is extracted from the non-K item itself i.e. the skin and bones, whereas the non-K absorbed in the feathers, is not the source of the extracted food/additive which are derived exclusively from the feathers that are a non-food. Therefore, even though skin and bones do become inedible during their processing, this is just a temporary state, generated by acids and alkali, which are removed from the finished product and the finished product is essentially still the same skin and bones. Whereas the product extracted from feathers is entirely disassociated with the absorbed non-K flavour and is therefore K. Nevertheless, a well known Rav argues that in any case where the chemical is removed, the product returns to its non-K status, even in the case of feathers. It will permitted only if the chemical remains but is camouflaged by other additives. Therefore, feathers and what is derived from them remain prohibited because whatever chemicals are used to process and extract the foods/additives, are removed. Is it possible that the foods/additives extracted from the feathers are permitted because all, or almost all of the absorbed non-K flavour is removed - in other words, just as we can Kasher our wooden stick, so too we can deem the feathers to have been Kashered? Now if we were to actually Kasher the feathers or the wooden stick, we require 60 times the volume of the stick. For example, a 500g stick requires 30 litres [500gX60=30,000g] and 3 tonnes of feathers would require [3,000litresX60=500,000 litres] which we obviously dont have in the normal processing. Now the only reason we cannot Kasher in less than 60 is ChaNaN [ChaTiCha NaAsis Neveilah] This means, Kashering is not a process of dilution of the prohibited component that is absorbed until it is less that 1:60, in which case we could immerse the non-K spoon or feathers in 100 small pots of boiling water and each dip would further dilute the concentration of the absorbed Issur Kasheing is rather a process that MUST revoke the prohibited status. If it is not revoked - i.e. it is immersed in a pot that does not have more than 60, then EVERYTHING becomes non-K and the spoon is just as non-K as it was before it was immersed. In other words ChaNaN applies to Kelim. And yet the Kosher agencies permit the additives extracted from non-K feathers because the feathers are not food but a Keli, and are therefore not limited by ChaNaN. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Jun 11 11:09:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:09:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:19 PM 6/11/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would also add that >if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >he should move here. Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who come here collecting for all sorts of things? What would they do if there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious community of Jews in the US? Indeed, how many religious Jews living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things. Is this not a huge mitzva? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 11 20:48:41 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 05:48:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <4a055873-1dcb-8b0f-2b31-69cec4cbdb81@zahav.net.il> 1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. 2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - what does that mean? Ben On 6/11/2018 8:09 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the > frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who > come here collecting for all sorts of things?? What would they do if > there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious > community of Jews in the US?? (1) Indeed, how many religious Jews > living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things.? Is > this not a huge mitzva? (2) > > YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 12 05:36:49 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah Message-ID: Please see the article at Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah by Dr. Leo Levi This article appeared in the December 1988 issue of the Jewish Observer which is available at https://goo.gl/9JUkt4 YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 11:25:42 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:25:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? In-Reply-To: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <10180612182542.GA32068@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 01:27:43PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a : Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) : but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose... However, when fundraising, pidyon shevuyim comes first, even after the funds were raised and the building materials bought for the not-yet-existent shul. SA YD 252:1. And the Tur says this is the only mitzvah we may sell those building supplies for. : 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities : and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent : in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? Is this distinction more than semantic? You are asking whether the "other priorities" are outside the label "tzedaqah" and therefore "other halakhot", or within the label, and therefore tzedaqah's priorities would be "multivariate". But the word "tzedaqah" has multiple usages. For example, in the sense we have been using it, we've been including pidyon shevuyim and binyan bhk"n. But it could be used to refer to supplying the poor with their needs exclusively. Or to mean their needs and dei machsero. Etc... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. micha at aishdas.org I awoke and found that life was duty. http://www.aishdas.org I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:31:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 10:42:20AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like : Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem : spoke to both? ... : If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would : seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply : they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. Like "shamor vezakhor bedibur echad"? There is no proof they all heard the same thing, never mind in the same way. But that's not where I wanted to go. If we take the Rambam's approach to the uniqueness of Moshe's nevu'ah, then the difference isn't in the "Dibbur" (which didn't actually involve heard words, leshitaso). It's in the shomeia'. Moshe's seikhel was able to accept the nevu'ah unmediated. Others, the same message could only be received via koach hadimyon so that it reaches the navi's conscious mind cloaked in visions and metaphoric sensations. So, if Hashem did make one dibbur to both, Moshe would still receive it Peh-el-peh and Aharon would experience the revelation as a prophetic vision. OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then we are left with two possibilities: - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, and passing Torah down the generations, etc... - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording the kelal, there could be others. There are other potential exceptions, most enigmatically Bil'am (Yalqut Shim'oni 966) on the very pasuq that describes Moshe's nevu'ah as being "Panim al panim" -- "velo qam navi od beYisrael keMoshe", but among the other nations, there was Bil'am. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that micha at aishdas.org a person can change their future http://www.aishdas.org by merely changing their attitude. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:39:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:39:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? In-Reply-To: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180612203937.GB20060@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 01:02:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 : minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority : of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to : reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish : the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, : how else might the desired result be accomplished? Through unofficial norms. It wasn't all that long ago (at most a couple of decades) when speed was left to the chazan watching the rav (or the chazan himself, if the rav is at another minyan), and the norms of the minyan set the chazan's pace without a watch and often without conscious thought. But then, even in those days people were coming late. I think you're dealing with a misdiagnosis. To my mind, the only real way to get people to come on time and to stay for davening and not spend the time learning with breaks for prayer is to offer programming that helps people relate to davening. If you don't cure the problem of boredum, people will come late regardless of the scheduling system, and find excuses to step out, whether physically or mentally. I would suggest the minyan in question explore in that direction, rather than worry about how Yishtabach time is determined. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. micha at aishdas.org - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 12 14:24:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 17:24:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> References: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <233e14ea-9b86-d3dc-f8fc-2d8bb4c8c50c@sero.name> On 12/06/18 16:31, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part > of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah > itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, > and passing Torah down the generations, etc... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording > the kelal, there could be others. Other possibilities: * Moshe told Yehoshua what he should write the next day. * The Rambam says that after a navi's vision a mal'ach explains it to him. I see no reason why the mal'ach in Yehoshua's vision could not have told him exactly what he should write. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Wed Jun 13 06:07:13 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:07:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW SHOULD COME FROM THE LETTER Message-ID: <9D3675F5-16E2-4542-A632-D76A033B1BCE@cox.net> There?s the story of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi who, when studying Torah, heard the crying of his infant grandson. The elder rebbe rose from his studying and soothed the baby to sleep. Meanwhile, his son, the boy?s father, was too involved in his study to hear the baby cry. When R. Zalman noticed his son?s lack of involvement, he proclaimed: ?If someone is studying Torah and fails to hear the cry of a baby, there is something very wrong with his learning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 13 12:29:17 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 21:29:17 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Perhaps there are several aspects of nevuah. One is the hearing, which Moshe did better. Another is the experience itself.? Here, it doesn't matter if Moshe's experience was "better" than Aaron's and in fact the word better doesn't apply. Aaron experienced this totality called nevuah and he did it his way. After doing that, he isn't the same person, or the same cohen. The same would apply to the hundreds of thousands of people who experienced nevuah but didn't have anything recorded. They became different people, and their avodat Hashem was completely upgraded as a result of the experience. Ben On 6/3/2018 9:42 AM, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was > the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 13 12:51:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:51:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah Message-ID: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> >From your friendly neighborhood clipping service. Taken from , with transliteration added for Avodah digest purposes. R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" of "Torah lishmah" means. I intend to reply, once I have time to collect a mar'eh maqom or two. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Tvunah in English Beit Midrash for Birurei Halachah Binyan Zion Under the Leadership of Maran HaRav Asher Weiss Shlita Learning Torah L'Shma Introductory Note Our Sages[1] have greatly commended one who learns Torah Lishmo -- literally, for its own sake.[2] Many times in the Talmud [Pesachim 50b, Nazir 23b, Horiyos 10b, Sotah 22b, Sotah 47a, Sanhedrin 105b, Erchin 16b] they have stated that one should always learn Torah, even if it not Lishmo, for through this one will eventually reach Lishmo. The goal, though, is total Lishmo. Two questions have to be dealt with: Firstly, is there anything negative or positive if one enjoys one's learning? Secondly, what precisely is Torah Lishmoh? Position One -- Enjoyment Is Not Ideal The Agrah D'Kallah[3] states that the disciples of the Ba'al Shem Tov asked their master if there is a problem if one enjoys learning Torah. He answered that since this is the very nature of Torah, as is written in Tehillim[4], "the statutes of Hashem are straight, [they] gladden the heart," Hashem will not act unfairly towards a person[5] and punish him for having had such enjoyment. This statement seems clear that the ultimate aim would be not to derive any enjoyment from one's learning. A similar sentiment seems to have been echoed by Rav Chaim Volozhiner. He seems to writes[6] that one who enjoys his learning does not commit a sin.[7] On the other hand, the Eglei Tal[8] writes that he has heard some people make a grave mistake, thinking that the ideal is for one to learn without enjoyment. He argues vehemently that one must love and enjoy one's learning. The one whom the Eglei Tal was arguing with was the Yismach Yisrael. He writes[9] that the true learning of Torah is only when one learns with no intention of any enjoyment at all. My feeling is that there is room for both the position of the Eglei Tal and that of the Yismach Yisrael to be correct. On one hand, Hashem wants us to enjoy His Torah, and, as we shall discuss in length soon, it is the proper way for one to study Torah. However, there are many instances where one does not enjoy learning, either because one has had a bad day, or because it is a piece of material which really does not grab his interest. In such a case, one needs to recall the words of the Yismach Yisroel that one needs to study Torah even if one does not have any enjoyment. Position Two -- Enjoyment Is Ideal In my opinion, it seems clear from many Rishonim that enjoyment and pleasure in one's learning is an integral part of the process of Torah study. Firstly, the Mishnah in Avos[10] states that when one studies Torah one needs to know in front of Whom one toils. Rabbeinu Yonah[11] explains that just as the Torah was the plaything of Hashem[12], so to speak, before the creation of the world, so too one's Torah should be one's own plaything. This seems to state clearly that deriving pleasure for Torah study is an ideal. Secondly, the general rule regarding commandments is that they were not given for pleasure[13], and therefore the pleasure of having fulfilled a commandment is not Halachikally considered pleasure. For example, if one took a vow not to derive pleasure from one's fellow, one's fellow may still blow the Shofar on his behalf, since the mere fact that one's fellow is enabling the fulfilment of one's commandment is not considered pleasure.[14] However, regarding the commandment of Torah study, Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar writes[15] that the essence of the commandment is to enjoy one's learning. Therefore, says Rabbeinu Avraham, if one forbade one's fellow from using one's Torah scroll, one's fellow may not use it. Again, this is a clear statement that enjoying one's learning is ideal. [A note of explanation is in order. It is difficult to understand how Rabbeinu Avraham can state that enjoyment is the essence of learning Torah. It is understandable how it is an integral part -- but to be the essence? I think his intent is as follows. The Shulchan Oruch HaRav[16] argues that there are two separate commandments of learning Torah. One is to study the Torah, and the other is to know the Torah. In my opinion this particular formulation is difficult, since we do not find that the Rishonim count the commandment of Torah study as two separate commandments.[17] Rather, it seems that these two categories make up the commandment. The commandment is to learn, while the essence and purpose of this learning is in order to know the Torah. The proof to this understanding of the commandment is that the commandment of Torah study is the verse veshinantam levanekha -- "And you shall teach your children,"[18] and our Sages explain[19] that the word veshinantam is to be expounded from the root shinen -- sharp. The words of Torah should be totally clear to oneself, to the extent that if one is asked about a given Torah matter one should be able to answer immediately, without babbling. This teaches us that the essence of the study is to achieve clear knowledge. Since the clarity of Torah knowledge is the essence of the commandment of Torah study, and this clarity of knowledge brings one great pleasure, Rabbeinu Avraham writes that the essence of the commandment of Torah study is to have pleasure from it.] A third proof: If deriving pleasure from the study of Torah is not the ideal state, how could it be that our Sages instituted the words, "veha'arev na es divrei Sorasekha befinu" in the morning blessing on the Torah? However, it could be that this is not a proof. The Avudraham[20] cites two verses to explain the word ????? in this context. The first is from Malachi[21] -- Ve'orvah Lashem minchas Yehudah viYrushalayim kiymei olam ukhshanim qadmonios -- "And the flour-offering of Yehudah and Yerushalayim will be pleasing to Hashem as the days of old and the years past." However, his second verse is from Tehillim[22] -- arov avdekha letov, which the Ibn Ezra[23] explains is the same root as an areiv -- a guarantor -- "Guarantee Your servant for good". Accordingly, the blessing is to be understood as a request from Hashem that He should act as a guarantor that our children should know the Torah, and does not refer to a request for having pleasure from the Torah. On the other hand, Rashi[24] explains that this blessing is a request that the study of Torah be with the tremendous pleasure of loving, feeling loved by, and being close to, Hashem. His interpretation is also cited by the Avudraham.[25] According to this interpretation, there is strong proof that pleasure is an ideal part of the study of Torah. Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind on this thought. 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must learn Torah in order to fulfil it. Support for these Positions All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the Rishonim. 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov. 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Uniting the Opinions However, in my opinion, it seems that these are really three sides to one coin. Before I demonstrate this, I would like to show some indications in this direction: 1. Although Rashi in Brachos[38] writes that Lishmo means in order to find out what to do, however in his commentary to Ta'anis he writes[39] that Lishmo means to fulfil Hashems will. 2. Although the Ba'al Shem Tov seems to be of the opinion that Lishmo means in order to fulfil the will of Hashem, however two of his main disciples[40] write that one must learn in order to act. Therefore it seems to me that all these three interpretations are really three parts of one whole. The first step is that one has to learn in order to fulfil the will of Hashem. However, what is His will? It is that one should learn and know clearly His Torah. What is the purpose of us knowing his Torah? In order that one should know what to do. In light of this, it would seem that we can understand that which we quoted from Rav Chaim Volozhiner in the beginning of the Shiur[41], even though at face value his statement that "there is no sin," seems to contradict that which we quoted later in the Shiur from him.[42] According to my understanding of Lishmo it is not a contradiction. The earlier quote is directed at one for whom part of his motivation to learn is because of his enjoyment. The motivation, ideally, should be purely because Hashem said so. But one should most definitely enjoy one's learning when one is learning. [1] For example, Mishnah Avos 6:1 and Sanhedrin 99b [2] We shall later discuss another manner to translate this word. [3] Agrah D'Kallah Parshas Chayei Sarah d"h BeMidrash BeParsha Zu Kad Damich Rebbe Avahu [4] Tehillim 19:9 [5] Avodah Zarah 3a [6] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [7] We shall return to this statement in the end of the Shiur [8] Hakdamah to Eglei Tal [9] Yismach Yisrael Parshas Bechukosai [10] Mishnah Avos 2:14 [11] Rabbeinu Yonah ibid d"h VeDah Lifnei Mi [12] Mishlei 8:30 [13] Rosh HaShannah 28a [14] Ibid, as explained by Rashi d"h Mutar Litkoah Lo [15] Peirush Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar Nedarim 48a d"h Sefarim [16] [Blank on web. -mb] [17] See, for instance, Rambam Sefer HaMitzvos Mitzvah 11 [18] Devarim 6:7 [19] Kiddushin 30a [20] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [21] Malachi 3:4 [22] Tehillim 119:122 [23] Ibn Ezra ibid [24] Rashi Brachos 11b d"h Ha'arev [25] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [26] Degel Machane Efraim Parshas Vayishlach d"h Ba Na El Shifchasi [27] Yosher Divrei Emes Os 7 [disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch, who was a major disciple of the Ba'al Shem Tov]; Ma'or VeShemesh Parshas Vayetzei d"h Vayomer Eilav Lavan [disciple of the Noam Elimelech, who was a major disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch] [28] Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 2 and 3 [29] Chiddushei Chasam Sofer Nedarim 81a d"h Shelo Borchu [30] Reishis Chochmah, Hakdamah [31] Shnei Luchos HaBris, Chelek 1, Ba'asarah Ma'amaros, Ma'amar 6, Os 187 [32] Yerushalmi Brachos 1:2 [33] Peirush HaRosh Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen [34] Mefaresh (Rashi) Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen. [There is doubt whether the commentary printed as Rashi on Nedarim is actually from Rashi, hence this commentary is commonly referred to as "the Mefaresh (commentator)"] [35] Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah 10:5 [36] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [37] Tosfos Pesachim 50b d"h Vekan [38] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [39] Rashi Ta'anis 7a d"h Lishmo [40] Likutei Amarim of the Maggid of Mezeritch (otherwise known as Maggid Devarav LeYa'akov) Siman??, Sod Yachin U'Boaz Perek 2 [41] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [42] [Ed. Note] According to the later quote, as is clear from the end of Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 4, learning for the love of the pure understanding of Torah is Lishmoh. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 04:22:44 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:22:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How to pour nesachim, major differences between the first and the second beis hamikdash Message-ID: Yesterdays daf (Zevachim 61b) says that the mizbeach in the first beis hamikdash was 28x28 amos and in the second beis hamikdash was 32x32 amos. Rabin explains the difference as follows: In the first Mikdash, Nesachim would flow into Shisim (a pit south-west of the Mizbe'ach) down the wall of the mizbeach. In the second Beis Hamikdash they enlarged the Mizbe'ach in order that the Shisim would be within (under) the Mizbe'ach and they made the corners of teh mizbeach hollow so that they could pour nesachim in the mizbeach. At first (during the first Beis Hmikdash), they learned from the words "Mizbe'ach Adamah" that the mizbeach has to be completely solid. In the second beis Hamikdash they thought that drinking ('consumption' of libations) should be like eating (Korbanos that are burned, i.e. within the boundaries of the Mizbe'ach) and therefore made the holes to pour the Nesachim as part of the mizbeach. Therefore, they understood that Mizbe'ach Adamah" teaches that the Mizbe'ach cannot be built over domes or tunnels (that are not needed for the Mizbe'ach). According to the Rambam in Hilchos Mamrim, this is perfectly standard practice. Any Beis Din can come and darshen the pesukim differently then a previous beis din. However, according to others this is not so simple. For those who hold that there is one halachic truth, this would seem to be very difficult, in either the first or second beis hamikdash they did the avoda of the nesachim wrong. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 05:50:21 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:50:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40a627c0-37a1-a74d-6f72-165b6d6d9469@gmail.com> On 6/14/2018 8:17 AM, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org wrote: > Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 From: Micha Berger > ...who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah? If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah ... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. ... Another possibility: Hashem dictated the last pesukim about Moshe's death to Moshe beforehand, even before Moshe ascended the mountain, and Moshe dictated them to Yehoshua, who did not write them down until after Moshe's death. Thus, all the Torah, to the last letter, was revealed to Moshe, but it was Yehoshua who put the last pesukim in writing. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Jun 14 06:47:54 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: At 08:17 AM 6/14/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you >regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. >2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That >isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >what does that mean? I am going to give you an answer that I know you will not like and will dismiss out of hand, but IMO, it is the truth. Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to Eretz Yisroel. After all, I said, Orthodox Jews are interested in doing mitzvahs, and one can certainly do more mitzvahs in Israel. He responded by pointing out that the additional mitzvahs that one can do in Israel are only of rabbinical origin at this time. Furthermore, he went on, one has to keep in mind the following. The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the right spiritual level before you go." While reciting the Shema twice a day we say, ?Beware lest your heart be seduced and you turn astray And you will swiftly be banished from the goodly land which G-d gives you.? Thus it is clear to me that one must be on the appropriate spiritual level to live in Eretz Yisroel. Encouraging those who are not on this level to settle in Eretz Yisroel was and is perhaps a mistake. This is a radical statement, and many will react strongly to it. However, is it possible that part of the reason for what is going on in Israel today is a result of the fact that the vast majority of Jews living in Israel are not properly observant, and the statement quoted in Shema is being, G-d forbid, fulfilled? I am not the one to judge anyone else, but each person should look in the mirror and ask themselves if they are sure that they are spiritually elevated enough to live in Eretz Yisroel. As Reb Dovid said, "You just don't go to Israel." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:19:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:19:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? Message-ID: We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping that stringency. Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? KT Joel Rich From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:18:14 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:18:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? Message-ID: The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases (each iteration away from the primary source can cloud fine points, or Godel's incompleteness theorem at play?). I also see much more of the implicit sociological assumptions made over time (and wonder how we define the community [e.g., town, city, continent...] and time [every decade, exile...] that we measure). Two examples: 1) S"A O"C 153:12 (MB:76) discusses an individual who had a stipulation with a community to build a Beit Knesset (synagogue), it stays with him and his family but it's not transferable. Why not? "Mistavra" (it's logical) that that's what the community had in mind unless specifically stipulated differently at origination (me -- who measured? How?) 2) S"A O"C 153:18 (MB:95) concerning a private object (e.g., Menorah) used by the synagogue. Originally, the assumption was they became kodesh once used, however, "now" it's assumed that they remain totally private (as if this were the original stipulation). So how, when, and where did this change? Were the first people who acted this way sinners, but enough sinners makes it OK? KT Joel Rich From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:35:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:35:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17593052-ba12-6371-5050-960187b566d0@zahav.net.il> Yes we have heard this answer before, several times. Putting aside its multiple problems, it is basically rejecting the paper you linked, given that the paper's author supports the state albeit with several large reservations. You can't say that the aliya of the vast majority of people to Israel is a mistake and support the state at the same time. Ben On 6/14/2018 3:47 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if > one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the > exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D > forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong > deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be > on the right spiritual level before you go. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:36:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:36:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. ?Ben On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > > Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? > From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 14 15:07:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:07:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, micha at aishdas.org but it's smarter to be nice. http://www.aishdas.org - R' Lazer Brody Fax: (270) 514-1507 From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 14:18:33 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 21:18:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: , <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. > Ben ?1?/??? Which raises a question I?ve been thinking about lately. When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From zev at sero.name Thu Jun 14 15:39:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:39:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <76b76294-55ee-c10b-66b4-858544078685@sero.name> On 14/06/18 18:07, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the > : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to > : Eretz Yisroel... > > : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one > : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact > : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, > : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed > : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the > : right spiritual level before you go." > > This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It's much earlier than that. It's a Tosfos (Rabbenu Chaim, quoted in Tosfos, Kesubos 110b, sv Hu Omer). -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 22:37:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 07:37:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> Message-ID: <1d515cf4-41e6-53ed-9246-feaee76b81cd@zahav.net.il> I'd guess the latter - the Gemara is telling us you have to decide for yourself and that while the Gemara will give values and weight, it? leaves the final choice up to you. On 6/14/2018 11:18 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 15 01:27:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 04:27:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 06:07 PM 6/14/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the >: Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to >: Eretz Yisroel... > >: The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one >: does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact >: same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, >: in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed >: here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the >: right spiritual level before you go." > >This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. If so, then why are there Satmar Chassodim living in Israel? Are they all on a high spiritual level? And could it be that the Satmar Rebbe left Israel, for this reason? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmeisner at mail.gmail.com Fri Jun 15 05:27:58 2018 From: jmeisner at mail.gmail.com (Joshua Meisner) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 08:27:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > Question -- is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? On Jun 14, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Ben Waxman wrote: > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a > bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. The implication of this sugya is that given that one has made a neder, it is better not to keep it than to keep it. Clearly, it is not suggesting that one violate the neder but rather that one be matir it before a chacham. The meforshim provide different reasons why this is the case -- e.g., because the neder was made out of anger that would hopefully subside or because the neder is characteristic of ga'avah -- but a chumra taken on because a person perceives a need for a s'yag or similar reasons (or, for that matter, a neder bish'as tzarah) may not be what the gemara is referring to. Going back to RJR's question, to provide a few data points, while on the one hand offering a korban without making a neder is assur, one tanna used to be makdish his korban only after he brought it to the mikdash to avoid the possibility of stumbling. Not sure if these cases can be translated into nidrei issur. Josh From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 15 12:02:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 15:02:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Referring to "the holy month of Ramadan" In-Reply-To: References: <163fc9b81f2-c8f-124c4@webjas-vaa038.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180615190235.GA17319@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:18am EDT, Prof. Levine wrote on Areivim: : What about referring to the "holy month of Ramadan"? Aren't their : restrictions regarding what a Jew is allowed to do when it comes to : non-Jewish holidays? Interesting question... Yes, if Moslems are aku"m. But Islam is monotheistic. In fact, they're more pedantic about it than the Torah requires. E.g. Many Moslems believe that the Torah's use of "Yad Hashem" et al even acknowledging they are meant as metaphors shows Shaitan's alleged corruption of the text. So, it's not yom eideihem in the normal sense. For that matter, one might even argue that many versions of Ramadan observance are actually qadosh (in our sense of the word). They fast to learn self-discipline and empathy for those who are less fortunate, they give sadaqah to the poor (I'm bet you can guess that Arabic) and there is a point of having a nightly meal, iftar, in fellowship with the broader community, not alone or as a nuclear family. All values the Beris Noach would want them to be fostering. So, the previous intentionally provocative paragraph aside, is there really a problem talking about Ramadan or referring to it as they do, as "the holy month of"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The trick is learning to be passionate in one's micha at aishdas.org ideals, but compassionate to one's peers. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 12:09:48 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:09:48 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? Message-ID: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with whom did the PC disagree? Ben From hanktopas at gmail.com Sun Jun 17 18:49:29 2018 From: hanktopas at gmail.com (Henry Topas) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch Message-ID: Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in a din Torah pls? Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. Thank you and kol tuv, HT Sent from my iPhone From zev at sero.name Sun Jun 17 21:42:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:42:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? In-Reply-To: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> References: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 17/06/18 15:09, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. > In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered > putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim > on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with > whom did the PC disagree? The issue was the way he wrote about gedolei haposkim, especially the Bet Yosef. http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1640&pgnum=250 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 23:10:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 08:10:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] machloquet - good or bad Message-ID: <5c275a89-82ba-3763-db85-3c8663f1b5a9@zahav.net.il> Summary of a talk given on Shabbat and then my commentary: According to the Rambam, machloquet is a fashla, something we don't want. It started when students didn't properly learn from their teachers. Had they done so, Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai would not have had so many disagreements. Rav Kook and Rebbe Nachman had a much more positive approach to machloquet. According to RK, when say that talmidei chachamim bring peace to the world, it is because they know how to argue with someone yet respect him and his opinion. A talmid chacham knows how to be inclusive, how to allow for and even want other opinions. According to RN, machloquet is a reenactment of Creation. God created the world through tzimmzum, allowing space for others. When there is one opinion only, that opinion fills the entire space so to speak. When someone else comes up with a different opinion, the first person has to contract to allow room for the new idea. This in turn allows for even more opinions. Ad kan the class. Today we don't do machloquet very well or at least we struggle with it. We try and either destroy the other side or we say that the other position doesn't really exist. This week a rav made a statement about Rav Lichtenstein tz'l and his position regarding (a very minor) women's issue. The easiest thing to do if one wanted to know RL's opinion about something is to pick up the phone and ask his sons, his daughter, an extremely close talmid. Instead the rav simply heard something and made a conclusion. When he was shown that his conclusion was incorrect, he pontificated that RL really didn't accept the more liberal position, he simply gave in to pressure. Occam's razor says that if RL said something and did something, it is because RL believed that to be the right thing to do. There is no need to come up with any explanation. Simply accept that there is a machloquet in the matter. Similarly, there is a mechina whose rosh yeshiva said things about women's role in society which people in the left wing MO world don't accept. No one says that anyone needs to send their kid there, but to try and work to shut down the mechina? You can't accept that someone, who BTW probably agrees with the LW on a whole bunch of other subjects, differs with you? You want to shut them down? Come on people, get a grip. From yherczeg at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:15:11 2018 From: yherczeg at gmail.com (Yisrael Herczeg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:15:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Re: Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." ::This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It is also in the Tashbetz Kattan. Yisrael Herczeg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:53:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:53:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is One Required To Live In Israel? (Bava Batra 91a) Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NKZ2eR by Raphael Grunfeld. (Note: Raphael Grunfeld is a son of Dayan Dr. Grunfeld who translated the Horeb and other works by RSRH from German into English.) First, it is not universally accepted that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel. Rashi?s commentary on the Torah as understood by the Ramban implies that there is no obligation to live in Israel. Rabbeinu Chaim, one of the Tosafists of the twelfth century, states clearly that following the destruction of the Second Temple and the exile from Israel, there is no longer any requirement to live in Israel. The Rambam agrees with Rabbeinu Chaim and accordingly did not include living in Israel in his list of the positive commandments. In more contemporary times, the Rebbe of Munkatch, in his responsa Minchat Eliezer, endorses Rabbeinu Chaim?s position. The Rebbe of Satmar, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, points out that the Shulchan Aruch does not include the mitzvah of living in Israel in its code of law. The majority opinion prevailing in the halacha, however, follows the Ramban and maintains that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel today. Although it is preferable to live in Israel, there is no obligation to go. However, once you live in Israel, there is an obligation not to leave. In fact, the language used by the Ramban in his supplement to Sefer Hamitzvot is that ?anyone who leaves Israel? ? ?kol hayotze mimenah? ? is like an idol worshiper. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:56:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:56:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In just a few weeks, we will observe Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av. This particular Rosh Chodesh is always only one day long, and this year it happens to fall on Erev Shabbos. This means that when Shabbos occurs, Rosh Chodesh will be over. I want to discuss the ramifications of a person who begins Shabbos early in this situation. Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal. (I know that there are poskim who advise one to eat a kezayis of bread after tzeis, but they don't require it.) In my experience, mealtime goes much quicker when there are fewer people at the table. This past Friday, for example, I went to a very nice minyan, beginning Kabalas Shabbos and Maariv shortly after Plag, I took a leisurely stroll home, and despite our best efforts at taking our time through the meal, my wife and I were still ready for Birkas Hamazon a full five minutes before shkiah. In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? I don't recall ever learning about this particular situation. There is an analogous but very different situation that I *have* seen discussed, namely that of a Seuda Shlishit that begins on Shabbos Erev Rosh Chodesh, and continues into Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos. In that case, the poskim give a wide variety of answers, but (among the poskim who *don't* pasken to say both) it is not always clear whether their rule is to base oneself on the beginning of the meal, or the end of the meal, or the holier of the two days. Further, some of them make a distinction, paskening differently for one who is merely benching after tzeis but didn't actually eat after tzeis, as opposed to one who actually ate [food in general or perhaps bread specifically] after tzeis. All that is a good starting point for my situation, but it is only a starting point. A tremendous difference between the two cases is that in the more common case, the calendar day DID change during the meal, to some extent or another. But in the case that I'm asking about, the calendar day did not actually change, only that the people involved are doing the mitzvah of Tosefes Shabbos. To be more explicit: Imagine a couple that goes to an early minyan on Erev Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Av. They daven Maariv, make Kiddush, and say Birkas Hamazon, all before shkiah. Then, after benching but still before shkiah, imagine that the wife gives birth to a boy. This boy will have his bris milah a week later on *Erev* Shabbos, and his bar mitzvah will be on Rosh Chodesh. Is it possible that his parents should have omitted Yaaleh V'Yavo from Birkas Hamazon? Of course, I understand that the answer may depend on details like whether or not the meal continued after shika, or even past tzeis. But I am most curious about the simple case, where benching was before shkiah. And the other cases will perhaps flow from that one. Any and all sources are appreciated. Thanks in advance. (Disclosure: I have other questions about the calendar and a person who begins Shabbos early, but I'm starting with this one, and perhaps I'll open new threads later about the others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:10:57 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:10:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What to do with old pots Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I found an old set of pots in my parents' basement. They have not been used in many years. No one remembers if they were milchig or fleishig. I would like to use them for milchig. May they be kashered and used for milchig? A. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Commentary on Nidah 27a) writes the pots may be designated for meat or dairy without kashering. The pots have not been used in more than 24 hours. After 24 hours any taste that was absorbed in the pot becomes foul, and on a Torah level the pot can be used for meat or dairy without kashering. Nevertheless, there remains a Rabbinic obligation to kasher pots even after 24 hours have elapsed. However, in this case, we may apply the principal of ?safek d?rabbanan l?kula? (in cases of doubt that pertain to a Rabbinic prohibition one may be lenient). Additionally, Igros Moshe (Y.D. II:46) writes that if a utensil is not used for more than a year, there is an opinion that holds that it does not need kashering. Although we don?t follow this opinion, it can act as an additional mitigating factor. However, since one can avoid the doubt by kashering the pot, it is proper to do so. Although the Magen Avrohom (OC 509:11) writes that the custom is not to permit kashering a fleishig pot to use it for milchig, in this case kashering is acceptable since it is only a chumra (extra stringency). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 04:30:24 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:30:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder Message-ID: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don?t know the exact reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That?s only known by HQBH. However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah that you?ve taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 07:50:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:50:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Learning, Spirituality, and Neo-Chassidus In-Reply-To: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> References: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180618145018.GE28907@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 1:14pm, R Aryeh Stein wrote on Areivim: > Rabbi Shafran's letter to Mishpacha included the following paragraph: >> It's easy to say that a person has a relationship with Hashem wherever >> he is, regardless of what he is doing, but it's not true. Many of us break >> that connection through destructive habits and the like, and sugarcoating >> them doesn't make them any less destructive. "Feeling spiritual" may >> be better than feeling bad about yourself, as quoted in the article, >> but are we to be content with feeling spiritual? I think the real problem with R' Avi Shafran's article was picked up in the replies. It's not an either-or. Rather, people whose core learning is the regular gefe"s or shas-and-posqim aren't getting inspired by intellectual pursuit *alone* and are looking for a better connection to the emotional and experiential aspects of Yahadus. Addition, not replacement. The question is more: Are we content with thinking the right thoughts while being parched spiritually? > Rabbi Moshe Weinberger was very disturbed by this paragraph in which > Rabbi Shafran seems to state that one's relationship with God can be > severed if one engages in destructive behavior. > He didn't discuss this specific point in his response to Rabbi Shafran > that was printed in Mishpacha, but he dedicated two shiurim to > demonstrate that Hashem's love for every Jew is eternal and > unconditional (see links to shiurim below) At 03:59:40PM -0400, Zev Sero via Areivim wrote: : To Hashem's love may be unconditional, but the direct connection a : person has with Him can certainly be severed; that is what kares : means. See Igeres Hateshuvah ch 5-6: : https://tinyurl.com/y9hckn5t : https://tinyurl.com/y6wtghxf But on another level, I don't think a person or even an object can be fully severed from the Borei, because withough Or Ein Sof, there is no such thing as existing. This fits kareis as per the Rambam, that the onesh after misah is ceasing to exist. (Except that we would have to translate the Baal haTanya's "Or Ein Sof" language into the Rambam's chain of sikhliim.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:14:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:14:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180618151454.GF28907@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:49:29PM -0400, Henry Topas via Avodah wrote: : Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in : a din Torah pls? : Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. A to'ein is a plaintiff. Could you ever have a din Torah in CM without a to'ein and nit'an? Ah, just googled. I take it you mean a to'ein rabbani, a modern Israeli coinage in order to avoid calling someone an oreikh din, since the job was defined in a way so as to avoid violating "al ta'as atzmekha ke'orkhei hadayanim" (Avos 1:8). The Yerushalmi, Kesuvos 4:10 and BB 9:4 (same quote; both gemaros are short and it's easy to find the quote), says the issur in the mishnah is telling only one side the law when they're still trying to phrase their claim. See also Kesuvos 52b and the Ritva d"h "asinu". So, while I don't have a maqor for when it became normal to have to'anim rabbaniim, I would think the place to look is the earliest shu"t that explain how they're not orkhei din. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, micha at aishdas.org The end is near. http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Moshe Sherer Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:57:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:57:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms Message-ID: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> See "Hezekiahs Religious Reform -- In the Bible and Archaeology" on the Biblical Archeology Society web site at . Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to get rid of everything hidden in private homes. A large 9th-century horned altar was discovered [in Beersheba] -- already dismantled. Three of its four "horns" [rectangular projections on the four corners of the top of the altar] were found intact, embedded in a wall. Their secondary use indicates that the stones were no longer considered sacred. The horned altar was dismantled during Hezekiah's reign, which we know because some of its stones were reused in a public storehouse that was built when the Assyrians threatened Judah and was destroyed by the Assyrian army in 701.... Next we move to Lachish. The second most important city in Judah after Jerusalem, Lachish was a military and administrative center in the Judean hills.... In 2016, an 8th-century BCE cultic place at Lachish was uncovered next to the main city gate. Archaeologists have called this cultic place a "gate-shrine." In it were found two small horned altars, whose horns had been cut off and embedded in an adjacent wall. Further, a square toilet was found installed in the shrine but was never used. The toilet was more of a symbolic act of desecration (see 2Kings 10:27) -- part of Hezekiah's cultic reforms. The best candidate for the elimination [of these cultic sites and others] is King Hezekiah, who probably ordered the abolition of all official cultic sites. Only the Jerusalem Temple and small, household shrines were spared. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. micha at aishdas.org Life is about creating yourself. http://www.aishdas.org - George Bernard Shaw Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:48:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:48:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder In-Reply-To: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> References: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180618154848.GG28907@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 07:30:24AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don't know the exact : reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That's only known by HQBH. : However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah : that you've taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. To do a mitzvah Hashem obligated you in, yes. But one you've taken on yourself? I don't know. As for untuitiveness, see my 9/8/2001 post at . But it ties together why Hashem would command men in something He didn't command women to that mitzvah likely being of more value to a man, to the greater reward. A line of reasoning that doesn't apply to volunteerism. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten micha at aishdas.org your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, http://www.aishdas.org and it flies away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 18 12:50:21 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:50:21 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? On 6/18/2018 5:57 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's > portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the > archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to > get rid of everything hidden in private homes. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 12:13:52 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:13:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chukas Message-ID: <0955AA8C-8FE3-48BA-A965-3E9AA6A10782@cox.net> 1) Four Torah laws cannot be explained by human reason but, being divine, demand implicit obedience: a) to marry one's brother's widow (Deut. 25:5); b) not to mingle wool and linen in a garment (Deut. 22:11); c) to perform the rites of the scapegoat (Lev. 16:26, 34); and d) the red cow. Satan comes and criticizes these statutes as irrational. Know therefore that it was the Creator of the world, the One and Only, who instituted them. Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 19:8). 2) [Ch.19:1] "Hashem spoke to Moses and to Aaron saying:" Symbolically the cow came to atone for the sin of the Golden Calf, as if to say let the mother come and clean up the mess left by her child. If this be the case, this explains why the commandment was directed to Aaron, the one who made the calf. 3) [19:2] "Zot chukat ha-Torah...." This is the statute (also translated as "ritual law," or "decree") of the Torah......" This unusual expression occurs only once more in Bamidbar 31:21. The rabbis have commented that it should have said ?Zot chukat ha parah.? Why does it sound as if this chok is the whole Torah? There are several explanations such as only Jews can be ritually impure. A non-Jew cannot have tum?ah. Also, since a chok is incomprehensible, it is as if you have observed the whole Torah if you follow an irrational, illogical commandment. 4) The Midrash to this chapter focuses primarily on one paradox in the laws of the Red Cow: Its ashes purify people who had become contaminated; yet those who engage in its preparation become contaminated. I thought of a contemporary example of something that would appear just as paradoxical. Radiation treatment is used to treat many forms of cancer, and yet, the same radiation can cause cancer. For someone who has no knowledge of medicine, this would appear as irrational as the paradox of the Red Cow. In a similar vein, the Midrash notes a number of such paradoxical cases of righteous people who descended from wicked parents, such as Abraham from Terach, Hezekiah from Ahaz, and Josiah from Ammon. The Talmud adds the paradox that it is forbidden to drink blood, but an infant nurses from its mother, whose blood is transformed into milk to become the source of life (Niddah 9a). You won?t go broke if you follow the chok. But if you don?t keep trying, you?ll end up dying. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 12:24:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:24:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180618192417.GC12350@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:50:21PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, : had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real : reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split : with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have : been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira : in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? I dunno. Look at David haMelekh. He had what to do teshuvah for as well. (Yeah, yeah, I know, kol ha'omer David chatah... But let's look at the navi's presentation of David, if not the historical figure.) However, he owned his mistakes, did teshuvah. And indeed, excelled at singing shirah. It seems there is a big difference between someone who errs, but stays connected to the Borei through it all well enough to be moved to song, and someone who doesn't. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, micha at aishdas.org and after it is all over, he still does not http://www.aishdas.org know himself. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Jun 19 00:15:18 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:15:18 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive into a hostile Arab town? Ben From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 19 03:01:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 06:01:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive : into a hostile Arab town? I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, no? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 19 06:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Used Metal Pots Bought From a Non-Jew In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Q. I bought a set of used metal pots from a non-Jew. Do I kasher them first or do I tovel them first? A. Shulchan Aruch (YD 121:2) writes that one should first kasher the pot and afterwards immerse it in a mikvah. If one toveled the pot first before kashering, it is a matter of dispute among Rishonim whether the tevila was effective. The Rashbam (cited in Beis Yosef YD 121) writes that toveling a pot before kosherization is like immersing in a mikvah while holding a sheretz (unclean item) and the tevila is ineffective. However, other Rishonim disagree and maintain that tevila is a separate mitzvah and is not connected with kashering. The Shach (YD 121:5) writes that if one was to tovel a pot before kashering, tevila should be repeated without a bracha because of the uncertainty. Nonetheless, the Dagul Merivava writes if the pot had not been used in the past 24 hours, one may tovel before kashering. After 24 hours, the non-kosher taste that had been absorbed in the pot is ruined. At that point the absorbed taste is no longer similar to a sheretz. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 19 08:17:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:17:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <3cd91821-d660-3a72-164e-c3abb8aaf807@sero.name> On 19/06/18 06:01, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone > : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the > : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the > : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive > : into a hostile Arab town? > > I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, > no? I don't know the answer, and wouldn't dare try to pasken it, but I do see a big question. The person is in no danger now. He will be in danger only if he chooses to drive on Shabbos. Is it permitted to help him do so safely? Does it make you an accomplice to his avera? Does hal'itehu larasha' perhaps apply here? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ydamyb at mail.gmail.com Tue Jun 19 05:19:56 2018 From: ydamyb at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:19:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 6:17 PM Akiva Miller wrote: > Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and > begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal > before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal... > In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a > regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling > Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Akiva Blum From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jun 19 09:44:50 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 16:44:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10d8a9cc4d8f47e593bd2928a907b8fd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. -------------------------- I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you can daven maariv after plag-would he say if you did that you don't say retzeih if you ate later? BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 05:11:06 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 08:11:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some degree or another. Would they pasken the same way if the Seuda Shlishis was earlier, and - for whatever reason - he had davened maariv and said birkas hamazon on Saturday afternoon after Plag Hamincha? I concede that it is a bizarre example, but the boundaries of halacha are defined by exactly this sort of situation. It's not done nowadays, but a person *IS* allowed to daven maariv on Shabbos afternoon after Plag. If someone did so, and did it during seudah shlishis, and then chose to say Birkas Hamazon while the sun was still above the horizon on Shabbos afternoon, perhaps he should indeed say Retzeh? Perhaps not, but I'd love to know what a posek might say. Summary: The question in this thread concerns someone who is benching on Friday afternoon which is Rosh Chodesh but he already said the non-RC maariv. This is VERY analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday afternoon which is Shabbos but he already said the non-Shabbos maariv. It is NOT so analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday night and he already said the non-Shabbos maariv, and the only argument in favor of saying Retzeh is that the meal began on Shabbos. I just thought of another difference between Friday Rosh Chodesh and the situation cited by RAB. If a person davened Maariv during seuda shelishit - and presumably included Ata Chonantanu - then he has verbally and explicitly declared Shabbos to be over, and it would be contradictory to reverse this by saying Retzeh in the benching (even if the sun is still shining on Saturday afternoon). BUT: When someone says maariv on Motzaei Rosh Chodesh he merely omits Yaaleh V'yavo, and there is no explicit declaration that RC has ended, so perhaps he could still include Yaaleh V'yavo on Friday afternoon. [There would still be a problem of including both Retzeh and Yaaleh V'yavo in the same benching, but some poskim do allow that in the Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos situation.] Akiva Miller From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 20 13:47:08 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:47:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi S. R. Hirsch Takes On The Rambam Message-ID: My grandson Daniel Levine who is studying in Yeshiva KBY and I are in the process of reading RSRH's Nineteen Letters with the notes written by Rabbi Joseph Elias. Today we read part of letter 18. While I knew that RSRH criticizes the RAMBAM, I was surprised at how strong this criticism is. Some of what is in letter 18 is posted at https://goo.gl/o3uXdg Below is a sampling. "Pressure of the times demanded more: the underlying ideas of the Tanach and the Talmud were recorded in the aggados, but again, in a veiled form, requiring of the student an active effort on his part in order to grasp the inner spirit, which really can be passed down only by word of mouth." "However, not everybody grasped the true spirit of Judaism. In non-Jewish schools Yisrael's youth trained their minds in independent philosophical inquiry. From Arab sources they drew the concepts of Greek philosophy and came to conceive their ultimate aim as perfecting themselves in the perception of truth. Hence rose conflict. Their quickening spirit put them at odds with Judaism, which they considered to be void of any spirit of its own; and their view of life was in contradiction with a view that stressed action, deeds, first and foremost, and considered recognition of the truth to only be a means toward such action." And so the times brought forth a man of spirit who, having been educated within an uncomprehended Judaism as well as Arab scholarship, was compelled to reconcile this dichotomy within himself. By giving voice to the way in which he did this, he became the guide for all who were engaged in the same struggle. It is to this great man alone that we owe the preservation of practical Judaism until the present day. By accomplishing this and yet, on the other hand merely reconciling Judaism with the ideas from without, rather than developing it creatively from within, and by the way in which he effected this reconciliation, he gave rise to all the good that followed- as well as all the bad. His trend of thought was Arab-Greek, as was his concept of life. Approaching Judaism from without, he brought to it views that he had gained elsewhere, and these he reconciled with Judaism. Thus to him too, the highest aim was self-perfection through recognition of the truth; and the practical, concrete deeds became subordinate to this end. Knowledge of God was considered an end in itself, not a means toward the end; and so he delved into speculations about the essence of God and considered the results of these speculative investigations to be fundamental axioms and principles of faith binding upon Judaism. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ydamyb at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 21:34:54 2018 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:34:54 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, 4:46 p.m. Akiva Miller via Avodah, < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > R' Akiva Blum wrote: > > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. > > Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are > presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and > benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some > degree or another. > > Please see the MB 424:2 where he quotes the MA specifically about where one davened maariv while still day that he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. I wonder about a case where one said kabolas shabbos, then ate and davened maariv later. I would think that too would be sufficient. Akiva -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 21 03:56:40 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:56:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Timeless Rav Hirsch Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/ZEcnxP The writings of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (RSRH) deeply resonate with many people today, as they have since the time he penned them in the middle of the nineteenth century, using them to recreate a community of modern, Torah-faithful Jews in Frankfurt that had all but disappeared. Many find that, ironically, his words seem more suited for our times than when he composed them. He stands almost alone among commentators in dealing with many themes of modernity: cultural evolution; our relationships with non-Jews; the Jewish mission to the rest of civilization; freedom of the will versus determinism; autonomy and totalitarianism; understanding the impact of paganism on the ancient world. Of course, his treatment of symbolism. This web page contains links to commentaries on the parshios by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein based on the writings of RSRH. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 06:00:23 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:00:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: Perhaps the machmirim would say to respond, "It is Shabbat and it is assur to drive, so I cannot tell to how to go. BUT I will tell you this: Do not go on such-and-such a road, because it will take you through such-and-such a dangerous area." That would not be a problem by those who the OP refers to as machmirim, it seems to me. (Of course, personally, I would label Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as the machmir, and would use the response he suggests: "It pains me that you are driving on Shabbat, so to minimize the Chilul Shabbat, I will give you the very best directions...") Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 21:02:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:02:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. And R' Joel Rich asked: > I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent > and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you > can daven maariv after plag - would he say if you did that > you don't say retzeih if you ate later? This situation is raised by Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen in "The Radiance of Shabbos" (ArtScroll). He writes (pg 95?), "If one interrupts a prolonged meal to daven Maariv or recite Havdalah, he does not say Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon afterwards. If one merely said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, he should still recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon. Rabbi Cohen cites MB 263:67 that if one said "Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol" during the meal, it is a "Tzorech Iyun" whether he can say Retzeh. Then he cites Eliya Rabba 299:1, Petach Hadvir there, Chayei Adam 47:24, Kaf Hachayim Palagi 31, and Rav Moshe Feinstein all as saying that one *can* still say Retzeh, but that Shulchan Aruch Harav 188:17 says not to. Personally, I am surprised that so many poskim distinguish between Maariv/Havdala on the one hand, vs. Omitting Shem Umalchus on the other hard. Here is a situation which will illustrate this point: Suppose someone had a long seuda shlishis, and after Tzeis he said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, and then he actually did a melacha. Would those poskim still say that he should recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon? Akiva Miller From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 21 18:01:47 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 01:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Individualism? Message-ID: <6b39dd928de144b0ba94b9a16c4318c5@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Anecdotally, it seems to me I've seen an increase in "individualistic" practices across the orthodox spectrum [e.g., davening at one's own pace with less concern as to where the tzibbur is up to (shma, shmoneh esrai, chazarat hashatz . . .), being obvious about using a different nusach hatfila, wearing tfillin at mincha . . .] I'm curious as to whether others have seen this? If yes, any theories as to why? (e.g., outside world seeping in?) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Jun 22 13:51:26 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:51:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In Avodah V36n72 (to which I'm humming "Chai, Chai, Chai/Am Yisrael Chai" :)), RJR asked: > BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? < Iff we're considering when one ended the meal; but then you're comparing unlike items (BhM vs. Ma'ariv), not to mention that BhM is a Torah-level *mitzva* while Ma'ariv is .... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 23 19:24:37 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 22:24:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BALAK "JACOB'S TENTS, ISRAEL'S DWELLING PLACES, MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD" Message-ID: "How goodly are your tents, O Jacob; your dwelling places, O Israel." [Num. 24:5] Why the repetition? What does each of these terms [tents and dwelling places] represent? And furthermore, why is the first appellation used "Jacob" and the second one "Israel?" In addition to the sensitivity and modesty demonstrated by the arrangement of the tents and camps, the Sages (Sanhedrin 105b) expound that these terms refer to the habitats of Israel's spiritual heritage. Tents (Ohalecha), alludes to the study halls, and dwelling places (Mishk'nosecha), which is related to Shechinah, or God's presence, alludes to the synagogues and Temples (Sforno). Rav Kook has a novel interpretation. He says that the verse, which mentions tents first, reflects a lower level and hence, uses the name Jacob, the first and lesser name. However, the verse which mentions dwelling second, reflects a higher level. Thus, it uses the name Israel, Jacob's second and more elevated name. The reason Rav Kook considers "tents" to reflect a lower level and "dwelling places" a higher level is because the tent is inherently connected to the state of traveling. It corresponds to the aspiration for continual change and growth. The dwelling is also part of the journey, but is associated with the rests between travels. It is the soul's sense of calm, resting from the constant movement, for the sake of the overall mission (sort of a parallel to Shabbos). I delved into the gematria aspect of this and came up with some heavy, mystical stuff. The gematria for "Ohalecha Ya-akov" (your tents O Jacob) is 248. There are 248 positive mitzvot. The word 'Avraham' and 'bamidbar' (In the wilderness) is also 248, as is the phrase 'Kol Adonai Elohim' (the voice or sound of Hashem, God). The word 'romach' (spear) is also 248. Now to tie all this together-- Balaam had intended, in a manner of speaking, to use a 'spear' to harm the Jewish people and curse them 'in the wilderness.' However 'the voice of Hashem, God' caused Balaam to turn the negative to the positive, (symbolized by the 248 positive mitzvos). Thus when Balaam said "How goodly are your tents O Jacob," he was blessing the Jewish people completely right from 'Abraham.' The gematria for "Mishk'nosecha Yisrael" (Your dwelling places, O Israel) is 1,381. As Rav Kook said, this part of the verse was on a higher level. In Gen: verse 25 (last part) and verse 26 (first part) we have: "Vayar Elohim ki tov. Vayomer Elohim na-a-seh Adam b'tzalmeinue" ("And God saw that it was good. And God said: "Let us make man in Our image..."). The gematria for this is also 1,381 as is the word "Ha-ashtaroth" (the principal Phoenician goddess, the consort of their chief male deity, Baal). Though Balaam was steeped in idolatry ("Ha-ashtaroth"), when he pronounced the second part of the phrase, ("mishk'nosecha Yisroel") God 'saw that it was good.' And so, the "image of God" wins out! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 25 07:17:25 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:17:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Waiting After Some Cheeses Before Eating Meat Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I know that we are supposed to wait after eating certain cheeses, before we can then eat meat. After which cheeses should one wait, and what is the basis for this practice? A. The Rama (Yoreh Deah 89:2) writes that the custom is not to eat meat after eating hard cheese. The waiting time for this is equivalent to the amount of time that one waits after eating meat, before then eating dairy foods. (See Taz ibid. 89:4, Aruch HaShulchan ibid. 89:11, Chochmas Adam 40:13.) There are two reasons that one needs to wait after meat before then partaking of milk; these two reasons apply as well to eating certain cheeses after meat. The first reason is that of basar she?bein ha-shinayim ? meat that gets stuck between the teeth ? which takes a considerable amount of time to dislodge or disintegrate, before which one may not consume milk. (Rambam, Hilchos Ma?achalos Asuros 9:28) The second reason for waiting after eating meat is meshichas ta?am ? an aftertaste left in the mouth, due to meat?s fattiness; only after a substantial lapse of time does this aftertaste dissipate, whereupon one may then consume milk. (Rashi in Chullin 105a s.v. ?Assur?) Poskim apply both of these reasons to cheese: Hard cheese, due to its firm and brittle texture, is like basar she?bein ha-shinayim, and is termed gevinah she?bein ha-shinayim ? cheese that gets stuck between the teeth. One therefore needs to wait a considerable amount of time for such cheese to dislodge or disintegrate before then consuming meat. (Sifsei Da?as Yoreh 89:2) Also, cheeses that are very pungent and leave a noticeable aftertaste are like meat that has meshichas ta?am; one must wait for the aftertaste to dissipate before then eating meat. (Taz Yoreh Deah 89:4) Although some classical poskim argue as to whether one or both of the above rationales for waiting apply to cheese, contemporary poskim rule that both apply. The next installment of Halacha Yomis will discuss further details. View OUKosher's list of Aged Cheeses. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sun Jun 24 23:26:22 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:26:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] [Commentary] Rabbi Meir Soloveichik: Why Christians Are Reading the Rav In-Reply-To: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: [RET emailed me this under a subject line that began "Too long for Avodah thought you might be interested..." But I thought his reluctance was missplaced. I just held on to the piece for its own digest. -micha] Jun 20, 2018 The nature of the dilemma can be stated in a three-word sentence. I am lonely. - Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik In 2015, I was invited to a conference held at a Catholic University in Spain, celebrating the first Spanish translation of *The Lonely Man of Faith*, the seminal philosophical essay of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik (my great uncle), reverently referred to by many Orthodox Jews as "the Rav." Published 50 years earlier, the essay contrasts two biblical accounts of the creation of man and teases out two personas, known as Adam the First and Adam the Second. In the first chapter of Genesis, humanity is created in the image of God and instructed by the Almighty to "fill the world and subdue it." Adam the First, Rabbi Soloveitchik suggests, is majestic; through his God-like creative capacities he seeks scientific breakthroughs, to cure disease, to build cities and countries, to advance the health and comfort of mankind. But then there is Adam the Second, who in Genesis 2 is created from the dust of the earth and remains in the sanctity of the garden of Eden, "to work and protect it." This represents the religious aspect of man, man who is ever aware of his finitude, who finds fulfillment not in majestic achievement but in an intimate relationship with a personal God. These two accounts are given, Rabbi Soloveitchik argued, because both are accurate; both Adam I and Adam II are divinely desired aspects of the human experience. One who is devoted to religious endeavors is reminded that "he is also wanted and needed in another community, the cosmic-majestic," and when one works on behalf of civilization, the Bible does not let him forget "that he is a covenantal being who will never find self-fulfillment outside of the covenant." The man of faith is not fully of the world, but neither can he reject the world. To join the two parts of the self may not be fully achievable, but it must nevertheless be our goal. In his letter of invitation to the conference, the president of the Spanish university reflected on how Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings spoke to his own vocation. As a leader of a Christian school, he said he grappled constantly with the challenge of being an *hombre de fe* in a Europe that, once the cradle of Christendom, was now suddenly secular: As Adam the First understandably and correctly busies himself with the temporal concerns of this world, we encourage our students to not lose sight, within their own hearts, of Adam the Second, the thirsting Adam that longs for a redemption that our technological advances cannot quench. We hope that our students, who come to our university seeking degree titles that will translate into jobs, will leave it also with awakened minds and hearts that fully recognize the deep aspirations that lie within their youthful spirits, and which *The Lonely Man of Faith* so eloquently describes. The letter reflected a fascinating phenomenon. As Orthodox Jews mark this year the 25th anniversary of Rabbi Soloveitchik's passing, more and more of his works are being studied, savored, appreciated, and applied to people's own lives -- by Christians. As interesting as this is, it should not be surprising. *The Lonely Man of Faith* actually originated, in part, in a talk to Catholic seminarians, and today it is Christians who are particularly shocked by the rapidity with which a culture that was once Christian has turned on them, so that now people of faith are quite lonely in the world at large. In his essay, Rabbi Soloveitchik notes that though the tension between Adam I and Adam II is always a source of angst, "the contemporary man of faith is, due to his peculiar position in secular society, lonely in a special way," as our age is "technically minded, self-centered, and self-loving, almost in a sickly narcissistic fashion, scoring honor upon honor, piling up victory upon victory, reaching for the distant galaxies, and seeing in the here-and-now sensible world the only manifestation of being." Now that the world of Adam I seems wholly divorced from that of Adam II, people of faith seek guidance in the art of bridging the two; and if, 70 years ago, Reinhold Niebhur was a theologian who spoke for a culture where Christianity was the norm, Rabbi Soloveitchik is a philosopher for Jews and Christians who are outsiders. The Catholic philosopher R.J. Snell, in a Christian reflection inspired by the Rav's writings, wrote that "like Joseph B. Soloveitchik in *The Lonely Man of Faith*, I am lonely," and he tells us why: In science, my faith is judged obscurantist; in ethics, mere animus; in practicality, irrelevant; in love, archaic. In the square, I am silenced; at school, mocked; in business, fined; at entertainment, derided; in the home, patronized; at work, muffled. My leaders are disrespected; my founder blasphemed by the new culture, new religion, and new philosophy which...suffers from an aversion to the fullness of questions, insisting that questions are meaningful only when limited to a scope much narrower than my catholic range of wonder. Yet Rabbi Soloveitchik's thesis remains that even when society rejects us, we cannot give up on society, but we also cannot amputate our religious identity from our very selves. Adam I and Adam II must be bridged. This will not be easy, but a theme throughout Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings is that all too often religion is seen as a blissful escape from life's crises, while in truth the opposite is the case. In the words of Reuven Ziegler, Rabbi Soloveitchik insisted that "religion does not offer an escape from reality, but rather provides the ultimate encounter with reality." Traditional Jews and Christians in the West face cultural challenges to their faith -- disdain, scorn, and even hate -- but if the challenge is faced with fortitude, sophistication, and honor, it will be a religious endeavor worthy of being remembered. And as both traditional Jews and Christians face this challenge, it will often be as compatriots, in a fellowship that we may not have foreseen 50 years ago. After attending the conference, I was emailed by another member of the administration, the rector of the university. He thanked me "for the pleasure of sharing that deep friendship which is a sign of the community inspired by the principles of the second Adam," and added, "[I] really enjoyed the time we passed together and the reading of the book of Rabbi Soloveitchik," which was, he reflected, "so stimulating for a better understanding of my own life and my faith." To be a person of faith is indeed to be lonely in this world. But more and more, lonely men and women of several faiths may be brought together by *The Lonely Man of Faith.* From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:42:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:42:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627194234.GE22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:18:14PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand : the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic : sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's : underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases... This is why the Maharal (Be'er 1, ch 19 or so) says that the Tur is only usable because of the BY, and SA, because it comes with the suite of nosei keilim. Speaking after years of learning AhS daily... There is a strong feel for the flow of the pesaq and how each area of halakhah is reasoned through by going to Tur, BY, SA, nosei keilim, AhS. It could be the Maharshal too would be more bothered by the Yad than by the other codes, IFF once studies the Tur or SA (or MB) with the other texts that explain how we got there. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The worst thing that can happen to a micha at aishdas.org person is to remain asleep and untamed." http://www.aishdas.org - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:36:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:36:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627183655.GC22635@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 11:54:52AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At : the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking : against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi : comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas : keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same : question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A : Baal keri is prohibited from going there. Or to put it less obliquely... The pasuq there (Bamidbar 12:4) refers to their location as Ohel Mo'ed. But the idiom is not necessarily referring to the Mishkan. Moshe went to the Ohel Mo'ed to get nevu'ah *outside* the camp. (Shemos 33) It had a pillar of cloud at the door, not at a mizbeiach. In Bamidbar 11:16 we learn that the 70 zeqeinim, after getting ruach haqodesh at the Ohel Mo'eid, returned to the camp. The Sifrei Zutra where (Bamidbar 11) writes: And he set them round about the tent the tent for speaking which was outside the camp. They made two tents, a tent for service and a tent for speaking. The outer tent had the same dimensions as the inner one, and the Levites served in both with the wagons. Two ohel mo'eds, the mishkan, and the nevu'ah center. The Ohel Mo'eid in this story also has a cloud at the door. So, I would think it was Moshe's place of nevu'ah, not the Mishkan. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and micha at aishdas.org this was a great wonder. But it is much more http://www.aishdas.org wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a Fax: (270) 514-1507 "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:38:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:38:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627193824.GD22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:19:19PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency : greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? It depends why gadol hametzuveh ve'oseh. The accepted theory is that it's because the YhR chimes up when a prohibition -- issur or bitul asei -- is involved (what pop-psych would describe as the attractiveness of "forbidden fruit"), so so one gets greater sekhar for winning the greater battle. Lefum tzaara agra. In which case, the YhR would work against keeping a neder, and so one should get more sekhar for fighting that battle. I argued that it's that someone we are obligated to do is indeed obligated because we need its effects more than someone who isn't. In which case, no one *needs* the chumerah for basic development; because if they did, it would have been obligatory. Then there would be no added value for keeping the chumerah in terms of the substance of what he's doing, but there is added value to keeping a neder. Meanwhile, it's subject to the Chullin 2a: "Tov shelo tidor mishetidor velo meshaleim." (Qoheles 5:4) Utanya: Tov mizeh umizeh, she'eino nodei kol iqar. -- Divrey R' Meir. R' Yehudah omer: Tov mizeh umizeh, nodeir umeshaleim. The gemara then continues by limiting R' Yehudah to nedarim of "harei zu" not shavu'os of "harei alai". Which would appar to include maintaining a chumerah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:07:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:07:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah In-Reply-To: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> References: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180627180708.GB22635@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 03:51:17PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote: : ... : R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" : of "Torah lishmah" means. ... :> Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions :> :> We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing :> opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. :> :> 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion :> of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent :> generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to :> fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice :> was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind :> on this thought. :> :> 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing :> in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo :> [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, :> one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is :> learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] :> :> 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh :> means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to :> learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah :> is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- :> i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar :> with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must :> learn Torah in order to fulfil it. :> :> Support for these Positions :> :> All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the :> Rishonim. :> :> 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara :> in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir :> bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the :> commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, :> that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." :> :> 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text :> reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake :> of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, :> for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out :> of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of :> the Ba'al Shem Tov. :> :> 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] :> and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Along the lines of #3, Yesushalmi Beraikha 1:1 (vilna 1a), Shabbos 1:2 (vilna 7b): One who learns but not in order to do, would have been pleasanter that his umbilical cord would have prolapsed in front of his face and he never came into the world. The Meshekh Chokhmah, Devarim 28:61, explains this in terms of the idea that the soul learns Torah with a mal'akh before birth. Someone who wants to learn as an end in itself would have been better off staying with that mal'akh! And (citing the intro to Qorban Aharon) a soul that was not born is a seikhel nivdal who grasped his Creator. All that is being given up by being born. But, if one is learning al menas laasos, which one can only do after birth, then their birth had value. The other opinion in the Y-mi is that someone who is lomei shelo al means lelameid is better off not existing. Again, the MC, notes, because the point of learning is to bring it into the world. The MC also gets this from Sanhedrin 99b, where the gemara concludes that "adam la'amal yulad" is for amal peh -- speaking Torah. While the gemara doesn't say al menas lelameid is a definiition of lishmah, the transitive property would lead me to conclude that's the implication. Al menas and lishmah... can they be distinguished? And if not 4. Al menas laasos. (I have discussed this MC before. He ends up showing that in terms of priorities, one who is going somewhere to teach doesn't have to stop to do mitzvos maasiyos; but someoen who is actually learning (and not teaching) has to stop even for a hakhsher mitzvah (maasis). This is one of my favorite shtiklach; worth a look! (There is a complete copy with a bad translation scattered among .) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jun 29 11:07:36 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 18:07:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? Message-ID: >From OU Kosher Yomis Q. What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? A. Chazal, the Talmudic Sages, prohibited cheese that is not made under the special supervision of a Jew (Avodah Zarah 29b, 35a-b). Various reasons are advanced for this rabbinic prohibition, but the reason accepted by most halachic authorities is the concern for the use of rennet enzymes from the stomach flesh of neveilah/non-kosher animals. Unsupervised cheese is termed Gevinas Akum. Cheese is only permitted if it is Gevinas Yisroel ? Jewish-supervised cheese (Yoreh Deah 115:2). This rule is unrelated to the rules of Cholov Yisroel (Jewish-supervised milk) and Cholov Akum/Cholov Stam (milk not under Jewish supervision). Therefore, even if a person eats Cholov Stam dairy products, he may only eat Gevinas Yisroel cheese. According to the Rama (Yoreh Deah 115:2) and many other poskim, Gevinas Yisroel is obtained by the mashgiach visually supervising the incorporation of the enzymes into each vat of milk in the cheese-making process; this way, the mashgiach will verify that the enzymes are kosher. According to the Shach (ibid. 20) and many other poskim, the mashgiach must manually add the enzymes to each vat of milk in the cheese-making process. The Vilna Gaon (ibid. s. 14) provides the rationale for this: Gevinas Yisroel is similar to Pas Yisroel (bread with onsite Jewish involvement) ? just like Pas Yisroel means that a Jew actually participated in the baking process, so too does Gevinas Yisroel mean that a Jew actually participated in the cheese-making process. Contemporary poskim rule that the basic halacha follows the Rama, although kashrus agencies typically endeavor to fulfill the Shach?s requirement as well. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:00:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:00:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Game Theory and Bankruptcy Message-ID: <20180629190056.GA23432@aishdas.org> Nobel Laureate R/Dr Robert Aumann famously (in our circles) explained the distribution of funds in the mishnah on Kesuvos 93a. In that mishnah, a man left behind 3 wives -- but the case works for 3 debts in general. Whatever wife 1's kesuvah is worth in the mishnah would be the same as if 1 of 3 creditors were owed the same amount. It is the creditor version that is the topic of AhS CM 104:15. But it only holds in cases where the assets aren't real estate, or if the debts are loans without certified contracts, if all the debts' contracts have the same date -- in other words, in cases where one doesn't pay the oldest loan fast. Creditor A is owed 100 zuz, creditor B is owed 200 zuz, and creditor C, 300. And the debtor has left than 600 zuz to divide. The AhS notes that there is a minority opinion that would have them divide as we today would probably consider more intuitive -- proportionally. A gets 1/6 of the assets, B gets 1/3 (ie 2/6) and C gets 1/2 (=3/6). And in his day this was a common practice. So, while one may say this became minhag hamaqom and thus a tenai implicitly accepted when doing business or lending money, the AhS recommends that if the creditors assume this division, beis din seek pesharah and divide this way. However, iqar hadin is as per the mishnah. Which the gemara tells us is R' Nasan, and R' Yehudah haNasi disagrees. (Stam mishnah, and the redactor of mishnayos doesn't mention his own opinion???) The first 100z has three claims on it and is divided in thirds. The second 100z has two claims on it, and is divided equally between B & C. And whatever is left is given to C. What this means is that whomever has the biggest loan is most likely to absorb the loss. RRA explains this case in two papers. The first, aimed more at mathematicians, invokes the Game Theoretic concept of nucleolus. (R.J. Aumann and M. Maschler, Game Theoretic Analysis of a Bankruptcy Problem from the Talmud, Journal of Economic Theory 36, no. 2 (1985), 195-213.) In the second, written for people who learn gemara, he avoids all the technical talk. ("On the Matter of the Man with Three Wives," Moriah 22 (1999), 98- 107.) The second paper compares this mishnah to the gemara at the opening of BM, and derives a general rule, RAR saying that no other division in Qiddushin would follow the same principles as the 2 person division in BM. Here is an explanatory blog post on Talmudology blog ("Judaism, Science and Medicine"), by R/Dr Jeremy Brown. (The blog would particularly be interesting to someone learning daf who is interested in science or math.) The aforementioned AhS gives two sevaras for R' Nasan's position: The first is that the first division is taken from the beinonis (mid-quality property) of the debtor's or the estate's holdings. Therefore, it has to be divided separately from the rest of B & C's debt. Each has claim to the full 100z, so each gets equally. The second division is taken from the beinonis of what the person owned that the time he started owing B & C money, and if there is non left, from the ziburis (lesser quality). Again, different material, so it is divided without consideration to the remainder of the debt to C. merchandise. Therefore, it is accounted for separately The second explanation focuses on why this case is different than shutefus, where the shutefim do divide proportionally to their investments. The debtor's assets are entirely meshubadim to A just as much as to B or C. C can't get his 300z until A's 100z is accounted for, no less than the other way around -- each has full power to halt distribution of any of the man's assets. So the division is by shibud, which is equal. But with shutefim, the profit is clearcut. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late micha at aishdas.org to become the person http://www.aishdas.org you might have been. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - George Eliot From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Migo vs Chazakah Message-ID: <20180629194917.GA8106@aishdas.org> AhS 82:18 is a qunterus on migo. Looking at #6 (within se'if 18), RYMEpstein looks at two gemaros that discuss migo bemaqom rov -- BB 5a and Qiddushin 64. In BB, Raza"l say that while rov adif meichazaqah, this is not true for every chazaqah. Chezqas mamon outranks rov (you don't make someone pay up on a "probably"), because the mi'ut yeshno ba'olam, so we can't take something out of his hands -- maybe he is of the mi'ut. This is true even though chezas haguf adif mechezqas mamon and migo adif meichezqas haguf. So chazaq IOW: rov > migo rov > chezaqa chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon So rov > chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon But chezqas mamon > rov -- where mi'ut yeshno be'olam, without bitul Acharei rabim lehatos is a case of bitul, so if the majority of dayanim rule that the nit'an has to pay up, that rov does trump chezqas mamon. Hoserver the gemara in R' Nasan says: "Mah li leshaqer?" ki chazaqah dami. Lo asi chazaqah ve'aqrah chazaqah legamrei. (R' Nasan shows up in two of my posts in a row!) Migo doesn't trump chazaqah, because assuming a person wouldn't give that particular lie is itself a chazaqah. Which is it? Another related issue that confuses me is what kind of chazaqah is a chezqas mamon: One could say it's a chazaqah demei'iqara -- preserving the status quo of who has the money. One could say it's a chazaqah disvara -- normally property belongs to the person holding it. Now, say the to'ein is tofeis the money he claims. This can at times work, because it shifts which is hamotzi meichaveiro when they get to BD. However, we know this is a normal case of the person holding the money, we know how he got it. So how would my chazaqah disvara apply? OTOH, it's not your usual case of presrving the old halachic state, because everyone agrees that before the dispute, the property was the nitan's. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger How wonderful it is that micha at aishdas.org nobody need wait a single moment http://www.aishdas.org before starting to improve the world. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anne Frank Hy"d From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jun 30 21:01:59 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? Message-ID: Naaah, of course he was not Jewish. The subject line was just to get your attention. But then again.... I would not have surprised me if Bil'am had said, "I can't do what my god doesn't let me do." After all, religious people of *any* religion generally refrain from going against the will of their god. Likewise, I would not have been surprised if he said, "I can't do what Hashem doesn't let me do." He is a professional, and he knows the rules of the game (most clearly seen in maftir). He knows who he is dealing with, and if he is trying to curse the Jews, it would be a good idea to follow the rules of the Jewish God. But Bil'am didn't say either of those things. What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase. There have been plenty of polytheists who accept the idea that there are many gods, One of them being Hashem, the God of the Jews. But in this pasuk, we see that Bil'am goes beyond accepting Hashem as *a* god - he accepts Him as "my God". I checked my concordance and found about 50 cases in Tanach of the phrase "Hashem Elokai", spelling "Elokai" with either a patach or a kamatz. It seems that this was the ONLY case where this phrase was used by a non-Jew. Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Sat Jun 30 22:44:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 01:44:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180701054415.GA28439@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 12:01:59AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me : do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase... : Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding : has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply : spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now : it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not : have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I : guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. This works well with my recent (few minute old) blog post. I argue that the whole point of Bil'am might have been to illustrate how monotheism and deveiqus don't guarantee being good people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Aspaqlaria Bil'am the Frummy by micha ? Published 18 Tammuz 5778 - Sun, Jul 1, 2018 Sun, Jul 1, 2018 The Medrash Tankhuma (Balaq 1) says: And if you ask: Why did the Holy One blessed be He, let his Shechinah rest upon so wicked a non-Jew? So that the [other] peoples would have no excuse to say, `If we had nevi'im, we would have changed for the better', He established for then nevi'im. Yet they [these nevi'im] broke down the moral fence of the world... For that matter, the Sifrei says on the last pasuq of the Torah: And another navi did not arise again in Israel like Moshe: In Israel, [another] one did not arise, but among the nations of the world, one did arise. And who was it? Bil'am ben Be'or. So here you have a prophet with the abilities of Moshe (whatever they meant by that) and yet he was no paragon of moral virtue. He didn't teach them how to lift themselves up, but how to corrupt the Jews. So how does that address the complaint of the nations? They had their navi, but they said it was unfair that they didn't have nev'i'im to give moral instruction -- and Bil'am wasn't capable of leading them in that way. Perhaps Bil'am stood for them as an example to teach them just that point. The nations are described as complaining that if they only had a navi they would have been as good as the Jews. But Bil'am was there to show them nevu'ah wasn't the answer. Even being a navi and having the Shechinah rest upon them is not sufficient to make an ideal person. The whole detour into telling us about an event in the lives of Balaq and Bil'am is such a departure from the rest of the Torah, it is considered a separate book. "Moshe wrote his book and Parashas Bil'am" (Bava Basra 14b) So why it it included? Based on the above suggestion, the section teaches us about the dangers of frumkeit. We can get so caught up in the pursuit of deveiqus, one's personal relationship with G-d, one can end up as self-centered and honor-seeking as Bil'am. We need to start out pursuing moral and ethical behavior, ehrlachkeit, and then the connection with the Divine can be harnessed to reach those goals. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 30 21:01:27 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pinchas Message-ID: <56A42568-E095-442F-A19F-017F306492C3@cox.net> ?Pinhas? has turned back Chamasi, my wrath, from the people of Israel.? (Num.25:11) Pinhas has proven his unusual power to turn back God?s wrath from Israel through a very courageous, difficult and controversial act. The Vilna Gaon brilliantly observes that in the word chamasi (my wrath), the two outside letters ches and yud read chai ? life ? while the inside letters mem and sav read meit ? death. The hidden meaning is that by Pinchos facing squarely what has taken place on the outside, he has miraculously turned back the wrath of the Almighty. In doing so, he has removed death (meis) from the inside, replacing it with life (chai). Why do we pray with a set text? An opinion recorded in the Talmud states that prayers correspond to the daily sacrifices offered in the Temple which are mentioned in this coming week's portion of Pinchas. (Numbers 28:4) It has been argued that this opinion may be the conceptual base for our standardized prayer. Since sacrifices had detailed structure, so too do our prayers have a set text. If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 08:09:35 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 01:09:35 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: This year's incarnation of the Gebrochts discussion attempts to discuss the Halacha and I think traverses territory not clearly enunciated in the past. Also I would not characterise this as Gebrochts-bashing; I dont believe anyone is troubled by those who say, "My Rebbe/My tradition is not to eat whatever it may be" the issue is that Gebrochts is promoted as Halachically legitimate and therefore preferred if not mandated. The ShA HaRav declares firstly, that as far as the Halachah is concerned, there is no concern with Kneidlach during Pesach, see the link - http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=25074&st=&pgnum=486 He does however advise that it is a valid stringency his first observation/proof however is that flour can be found on the surface of the Matzos and later on says this is quite common However, A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years B] no other Posek ever verified this claim this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within the finished Matza - but C] there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already been made D] even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link provided - It is universally accepted these days that flour is not added to a dough already made and there is no Matza baking program that permits adding flour to the already made dough Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 1 18:30:38 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 21:30:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The not-Korban Pesach Message-ID: I had asked: : It has come to me attention recently that the Torah never refers to : the Pesach as a Korban... : My question is this: Whatever reason it was, why the Torah avoided : using that word in this context ... why did Chazal feel differently? Upon further research, it seems that my question was based on the *mistaken* assumption that the Pesach was unique in this regard. It turns out that while the Torah does use the word "korban", it never uses phrases such as "Korban Tamid", "Korban Todah", or "Korban Musaf". These were referred to simply as the Tamid, the Todah, and the Musaf, just as the Pesach was. Apparently, construction of the phrase came much later, and was applied to them all. Exception: The "Korban Mincha" is mentioned three times in Vayikra 2, but that would change the whole question drastically. I should also clarify: these phrases aren't missing only from the Torah, but from the whole Tanach. They seem to have arisen after the Tanach. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sun Apr 1 20:40:08 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 23:40:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b27445d-5dde-c27e-a809-871e12258604@sero.name> On 01/04/18 11:09, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > A] we have not been able to verify this in all our years Who is "we"? > B] no other Posek ever verified this claim > this claim supports the proposition that there remains flour within > the finished Matza - but > > C]? there has never been a Posek who suggested that dough is not > thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product > the only concern was that flour not be added AFTER the dough had already > been made Perhaps you mean no *other* posek, because this one clearly says it. It's no surprise that nobody before him mentions it, because he says it's a recent phenomenon. > D]? even the published Teshuvah admits this, look at note 33 on the link > provided - This is a bizarre claim. The teshuvah "admits" no such thing. First of all, the footnote is obviously not part of the teshuvah, not by its author, and thus completely irrelevant to anything. Second, the footnote does not "admit" such a thing either. It brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 1 21:12:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 06:12:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions, one that basically is an exception that proves the rule and the other is a real exception. 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. 2) Powered chalav nochri. Labels here are supposed to state that a product containts powered chalav nochri (if it does). This was the result of a lawsuit.? I guess that no one wants to start listing every possible kula that goes into a food product. OTOH? if meat isn't halaq, labels generally don't state it. They only state the meat's halaq status if it is halaq. Ben On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: > I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the > lines to fine, or it becomes unusable. Once it's certifying a product > as lacking qitniyos, it might as well stick to avoiding all qitniyos > rather than having a confusing (to some) explanation on each package > which minhagim can or can't use the product. > > The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that > in a number of ways. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 1 18:58:35 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 21:58:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which >is eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give >his full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are >15,000 Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. Have patience and watch developments. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 2 07:10:57 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:10:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <8B.1D.08474.79E81CA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 01/04/18 21:58, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 12:20 PM 4/1/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >> I would just like to point out that according to this claim (which is >> eight years and only the claim of one person who didn't even give his >> full name) we are talking about 3, maybe 5 shuls. There are 15,000 >> Orthodox batei kenesiot in Israel. This is hardly a wave. > > Have patience and watch developments. Do you claim prophecy, or are you breaking silence on some vast and hereto unsuspected conspiracy? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 3 08:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kintiyot derivatives In-Reply-To: <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> References: <20180327033232.GA4604@aishdas.org> <9b1cbf47-2f5b-5094-cbf4-ca62e5daec27@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180403150030.GA23693@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 06:12:23AM +0200, Ben Waxman wrote: : On 3/27/2018 5:32 AM, Micha Berger wrote: :> I think there aren't, for Arevimishe reasons. A hekhsher can't split the :> lines to fine, or it becomes unusable... :> The hekhsher system creates least-common-denominator norms like that :> in a number of ways. : I was thinking about this. I thought of two exceptions... I think what I said is really particular to the US, or maybe chu"l as a whole. Where people who keep kosher will suffer with less, and people who don't won't care what has a hekhsher and what doesn't. Few people will make a less observant choice if an Amerucan hekhsher chooses to be more machmir than their own minhagim require. Non-Mehardin rabbanut has a strong motive away from least common denominator. They have a responsibility to a large population that will buy with a hekhsher IFF and only if the sacrifice is not too onerous. : 1) Some chocolates state that they are kosher for everyone, but that : they contain lecithin? (leftit). I consider this the exception that : proves the rule because so many poskim consider it to be OK in any : case that stating that a chocolate contain lecithin is basically : stating that it contains a non-kitniyot product. I recall the marshmallows sold in the US with a long explanation as to why the mei qitniyos they contain are a non-issue. Tha candy with a teshuvah on every wrapper. (Even better than Laffy Taffy or Bazooka Joe!) Unfortunately, they all have the same one. Pretty much the same thing. But didn't work in the US in the long run, as the rightward drift continued. :-)||ii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 3rd day micha at aishdas.org in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Chesed: What is perfectly Fax: (270) 514-1507 balanced Chesed? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 3 21:58:05 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 04:58:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin Message-ID: One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, he does this privately, since the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was sitting up front without wearing tefillin. When I asked his brother, who does put on tefillin during Chol Moed, about this, he told that the rabbi put on tefillin during Chol Moed until he married. "Our minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed," he said. My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in the ladies section. Thus I do not understand how the rabbi of the shul that I davened in yesterday could sit up front facing everyone without wearing tefillin. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 06:28:11 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:28:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Professor L. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 12:58 AM > My understanding is that in a shul where the minhag is to not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does wear them should not wear them > in such a shul. On the other hand, in a shul wear the minhag is to put > on tefillin during Chol Moed, one who does not put on tefillin should > not display this publicly. I was told that in Rabbi Heineman's shul in > Baltimore, those who do not put on tefillin during Chol Moed daven in > the ladies section. This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom came from different places with different minhogim. According to halokho, what the acharonim say about wearing t'fillin or not halakhically does not apply here. Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where there was a mnhag hamokom. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 4 07:44:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:44:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin References: Message-ID: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 09:28 AM 4/4/2018, Mandel, Seth wrote: >This was true in Europe, where there was such a thing as 'mnhag hamokom." >But in America, most shuls are composed of people from Lita, from >Poland, from Hungary, from Galicia, and from Germany, all of whom >came from different places with different minhogim.... >Quoting the Mishna Brurah is not an excuse. He was from Lita, where >there was a mnhag hamokom. If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section From mandels at ou.org Wed Apr 4 08:07:12 2018 From: mandels at ou.org (Mandel, Seth) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 15:07:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: , <68.4A.12295.725E4CA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: From: Prof. Levine Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 10:44 AM > If Rabbi Heineman in Baltimore can insist that anyone who does not wear > tefillin during Chol Moed has to daven Shachris in the Ladies Section > than this shul which says that the minhag of the shul is to wear tefillin > can send all of the non-tefillin wearers up to the Ladies Section Any shul has the right to set up its own rules, and anyone who davens there has to follow its rules. That is also halokho. Even if they were to make a rule, for instance, that one must wear green on Chanukka. Or that the shul must say the prayer for the State of Israel. But to claim that it is halokho that in America people who daven with t'fillin may not daven together with people who do not is wrong. There is no such halokho in America. Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel Rabbinic Coordinator The Orthodox Union From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 4 20:58:28 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 05:58:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rabbis and Tefillin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6b0af463-987c-0e3e-d5a2-27cb630b86ba@zahav.net.il> On 4/4/2018 6:58 AM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > One rabbi who has a shul in Flatbush told me that while his minhag is > to put on tefillin during Chol Moed,? he does this privately,? since > the minhag of his shul is not to put on tefillin during Chol Moed. > > > Yesterday I davened in a shul where the minhag is to put on tefillin > during Chol Moed. Much to my surprise the rabbi of the shul was > sitting up front without wearing tefillin.? When I asked his brother . > . . . . > Wouldn't the rav in question be the proper person to ask? ?Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at mail.gmail.com Wed Apr 4 23:46:31 2018 From: meirabi at mail.gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says Message-ID: The ShA HaRav does not initiate this ban on Gebrochts as his own, rather he bases himself upon the propositions of Poskim which we are now exploring, and it seems that they actually do not support the proposition to create a ban against Gebrochts. A] The observation made by the ShA HaRav, which is central to his anti-Gebrochts argument - is un-supported. Our Poskim and our personal experience, has verified that there is no such thing as flour being found on the surface of baked Matza. B] The ShA HaRav does not issue his own assessment [other than observing flour on the surface of baked Matza] but relies upon other Poskim to support the proposition that flour remains within the finished Matza. However, no such thing is found in the Poskim, other than in situations where flour is added to a dough which is ALREADY formed. No Posek ever suggested that a normal dough may not be thoroughly kneaded leaving flour in the finished product. And the ShA HaRav admits this by saying that nowadays the dough is made very hard, dry, with very little water i.e. it is not surprising that Poskim have not discussed this as it is a concern that is due only to this recent change. But no other Poskim from his time endorsed the reasoning that flour is found on the surface of baked Matza etc. C] it is surprising to hear a devoted Chabadnik suggesting that the footnotes found in the KeHos, the official Chabad publishers' publication - are completely irrelevant to the Teshuvah. There are 2 versions to understanding note 33 on the link provided = here is the gobbledigook version - "it brings to the reader's attention, for his better understanding, a similar concern that is recorded in earlier times, in specific circumstances, from which one can easily understand why this current concern should lead to these conclusions" = here is the plain speak version - "this is the best we can find to support the proposition" which is, however which way you turn it, no support at all for this new concern of flour remaining within the baked Matza. One can hardly but suspect that the footnote was added because the Taz and MaAv that the ShA HaRav next refers to, is no support at all for banning Gebrochts, because their observations are exclusively applicable to thick soft Matzos that were under suspicion of having had flour added to the dough during its kneading - and as we mentioned - this had already been comprehensively stamped out by the times of the ShA HaRav. Remember, they were kneading soft dough for soft Matza and it was quite likely that the dough may have been a little too loose and one would be tempted to add more flour to it. So there we have it - if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not - then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha - then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Apr 7 20:38:51 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 23:38:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Isru Chag Message-ID: <64A81636-64D4-4FF1-B35D-C25381E32A1C@cox.net> The gematria for Isru Chag is 278, the same gematria for l'machar found in Bamidbar, Ch.11, vs.18. This is in the Sidra, Beha'alotch, where God has Moshe establish a Sanhedrin because Moshe complained that he could not carry on alone. God says to Moshe: "To the people you shall say, 'Prepare yourselves for tomorrow and you shall eat meat..." There is an interesting tie here. The day after a festival is the "morrow" and even though the holiday is over, we must always be preparing ourselves. As a matter of fact, in counting the omer, we are preparing ourselves for mattan Torah in 50 days. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Sat Apr 7 21:15:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 14:15:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Apr 2018 16:46:31 +1000 "Rabbi Meir G. Rabi" wrote: > So there we have it -- if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your > parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o > Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and > enjoy Pesach Is RMG Rabi's post on Gebrokts consonant with the comment of the Mishna Brura. The Chafetz Chaim stated that even though one may have doubts as to the Halachic imperative of being careful (yes, perhaps needlessly) about Matza Shruya, nevertheless, "one should not be MAZNIACH [translate as you will] those who have this Chumra" In particular, it seems to me that the practice of actually keeping Shruya is very much in line with many other Chumras that people have. Consider Garlic on Pesach, for example. I would posit that today the chance of garlic inducing Chametz is akin to itinerant matza flour being present on a baked Matza. Nonetheless, those who have this Chumra, keep it. They keep it because of the Minhag to be Machmir on Pesach! That Minhag, by its nature is concerned with the infinitessimal. There are many other examples. The Belzer don't eat carrots because of a Chametz incident. They were Machmir from then on. Lubavitchers has an incident with sugar and were Machmir from then on to pre-cook it. Halacha on Pesach does admit the concept of remote Chumras! Yes, for those who look at things from a non Pesach purist halachic view, may well scratch their heads. Nonetheless, the Chafets Chaim taught us that we should not be Mazniach. The idea that Pesach cannot be enjoyed without Kneidlach is fanciful, and not directly born out by plain Halacha. The Halacha specifies Meat and Wine as primary inputs from Gashmiyus food that give rise to happiness. Yes, B'Sar Shlomim (not chicken) and wine (good enough for Nisuch Hamizbeach?) To state "if you are CONCERNED about Halacha... eat Kneidlach" is perhaps a worse actualisation than "Mazniach" as it implies that such people are acting in perhaps some antinomian-like chassidic voodoo practice. [ One can argue quite cogently, for example, that wearing a Gartel today is also "not in line with the Halacha". (We wear underpants!) We do not, however, dismiss such practices. [On Shruya see also Gilyoney Hashas from Rav Yosef Engel Psachim 40b]] The Ari z'l stated that he would never 'talk against' a minhag yisrael/chumra on Pesach. In summary, and I've felt that RMG Rabi, Halacha is not a pure science which leads to a true/false conclusion for every question that is investigated using the rules of the Halacha. Admission: My father a'h had the Minhag from his family (likely via Amshinover fealty) not to eat Gebrokts. This is Toras Imecha for me, especially on Pesach, and whilst I know that in general this practice is unique to families who follow the minhogim of the Talmidei HaBaal Shem, and is most minor, I state quite openly that deciding NOT to follow a family minhag/chumra on Pesach would be FAR more upsetting and disturbing to me than not eating Kneidlach. I'm happy to wait for the last day, and for the record, I am not a fan of them, despite my wife being a superlative cook. Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a "hot dog roll". "It is only the anticipation of redemption that preserves Judaism in Exile, while Judaism in the Land of Israel is the redemption itself." Rabbi A.I. Hacohen Kook From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 8 05:55:41 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 12:55:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent actions of Simcha Felder. >From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv "Using his leverage as the swing vote in the divided State Senate, Sen. Simcha Felder appears to have strong-armed a provision into the budget that significantly changes state oversight of yeshiva curricula, political observers say. " I have talked to some people who live in Willimsburg, and the picture they paint of the level of secular education in Hassidic yeshivas is not a good one. One Satmar woman who lives in Williamsburg told me that her sons received no secular education in the Satmar yeshiva they attended. For the record NYS law requires that all children receive a secular education. What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf R. Barukh Schick of Shklov (d. 1808): When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . . . He urged me to translate into Hebrew as much secular wisdom as possible, so as to cause the nations to disgorge what they have swallowed, making it available to all, thereby increasing knowledge among the Jews. Thus, the nations will no longer be able to lord it over us-and bring about the profaning of God's name-with their taunt: "Where is your wisdom?" R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. I:Iayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, 6 through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash. The Gaon of Vilna's sons: By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... 8 First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): I cannot refrain from repeating a true and astonishing story that I heard from the Gaon's disciple R. Menachem Mendel. . . . 10 It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. This included its inner and outer manifestations. He explained: All secular wisdom is essential for our holy Torah and is included in it. He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. He especially praised music, explaining that most of the Torah accents, the secrets of the Levitical songs, and the secrets of the Tikkunei Zohar could not be comprehended without mastering it. ... He explained the significance of the various secular disciplines, and noted that he had mastered them all. Regarding the discipline of medicine, he stated that he had mastered anatomy, but not pharmacology. Indeed, he had wanted to study pharmacology with practicing physicians, but his father prevented him from undertaking its study ,fearing that upon mastering it he would be forced to curtail his Torah study whenever it would become necessary for him to save a life. . . . He also stated that he had mastered all of philosophy, but that he had derived only two matters of significance from his study of it. . . . The rest of it, he said, should be discarded. To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw for this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 8 05:22:36 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 08:22:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Message-ID: <9ABBE35B-0F5B-4CD1-917D-550FD3E33394@cox.net> 9:1 "Vay'hi bayom hashemini..." The Sages teach that the word "vay'hi" often indicates that trouble or grief is associated with the narrative (Megillah 10b). What trouble or grief could there have been on that joyous first day of Nissan? It presages the tragic deaths of Aaron?s sons, Nadav and Avihu. Another explanation: Even in the midst of our greatest rejoicing, a Jewish wedding, we pause for a moment to recall the destruction of the Temple and the fragility of life through the breaking of the glass. Here, too, we have such a happy occasion, but the "Vay'hi" is to remind us of our fallibility and the frailty of life. There are many commentaries on Aaron?s response when told of his sons' deaths: Vayidom Aharon, ?and Aaron was silent.? It is somewhat coincidental that the third syllable of vayidom sounds a little like the English word ?dumb.? One of the literal meanings of the word ?dumb? is mute and unable to speak. It seems to me that Aaron?s silence was his inability to speak due to shock. Many people would faint dead away if told of such news. So it really isn?t surprising that his reaction was one of a deafening silence. When two egotists meet "It's an I for an I" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 8 12:08:57 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2018 21:08:57 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rabbis Ben Nun, Sherlo, and Rimon have come out strongly against the wheat substitutes and feel that they should be banned. In their opinion, the primary reason for the kitniyot minhag is to prevent mixing up the various grains. Eating these types of products will lead to the same confusion. Ben On 4/8/2018 6:15 AM, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: > Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they > essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and > pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are > quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a > "hot dog roll". From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 07:29:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 10:29:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180409142919.GG25254@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 12:55:41PM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : The teaching or more correctly the lack of teaching of secular subjects : in Hassidic yeshivas has again come to the fore as a result of the recent : actions of Simcha Felder. : : From https://goo.gl/Xu9ejv ... : What indeed should our attitude towards the teaching and study of secular : studies be. There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept : only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time : studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, rather than the one you're critiquing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 07:54:47 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:54:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: Message-ID: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:29 AM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >And this would be the only thing such Chassidish chadorim disagree with >the Gra about? Why do any of these sources matter in this context? > >You are again putting yourself in the position of arguing for one derekh >in favor of another by working within the givens of your favored derekh, >rather than the one you're critiquing. And what do you do with the GRA's statement When I visited Vilna in Tevet 5538 (1778] ... I heard from the holy lips of the Gaon of Vilna that to the extent one is deficient in secular wisdom he will be deficient a hundredfold in Torah study, for Torah and wisdom are bound up together. He compared a person lacking in secular wisdom to a man suffering from constipation; his disposition is affected to the point that he refuses all food. . simply ignore it? This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech cannot go against the facts. Also from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf Friesenhausen's critique, however, was hardly confined to the left; he also had to contend with the right: I appeal especially to all those who fear God and tremble at His word, that they not heed the false claims of those who plot against secular wisdom . . . , unaware that those who make such claims testify against themselves, saying: "We are devoid of Torah, we have chosen folly as our guide." For had the light of Torah ever shone upon them, they would have known the teaching of R. Samuel bar Nachtmeni at Shabbat 75a and the anecdotes about Rabban Gamaliel and R. Joshua at Horayot 10a. Also, they would have been aware of the many talmudic discussions that can be understood only with the aid of secular wisdom. Should you, however, meet a master of the Talmud who insists on denigrating secular wisdom, know full well that he has never understood those talmudic passages whose comprehension is dependent upon knowledge of secular wisdom. . . . He is also unaware that he denigrates the great Jewish sages of the past and their wisdom, as well. Worst of all are those guilty of duplicity. They speak arrogantly in public, either to appease the fools and gain honor in their eyes, or out of envy of the truly wise, disparaging those who appreciate secular wisdom, yet in their hearts they believe otherwise. See in the above link the Chasam Sofer's evaluation of Rabbi Friesenhausen. He was indeed a talmud Chacham. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 08:17:47 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:17:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:54:47AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : And what do you do with the GRA's statement .... : simply ignore it? Yes, that's exactly what the Chassidim who run the mosedos in question do with many of the Gra's statements. Why would it surprise anyone if they ignore this as well? As for me, as in your question, "what do you do", that's an entirely different issue. : This statement is a statement of fact, so how can anyone disagree : with it? The GRA certainly knew what he was talking about. A derech : cannot go against the facts. It may be more productive to ask about 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on and 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. Being surprised when Chassidim don't see the world the way the Gra did isn't really useful or warranted. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 11:28:06 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 14:28:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 1144 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 13:30:59 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:30:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180409203059.GB4975@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is : not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with : what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find : that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Or any of a million other things someone who disagrees with the Gra might suggest. A few years back there was a storm, and my son's grade school rebbe ended up losing a son to a downed power line. The friend who tried saving the son died immediately. The boy lingered for about 2 weeks. We attended the levayah. The father was proud that his young son went to his Maker pure, unsullied even by learning the alphabet. Alef-beis, yes, the child knew; but they hadn't yet begun the English alphabet. Not a sentiment I would share. In fact, hearing it from a rebbe who taught my son in a MO school, I found it kind of startling. But it's a perspective. And if it fosters accepting ol malkhus shamayim and ol mitzvos, raising children who are "ohavei H', yir'sei E-lokim, anshei emes, zera qodesh..." who am I to say it's not the right answer for someone else? :> It may be more productive to ask about :> 1- the veracity of the reports you are relying on :> and :> 2- if so, how do they understand the facts. : Rabbi Dr. Shnayer Leiman, who wrote the article from which the : quotes come... I meant in each point something different than what your responses reflect. To spell out further: 1- The reports that lead you to believe the norm for secular education in chassidishe chadorim today is actually as weak as you believe. Rather than the likelihood that the more extreme stories are the ones more often reported. They could all fully be true, and yet not reflect the experiences of a statistically significant number of American students. Or perhaps they do. I would want statistics, not anecdotes, before judging. For example, I did not notice it any easier to teach Sukkah 7b-8a "sukkah ha'asuyah kekivshan" and the diagonal of squares vs circles or their areas to MO Jews who weren't themselves in STEM fields than to American chareidim. And if things were so bad, how do so many end up "in computers", if not in a job that requires as much post-HS education as mine? 2- How do they understand those "facts" about needing limudei chol to succeed in limudei chodesh. Which of the numerous possible responses I refered to in response to the first snippet in this email they actually believe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 9 15:12:48 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 18:12:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:30 PM 4/9/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:28:06PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: >: One may ignore what the GRA said, but that does not mean that it is >: not true. The only way for someone to intelligently disprove with >: what the GRA said would be for him to study secular subjects and find >: that his learning has not improved and is not missing things... > >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 9 15:31:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 18:31:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <54.A1.08474.E0F7BCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180409151747.GM25254@aishdas.org> <2F.B4.08474.8B5EBCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180409223134.GD12000@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:12:48PM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Unless one might argue that the study warps what one learned and one's : >ability to judge the quality of one's learning. : : Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" : is learning? I hope not. I am implying that it is valid for the chassidim whose school you are critiquing to believe so. And yes, they probably believe that the Gra's hisnagdus was an error caused by his exposure to the wrong set of ideas. They *certainly* believe that of RYBS. (Or at least did in his lifetime. I see an "acharei mos - qedushim" effect currently going on with RYBS's memory.) As I wrote, I am defending the position in an eilu va'eilu sense. It is not a position to which I personally subscribe, nor could subscribe. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 9th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Gevurah: When is strict justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 most appropriate? From rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com Mon Apr 9 23:17:53 2018 From: rabbi at itskosherveyosher.com (Rabbi Meir Rabi) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:17:53 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Gebrochts - MInhag but absolutely no foundation in Halacha Message-ID: My Gebrochts postings have been to clarify one point - it is wrong to claim that Gebrochts is Halachically mandated or justified and points to anything other than a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition. and I do thank RIB for his query to which the answer is a firm NO - my observation - [if you dont wish to eat Gebrochts because your parents etc did not -- then enjoy Pesach [if Pesach can be enjoyed w/o Kneidlach] but if you are concerned about Halacha -- then eat Kneidlach and enjoy Pesach] - is in no manner a violation of, "one should not be MAZNIACH [ridicule] those who have this Chumra" IF they do not eat Gebrochts FOR THE RIGHT REASON i.e. a desire to honour a family/group/sect tradition BTW - I do not see this in the ChCHayim, pity RIB did not provide sourcing But it is in the ShTeshuvah [460:2] - Nevertheless those who wish to sanctify themselves by refraining from that which is permitted - soaked and cooked Matza, even that which has been [baked hard] and ground [again referring to the corrected practice of making Matza meal from thinner hard baked Matza and NOT from thicker soft Matza which was grated on a Rib Ayzen, and at greater risk of being underbaked and Chametz] - should not be ridiculed. RIB has not suggested any argument to associate not eating garlic during Pesach with Gebrochts, and I have no idea what makes one Chumra IN LINE with other Chumras. Neither do I understand the significance to our discussion/disagreement. We both urge those who do not wish to eat Gebrochts/Garlic etc because their parents etc did not - to keep their tradition. However, the natural corollary is - that IF you DO NOT have such a custom - then eat them and enjoy Pesach because there is no legitimate Halachic imperative. Also, the reference to Keneidelach being an important contribution to Oneg Yom Tov is not of my making - it comes from great and highly respected Poskim. It is also not correct to characterise this Minhag as being concerned with the infinitesimal - because that is the Halacha - a speck of flour can become Chametz and ruin your entire Pesach. Indeed this was the very point I am making - there is no substance in Halacha to support this concern - if there was it would be Halacha. And finally - If anything, the urging that we not be Mazniach, demonstrates that Halacha has no concerns about this issue. We ought to however, nevertheless, not ridicule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 01:37:42 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:37:42 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: " Are you implying that the GRA's extensive secular education "warped" is learning? I hope not. Rav Shimon Schwab never finished the 9th grade, but he had extensive secular knowledge that he acquired on his own. Are you implying that Rav Schwab's learning was "warped" because of his extensive secular knowledge? I hope not. And they there is Rav Y. Soloveichik who had a Ph d in philosophy which the GRA said was a waste of time to study. Are you implying that his learning was "warped." I could go on with others. On the contrary, according to the GRA one's learning is deficient if one does not have secular knowledge." You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a question of cost/benefit for the masses. Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is greater then benefit. The people you listed were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 02:23:50 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:23:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: At 04:37 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >You missed the point. It is a concern that the secular learning will >affect the person there can certainly be exceptions. It is a >question of cost/benefit for the masses. > >Will the masses benefit more from learning secular studies or be >harmed by the influence. The Chassidic approach is that the harm is >greater then benefit. The people you listed > >were certainly exceptions but exceptions do not make the rule. When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue Apr 10 03:05:03 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:05:03 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > When Rabbi S. R. Hirsch was asked about the dangers of teaching secular > studies, he replied, (I do not have the exact reply, so I am > paraphrasing..) "True some will be led astray by studying secular > subjects, but how many more are led astray by the fact that they did not > study secular subjects and are not prepared to deal with the world?" > > I have been told that Satmar is experiencing considerable defections from > observance by some of its youth. I have been told that the same is true of > Chabad. I have no data to back up these assertions. > > YL > > And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: "All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are largely Orthoprax." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 02:16:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:16:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: Will those who are against the teaching of secular subjects simply ignore what R. Yhonason Eybeschutz wrote in Yaaros Devash 2:7 (as translated by L. Levi in Torah and Science, pages 24-25)? For all the sciences are ?condiments? and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impureand how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:32:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:32:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:31:27AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: :> Is that a common interperation of minhag hamaqom -- that there be :> a common practice in all things? I understood minhag hamaqom to :> be designated practive by practice. : Otherwise the concept of Minhag Ha Makom is meaningless.... Again, why? It is meaningful to say, "here, the minhag hamaqom is to say "umoried hageshem", not "gashem", without making reference to anything else the qeillah might do. Why do we need a context of a qehillah that has many such rules rather than a few? And how many? : Many people wear tefillin on chol hamoed in Eretz : Yisroel, including some gedolim. However, some do : it betzinoh so it is not so well known. You misspelled, "a tiny percentage". : One such godol is the Erlauer Rebbe. You can go : in his beis medrash and see him with tefillin. He : keeps the minhogim of his zeide, the Chasam : Sofer, to wear tefillin on chol hamoed and daven nusach Ashkenaz. One may argue that the Erlau community has their own minhag, and their beis medrash it's own minhag hamaqom. But that raises questions of how one defines "maqom" that I don't know how to answer. .... : Bekitzur, Al titosh toras imecho, keep on : following your minhog and Al yisbayeish., as the : Rama says in beginning of Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim. Minhag avos is inferior to minhag hamaqom. In fact, we have had a hard time finding its basis. The best I can come up with is that minhag avos means that in the absence of a minhag hamaqom in your current location, you should follow the minhag hamaqom of your prior location even if that means the location of your avos. :> For other things? Give it time. How long did it take Jews from Provence, :> Italy and elsewhere to congeal into a single minhag Ashkenaz? : On the contrary, I doubt that the Chassidim will : ever eat Gebrokts on Pesach, the Sephardim will : stop eating kitnyos, and the non-Chassidic world : will stop eating Gebrokts on Pesach. And yet nowadays Sepharadim make an Ashkenazi qutzo shel yud, to be yotzei lekhos hadei'os. Yekkes and Litvaks eat glatt out of necessity (go find reliable non-glatt), but how many would eat that piece of non-glatt if they found a reliable hekhsher for it? Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. The choilam is far broader in the US than its ancestry; and in other communities, tav-lessness caught on. How many non-Morrocans in Israel celebrate Mimouna nowadays? It seems from the media, this minhag is spreading. (I think it would be a beautiful thing for "misht-night" communities to adopt. After a week of not being guests, make a point of sharing food and showing it had nothing to do with a lack of friendship.) I see lines coalescing. These things take centuries, and accelerate as people who remember pre-migration life pass away. We just begun. I think it is less that a Minhag America can't emerge than the mashiach won't give it the time necesssary to emerge. And Minhag EY may go back to being by sheivet and nachalah, but in any case its evolution will be radically changed by the rapid influx of the rest of Kelal Yisrael. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:03:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:03:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:37:30PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as : a trivia question for now). There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one were considered propitious for a large crop. (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:12:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:12:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101226.GC31049@aishdas.org> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 07:50:13AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat before Biur : Chametz? What makes this mitzva different from so many other mitzvos, where : we cannot eat until doing rhe required act? When the issur de'oraisa begins is a machloqes tannaim (RH 28a-b): Rabbi Yehudah holds starting from chatzos, R Meir - from sheqi'ah. (Does the issur start from when the non-qorban could be shechted, or when it could be eaten?) The Rambam in Chameitz uMatzah 1:8 pasqens chatzos, as do we when we make the zeman 1 hour before chatzos (rather than 1 hour before sheqi'ah). MiDerabbanan, it's pushed earlier, and that's the safety margin. But I don't think that's enough to make it a morning mitzvah that it must be done first thing. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:19:33 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:19:33 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 02:15:47PM +1000, Isaac Balbin via Avodah wrote: : Postscript: Is anyone concerned about the Kulos in our day, where they : essentially dismiss the Maaris Ayin concern, and make pseudo bread and : pseudo bread products? The fashionable Pesach retreats and cruises are : quite good (I'm told) at serving up 'eggs on toast' in the morning, or a : "hot dog roll". It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. Like not declaring quinoa to be qitniyos. And unlike declating peanuts to be. (Which some of Eastern Europe did, and as RMF attests, some didn't.) For that matter, is there anyone whose ancestors had the minhag of qitniyos but didn't include corn when it was brought over from the New World? Since minhag is by definition informal and mimetic, what happens to catch on or not doesn't trouble me. Boils down to a qasheh oif a masseh. (You can't ask a "question on a story"; how it happened is how it happened, unreasonalbe or not.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From isaac at balb.in Tue Apr 10 03:24:59 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:24:59 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> On Apr 10, 2018 at 8:19 pm, wrote: > It's not a qulah, it's a reluctance to extend a minhag our ancestors made, > even though one of the reasons suggested post-facto for it would apply. > There is no special pesaq by which this is the only way Pesachdik beigels > would be muttar. Rather the lack of invention of a new issur. It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of another term. From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 02:59:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:59:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] PESACH -- AFTER 400 YEARS GD'S IN A HURRY TO REDEEM US? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180410095948.GA31049@aishdas.org> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 01:28:48PM +1100, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: : We begin the Seder with Matza being a reminder of our suffering -- but we : conclude it with a new perspective -- Matza reminds us of how quickly Gd : took us out of Egypt. Actually, that's the end of Maggid, not the end of the seder. Later than that in the seder, Hillel reminds us of a third aspect of matzah -- al matzos umorerim yokhluhu. Not that of slavery, nor of leaving, but of the midnight in between, and every Pesach thereafter. There is a fourth aspect: Lechom oni -- she'onim alav devarim harbei. Rashi takes this idea so seriously that he holds you're not yotzei the mitzvah with matzah eaten before Maggid. Matzah that didn't have the haggadah is not lechem oni. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 03:51:53 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 06:51:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Kneidlach - what the ShA HaRav actually says In-Reply-To: <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> References: <20180410101933.GD31049@aishdas.org> <31aeb16f-9e9f-4d96-879c-e5a1b16f528f@Dr-Bs-iPhone> Message-ID: <20180410105153.GB23901@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 08:24:59PM +1000, Isaac Balbin wrote: : It's arguable. The counter argument is they *are* being Meikel on the : Rabbinc Issur to use things which 'compete' with bread. For want of : another term. The only thing we know for sure is that it included some subset of grain-like foods and of legumes. Any reason as to why is a post-facto theory. Multiple exist. In principle, pasqaning one such shitah is right, and therefore the rabbanim who made a din must have intended to include the new case is possible. But not compelled. We often leave a gezeira off where it originally ended because it's not for us to ban more things than Chazal did. All the more so in a case like qitniyos, when it's not a rabbinic issur but a minhag. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 05:14:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 08:14:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10.4C.08474.AFAACCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:05 AM 4/10/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And Modern Orthodoxy which does learn a complete secular studies >curriculum has at least as high a drop out rate then Satmar if not >higher and even among those who do remain their level of observance >is not necessarily that high. See for example the following study >http://listserv.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/wa?A2=LOOKJED;4e21c035.1801p >which has as one of it's conclusions the following disturbing statement: >"All this relates to practice, so that it would be fair to say that, >when the dust settles, the graduates of Yeshiva high schools are >largely Orthoprax." I am not claiming that the study of secular subjects is any sort of guarantee that one will remain religious. The reasons for someone to give up observance or to water down their observance are complex. However, for many reasons it is important to have a basic secular education. One of them is to open up some opportunities to earn a living. And let me be clear, I am not talking about a "Harvard" secular education. But I see no reason why someone born in the US should not be able to speak, read and write English. I have an Op Ed piece that will appear in this week's Jewish Press on the topic of secular subjects in chassidic yeshivas. In part it reads Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. Parents do not have a blanket right to determine the education of their children. Would you say that a parent has a right to send his child to a school that preaches Antisemitism and prejudice? Also, based on my experience as an educator for over 50 years, I have to say that parents do not always know what is best for their children educationally. Choosing to enroll one's sons in a school that does not give a basic secular education is a very poor choice. Also, having a school that does not give a basic secular education is against the law as is clear from my recent Jewish Press article. Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma let alone a Regents diploma? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Tue Apr 10 04:29:37 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:29:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: It's not only the lack of secular education (that R' Yitschok Levine refers to) or knowledge to interact with the secular world (that R. Hirsch z"l is reported to have referred to) that is the problem; it's the abysmal standard of the education they do receive, the overall intellectual integrity, and their attitude to anything scientific. Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. As far as i recall, the Munkatche Rebbe [frequently?] visited the Natural History Museum when he could. There is such a terrific gap in some of our children's education that it's hard to believe it's not going to be detrimental in some way to their development. [I know I'm spouting to the 'converted', but thanks for the opportunity to at least voice my concerns somewhere.] Dovid Rubin From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 06:07:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:07:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. I will just deal with one of the things you raised. If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against the crowd, this practice would end. YL The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of Volumes I-IV. The German custom to bring a young boy to the synagogue with a wirnpel (wrapping for t he Torah scroll) has no connection whatsoever to the practice of the chalaka (the Arabic term for Upsherin) observed by Sepharadirn and later ad opted by many Chasidirn. Th e custom of holding a special celebration marking the boy's first haircut developed among these groups. The celebration takes place at a specific age, usually three. Th e festivity is customarily held near the gravesite of a tzadik or in a synagogue. T his custom was unknown in ancient Sephardic and Ashkenazic communities. The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are found in accounts written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim. Some three centuries later, we find the first indications that the custom had made its way into Chasidic circles. The most important source concerning the chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. The details of this story are somewhat vague, and it is unclear whether the Ari-zal made a chalaka for his son, or whether the account refers to his disciple, Rabbi Yonatan Sagish. There is also some question as to whether the Ari-zal participated in Lag Ba 'omer events in Meron after his kabalistic insights because the custom to conduct a chalaka on Lag Ba 'omer runs in opposition to the Ari-zal' s final ruling that forbade hair cutting during the orner period. Furthermore, the custom of the chalaka has given rise to some questions as to the propriety of hair cutting at a gravesite or synagogue, which might constitute an infringement upon the sanctity of the site. Some have also questioned the permissibility of haircutting on Lag Ba omer, during bein ha-rnetzarirn (the three weeks before Tisha B' A v) or during Chol Ha 'rno 'ed. Yet another concern was the immodest behavior that occasionally accompanied this event. :Most Sephardic and Chasidic rabbis applauded, or at least defended the practices observed in their circles, though there were those who forbade The custom in this manner. Rabbi Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik of Brisk (1889-1960) disapproved of bringing children to rabbis on their third birthday for the chalaka, claiming that this practice "has no reason or basis." He noted that there are sources indicating that one should introduce the child to matters of Torah at the age of three, but none that involve haircutting. Rabbi Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky [the "Steipler Ga'on," (1899-1985)] also opposed this practice, and would send away parents who brought their children to him for the chalaka haircut. The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. Some, however, dismissed this argument, claiming that to the contrary, the chalaka perhaps began as an ancient Jewish practice which was later adopted by the gentiles. There are some older customs, originating in the times of Chazal and the Ge'onim, such as fasting on Erev Rosh Hashana and the ceremony of Kapaprot on Erev Yom Kippur which were opposed by some rabbis since they feared that their origins could be found in pagan rites. In any event, although some communities accepted this custom, Ashkenazi communities \yere never aware of such a practice. They did not receive this tradition from their forebears, and they found no mention of it in the writings of the Rishonim. The ancient tradition among Ashkenazi communities was to cut a boy's hair at a very young age. In fact, during the times of Chazal, parents would cut an infant's hair not long after birth, and they even permitted cutting a baby's overgrown hair on Chol Ha 'mo' ed. In the times of the Rishonim, too, boys' hair in Ashkenaz was cut already within the first several months after birth. The phenomenon of children with overgrown hair simply did not exist in Germany, and a boy with overgrown hair would have been mistaken for a girl. The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no special affair was held to celebrate the event. .. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:21:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:21:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 09:07:38AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : >Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for : >children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. : : I will just deal with one of the things you raised. I only raised one thing. You are discussing an example, and not the point. : If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go : against the crowd, this practice would end. Which has nothing to do with the general principle of whether the resettlement of Jewry post-war should or shouldn't evolve into new minhagei hamaqom, nor the topic I raised -- the claim they actually are. Nor the reason why I raised the topic: the idea that minhag avos is only a stop-gap, a way to manage when in a maqom that has no minhag. Nor the reason for my post: Your claim that minhag hamaqom only has meaning if the maqom has loits of minhagim. That it can't be applied one-off to whatever practice is under discussion. And if you are correct, what's the threshold of minhagim that unify a community sufficiently to qualify. Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line accordingly. : The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: : Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of : Volumes I-IV. WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. : The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are : found in accounts : written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... It has to be earlier. Originally, chalaqah was held at the qever of Shemuel haNav on the 43rd of the omer, his yahrzeit. See teshuvos haRadvaz 2:608. (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get associated with a haircut at age 3. The move to Meron and Lag baOmer happened when the Ottomans restricted access to the qever in the 1500s. But that has little to do with upsherin in general, eg on a birthday.) The Radvaz, R' David b Shelomo ibn Zimra, was among the gerushei Sefarad, who ended up in Tzefas in 1513 and eventually end up in Egypt where he was RY (he taught the Shitah Mequbetzes, R' Betzalel Ashkenazi) and ABD. So, upsherin was already a practice old enough to get recorded as minhag by someone who lived through the transition from rishonim to achronim. : The most important source concerning the : chalaka is the account of the celebration in which the Ari-zal is involved. What makes this "post important source" if the practice predated the Ari by generations? Raising questions about a tradition that the Ari practiced it is a distraction if he isn't the basis of the minhag. AND, the problems with the story isaren't around upsherin, but around making a celebration the night of Lag baOmer, again nothing to do with making one on the child's 3rd birthday. (Unless it too is in the wrong part of the omer or during the 3 weeks. Issues we already navigate for bar mitzvah parties that aren't on Shabbos.) .... : The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice : stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka : transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's : hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in : ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation : of pagan ritual... All I know is that people invoke a similar Hindu practice. And while Hindus may wait to age 3 before making a celebratory first haircut, waiting until 5 or 7 are more common, and not making any ceremony at all is most common. (Although a girls' only haircut being at 11 months is most common.) Observant Sikh men never get a haircut. In Mongolia, between 2-5, girls get their first haricut when they are 3 or 5, boys when they are 2 or 4. No match. China - 1 month. (They wait until after the bulk of infant mortality; lehavdil but yet similar to our considering a child who dies in their first month a neifel.) Poles: a pre-Xian tradition that survived into the 1700s was 7-10. Ukraininans, 1st birthday. Polenesians, teens. Yazidi, originally 40 days, now, 7-11 mo. Interestingly, Moslem boys get their first haircut at 1 week old -- in other words, on the 8th day. In short -- no culture that wikipedia or google found for me has a special haircut for 3 yr old boys ceremony. And yet, I turned up much else. We've seen similar attacks on shlissel challah ('tis the week for that perrennial) based on a difficult to assert connection to key-with-cross breads in Xian communities that were nowhere near the areas where shlissel challah originated -- in either time or space. And yet, the same people continue dressing up their children in Purim costumes, despite the similarity to Carnivale -- and both being local to Italy in origin. Or milchigs on Shevu'os starting in the same region that already had Wittesmontag on the Monday before the Xian Pentacost. For that matter, both of those customs are first originated LATER than chalakah! ... : The custom of chalaka was never accepted in Ashkenazic countries or : other regions in Western Europe, not even among the Sephardic : communities in these areas. The practice earned acceptance in Eastern : Europe among certain Chasidic circles, but only in later generations. : Among other circles, boys' hair was cut when they began speaking, and no : special affair was held to celebrate the event. Is using the haricut to tell the boy "You're not a baby now, time to start chinukh in earnest with alef-beis" really so terrible? Nothing will make that point as deeply as weeks of build up, followed by changing the look in the mirror. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From sholom at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 08:09:18 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:09:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Sh'mini sh'mini! In-Reply-To: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> References: <20180410100305.GB31049@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <22b69f274e57a0d24c6dcbc45c456a93@aishdas.org> > : During a leap year, in ch'l, when Pesach starts on shabbos, we (always? > : usually?) read from a different parsha eight times. (I'll leave this is as > : a trivia question for now). > > There was a saying: Shemoneh 'Shemini' shemeinah. Years like this one > were considered propitious for a large crop. > > (I think I saw that in a sichah by the LR.) REMT wrote me off line and noted: "I don't know its source, but I first heard it when I was a young child." He also answered my trivial question, writing: "In a leap year, the parsha read eight times will always be Acharei Mos. I know of no one commenting on its significance." It just occurs to me that the main event in parshas Acharei Mos occurred on the same day as the events in parshas Shemini. Kol tuv! -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 10 09:30:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:30:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 11:21 AM 4/10/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Since this is a shift to a new topic, I changed the subject line >accordingly. > >: The following is from Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz, Minhag Ashkenaz: >: Sources and Roots by Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger, Synopsis of >: Volumes I-IV. > >WADR to RBSH, he is mistaken. It was not RSRH who wrote this, but Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamburger who has spent much time investigating minhagim. >: The earliest reports of t he chalaka [upsherin] celebration are >: found in accounts >: written by Sepharadim early in the period of the Acharonim... > >It has to be earlier. Again you are questioning Rabbi Hamburger. I suggest you contact him about this and the rest of your post. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:31:21 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:31:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tefilin On Chol hamoed In Eretz Yisroel (and Flatbush) In-Reply-To: <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 09:07, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > At 06:32 AM 4/10/2018, R Micha Berger wrote: >> Similarly, I can't count the number of upsherins I've attended for >> children of Litzvish or Yekkish lineage. > > I will just deal with one of the things you raised. > > If people knew the origin of upsherin and had the courage to go against > the crowd,? this practice would end. YL That is simply not true. The Baal Shem Tov and his talmidim practised it, and that is more than enough for most people. That not everyone did it is irrelevant; very few practices had unanimous support. The BeShT was far greater than the sources you cite, and many more people follow him today than follow those people, so they would have no reason to change. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 10 08:35:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:35:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, > and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get > associated with a haircut at age 3. Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From seinfeld at jsli.org Tue Apr 10 10:08:53 2018 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:08:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Playing devil?s advocate here. For the record, I have college and graduate degrees, my children all read and write well etc. However, in response to Prof. Levine. If the cost of that exposure to American secular culture (language, history, values, etc.) is that a certain percentage of children may be enticed by it and go OTD - more than would have otherwise - then, yes, it makes sense. That?s an unacceptable cost. I?m not saying that that is a real cost, but that is the perception. If you want to change the practice, you have to change that perception (which may have some truth to it, I don?t know). >Does it make sense that a Bar Mitzvah boy who is born in America >cannot read English on an 8th grade level? Cannot read an 8th grade >science book and write a report in acceptable English about what he >has read? Cannot speak English properly? Knows nothing about the >history of this country and cannot relate, at least briefly, what >happened during the Revolutionary War and the civil War? Has the >mathematics skills of a 3rd grader at best? Does not have a basic >knowledge of science and hence has no idea of how, say, the >digestive system works? (BTW, one way appreciating the wonders of >HaShem is to study how some of the systems in our bodies work.) Has >no real knowledge of how our government works? I think not. > From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 10 10:29:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minagim and the Origins of Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: <1522335771074.14203@stevens.edu> <20180330125217.GA17459@aishdas.org> <87.BC.03752.A985EBA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410103236.GE31049@aishdas.org> <89.96.08474.027BCCA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180410152114.GD12522@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180410172934.GA1877@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:35:39AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 10/04/18 11:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : >(This original version of the minhag has its logic; Shemu'el was a nazir, : >and he lived in the BHMQ starting at age 3. So you see how he would get : >associated with a haircut at age 3. : Shmuel moved in to the mishkan at the age of two, not three. As per the same discussion in previous years.... That's what the rishonim run with -- see Rashi and Radaq on the pasuq. Although Rashi says 22 mo in our girsa, I think the other girsa of 24 mo is more likely, because... As the Radaq points out, this fits halakhah, that the time a woman is mish'ubedes to nurse is 24 months. But while elegent, it is not mukhrach that Chanah kept to the minimum. (Thinking out loud: The exchange in 1:22-23 fits better if it was about Chanah not attending an aliyah laregel that was after Shem'el was 2. After all, why would Elqanah have pushed her to bring ShMemu'el to the mishkan before it was safe?) More to the point (and back to repeating myself), there is a machloqes in the medrash whether Shemu'el lived 52 or 53 years. And since that's 50 years after he was weaned and brought to the Mishkan, it implies a machloqes about when he moved into the Mishkan. The minhag was apparently based on the position that he was niftar at 52, and thus moved into the Mishkan at 3. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 10th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Gevurah: When does strict Fax: (270) 514-1507 judgment bring balance and harmony? From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:06:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:06:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? Message-ID: One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has no inherent "Jewish" quality.) However, there are opinions that say that the Jews spoke Egyptian while in Egypt. I have posted some selections from the Sefer Lashon HaKodesh, History, Holiness, & Hebrew by Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/jews_egypt_hebrew.pdf While it is true that according to one Medrash the Jews did speak Hebrew while in Egypt, there is another Medrash that contradicts this. >From the above reference: GOD SPEAKS TO THE JEWS IN EGYPTIAN While the above sources point to the notion that the Jews in Egypt did not speak Egyptian, there is another Midrash that implies otherwise. This Midrash likens the Jews in Egypt to a prince who was kidnapped for an extended period of time. Finally, his father the king decided to exact his revenge on the kidnappers and release his son. Upon saving his son, the king conversed with the child in the language spoken to him by the kidnappers. Similarly, explains the Midrash, after God redeemed the Jews from exile in Egypt, He spoke to them in Egyptian.221 The Midrash explains that the Jews had been in Egypt for many years, where they had learned the Egyptian language.222 Therefore, when God wanted to give them the Torah, He began to speak with them in the Egyptian language with which they were already familiar. He began by proclaiming, "I (anochi, ) am Hashem, your God ... !"223 According to this Midrash, the word "anochi" in this context does not denote the Hebrew word for "I"; rather, it refers to the Egyptian224 word anoch (11:ix), which means "love" and "endearment."225 One Midrashic source even explains that the Jews forgot Lashon HaKodesh, which is why God had to speak to them in Egyptian. >From page 99 THEY SPOKE LASHON HAKODESH, BUT TOOK ORDERS IN EGYPTIAN Similarly, we can posit that even when exiled to Egypt, the Jews indeed continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, they were not accustomed to accepting orders in Lashon HaKodesh; their Egyptian taskmasters spoke to them only in Egyptian. Therefore, at Mount Sinai, when God was giving the Jews the Decalogue, He spoke to them in Egyptian, the language in which they were accustomed to "taking orders." THEY MAINTAINED THE ESSENCE OF LASHON HAKODESH, IF NOT THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE Even if we assume that the Jews completely forgot Lashon HaKodesh, we can still reconcile the contradiction based on a previously mentioned concept set forth by Rambam. Rambam, as we already mentioned, writes that Lashon HaKodesh is called so because it lacks the explicitness found in other languages, making it a chaste and holy language. Therefore, one can explain that although the Jews in Egypt spoke the Egyptian language, they did not deviate from the moral standards manifested by Lashon HaKodesh. God had to speak to them in Egyptian since that was the only language with which they were familiar. However, they did not change their manner of speaking; that is, they internalized the refined and moral linguistic style of Lashon HaKodesh, which they maintained even when speaking Egyptian. And from the Chapter Summary After discussing Joseph's personal exile to Egypt, we segued into discussing the Jews' collective exile to Egypt. A well-known Midrash states that the Jews in Egypt did not change their language, meaning that they continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh. However, another Midrash states that God began presenting the Torah to them in Egyptian, because that was the language that they spoke in Egypt. While these two Midrashim seem at odds with each other, we presented several approaches to reconcile them and give a more concrete answer as to whether the Jews in Egypt spoke Lashon HaKodesh or Egyptian: ? Radak explains that there were some Jews who were not enslaved, and they spoke Lashon HaKodesh exclusively. Their not-so-fortunate brethren spoke Lashon HaKodesh between themselves, and Egyptian with their Egyptian overlords. ? Alternatively, it is possible that all the Jews spoke Lashon HaKodesh, yet God presented them the Torah in Egyptian because they were acclimated to accepting orders in that language. ? A third possibility is that since the hallmark of Lashon HaKodesh is its embodiment of holiness and purity, even if the Jews forgot the literal language, they could still be said to speak Lashon HaKodesh- The Holy Language-if their manner of speech remained holy. After the Jews exited Egypt and eventually arrived in the Land of Israel, establishing their own rule, it is clear that Lashon HaKodesh alone served as their spoken language. This arrangement lasted for several centuries until the language began receding under Babylonian influence, toward the end of the First Temple period. Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may not be true. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 10 13:22:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:22:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Legendary Chassidic Rebbe Admits: The Noda BiYehudah Was Correct In His Opposition to Lisheim Yichud Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/QEUCPq However, what is less well known, is that the Divrei Chaim, despite being a great Chasidic leader, actually said that the Noda BiYehuda was correct in the matter, and, based on that, his followers do not say lisheim yichud before sefira. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:39:28 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:39:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Did the Jews Really Speak Hebrew When They Were in Mitzraim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:06 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > One often hears the assertion that one of the things the kept the Jews > from assimilating in Egypt is that they spoke Hebrew and not Egyptian. > Indeed, this is one of the justifications given by those who want their > children to speak Yiddish rather than say English. (For the record, as far > as I know, Yiddish is essentially Middle Deutsch, and hence to my mind has > no inherent "Jewish" quality.) > > > ... > Thus oft made assertion that the Jews spoke Hebrew while in Mitzraim may > not be true. > > YL > > > May not be true is the operative word, there is no disputing that there is an opinion in Chazal that it is true and that the Jews spoke only Hebrew in Egypt. This is the opinion that the Chasidim follow and therefore they are against speaking English. I don't see how you can find fault with them when they are following a valid opinion in Chazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:10:49 2018 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Yehuda Gluck) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 04:10:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Wed Apr 11 02:59:49 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: R? Moshe Yehudah, Thank you for taking notice of my post! ?Only a narrow band of Torah studies are benefited by a narrow band of secular studies? - I agree with you - but only in part. 1. If I may add the word ?directly? to your statement (- ?only a narrow band of Torah studies are *directly* benefited?), as, arguably, the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education [though admittedly, this was not the thrust of my original statement]. 2. Re the case in point, Chullin and biology. Though, in general, the biology syllabus does not necessarily help in learning Chulin, biology could be taught in a manner that would: i.e. a teacher familiar with the various sugyos, could give a thorough grounding in anatomy, etc. This would be better than relying on Temunei Chol [or similar compilations], which (might) stifle critical thinking. Furthermore, an appreciable amount of Torah literature is based upon a medieval understanding of chemistry and anatomy. A fuller understanding of those thinking processes, coupled with a comparative study of [human] biology and the basics of modern chemistry, could conceivably open the door to a much fuller Torah experience. Indeed, a syllabus could conceivably be drawn up that would both benefit the Ben Torah and satisfy the requirements of an Examinatory Board. 3. Re maths; again, you are right, so far as a basic understanding of the sugyos are concerned. But to appreciate maths as a backbone of the world?s structure and thus marvel at the???? ????? , to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory to deeper areas of the Torah [which surely some of them will want to learn], requires a fundamental grounding in the subject. Dovid Rubin Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ________________________________ From: Moshe Yehuda Gluck Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 9:10:49 AM To: 'The Avodah Torah Discussion Group' Cc: 'D Rubin' Subject: RE: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies R' Dovid Rubin: Leaving English aside (G-d forbid they should be able to pick up a secular book and actually understand it!), the mathematics they're taught (in which [some of] the amoro'im, ge'onim, rishonim, acharonim were tremendously proficient) at their last school year [12/13 yr olds!] is at a level of 8/9 yr olds at best! Biology, which could so help them in their study of Chullin is [virtually?] non-existent. --------------- I'm cherry-picking one thing out of R' DR's post - he mentioned that biology could so help them in their study of Chullin. In fact, this is an argument that is often made (and has been made by me in the past, and I'm pretty sure I saw it elsewhere in this thread as well): Learning secular studies is necessary to help people in their Torah studies. I'm not convinced anymore that that's true. I think that there's actually only a very narrow band of Torah studies that are benefitted by a very narrow band of secular studies. For example, I have a sefer written by a BMG Rosh Chabura to help in understanding the trigonometry in Eiruvin. The entire sefer (including the covers and flyleaf) is 20 pages long. Do those sugyos in Eiruvin justify a full year of math instruction? (Trigonometry was Math III when I was in high school in Monsey.) Why don't we just give everyone learning Eiruvin a copy of this sefer, and skip Math III? Same with biology. I passed my biology Regents. But as I recall, it wasn't very helpful in learning Chullin. The most help I got was from Sefer Temunei Chol, and that was enough to understand what was going on. So how is learning Chullin a justification for spending a year on biology in high school? I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. KT, MYG P.S. Writing the above makes me want to start writing that companion sefer! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 01:23:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:23:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: Lets take a step back for a second. There has been a machlokes for thousands of years (see the Gemara in Berachos 35) whether the ideal is torah only or for lack of a better phrase torah im derech eretz. There is no disputing that in the last 200 years the overwhelming majority of Gedolim have been in the Torah only camp and in the 20th century the Torah im derech eretz is pretty much RYBS and the followers of R' Hirsch. I can provide an almost endless list of Gedolim who had zero secular education and knew kol hatorah kula while on the other hand the list of Gedolim who had a secular education is much much much smaller. Your position regarding secular studies while certainly a valid one is unquestionably the minority opinion and therefore it is ridiculous for you to simply dismiss the other opinion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 03:23:23 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 10:23:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: , <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <79615f4629784da49fb5941943399ebd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some secular knowledge in order to understand them. ----------------------------- Bingo-and probably true on a micro level but not, I fear, on a macro level. I used to tell my boys that 80% (not based on a study but the handy 80/20) rule)of what they learned would not be used later, the problem is you don't know which 20% will be. Look here for the background of the inventor of the m-16 and you'll see what he brought together https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Stoner Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 04:40:52 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 07:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote, and I quote his closing last paragraph in full: > Boys have to be equipped with an education that prepares them > to earn a living to support a family. How many boys who attend > a Hassidic yeshiva actually earn a basic high school diploma > let alone a Regents diploma? The first and second sentences don't have any logical connection that I can see. There are plenty of boys who attended a Hassidic yeshiva, who now earn enough to support a family. Diplomas are not guarantees, and I'm don't know how much they help. They certainly don't help as much as drive and persistence and elbow grease. My boss, for example, asks me for help occasionally with English spelling and grammar, but that doesn't seem to have hampered his ability to own his business at half my age. (His mathematics abilities are a good example. He understands enough of the concepts that he can figure out anything on his calculator without my help. But he avoids doing even simple arithmetic in his head. And because he refuses to do the arithmetic in his head, I make more mistakes than he does.) Akiva Miller From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 11 06:22:58 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:22:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <1F.0A.18065.33C0ECA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:10 AM 4/11/2018, Moshe Yehuda Gluck wrote: >I can go on; my thesis is that there is not much basis to the argument that >a well-rounded education makes much of a difference in understanding Torah. >What would be much more efficient and effective would be a focused companion >sefer to Shas that gives the background on those sugyos that need some >secular knowledge in order to understand them. Please read RSRH's essay The Relevance of Secular Studies to Jewish Education (Collected Writings VII) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Wed Apr 11 06:50:01 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 13:50:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption Message-ID: Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:20:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:20:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org> I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 11 09:45:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:45:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 01:50:01PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Is anyone aware of any authorities that hold that an adopted child may : be called up (or function) based on the shevet of the adopted father? All I have is the reverse. R' Gedalia Felder (Yesodei Yeshurun 2 pp 188-191) holds that an adopted child can be called up "ben Micha Shemuel", but that this shouldn't be done when the adopting father or the son is a kohein. In order to avoid confusion about the child's kehunah. (Or that of a future descendent, when people vaguely remember his name years later). I assume leviim too, but that's not in my notes. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Apr 11 12:08:20 2018 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:08:20 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] shevet/adoption In-Reply-To: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> References: <20180411164519.GJ10793@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Tangentially, there is a convention to write the name of a chalal in official documents as Ploni ben Ploni Vehu Kohein, to signify the difference in status between father and son. I'm not sure that this would be recommended (or desirable) in the case of an adopted child. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 11 23:46:36 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 01:46:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: I suspect that some will feel that my position on the issue "secular" studies comes from the left of center. First off, we need to delineate what we mean by "secular" studies. This word as we use it today is far different from the science the GRA or the many achronim, rishonim and of course Chazal learned in the sense of math, astronomy and biology. Today that word would also include many areas such as social studies, psychology, philosophy, evolutionary biology, cosmology, comparative religion, black studies, sexual awareness, cultural studies etc, etc, that could lead a young untrained mind into problematic areas that could raise many question they are not prepared to deal with. The scientific study required by the various sugios in shas and halacha really require a minimal study of some elementary math such as some trig and geometry, some values such as that of Pi, square root of 2 etc and Pythagoras theorem, astronomy (mainly lunar orbit, seasonal and diurnal calculation), anatomy and some other limited areas of biology plus a handful of other concepts. By this logic much of what we call science today would be excluded from being necessary for learning Torah. Mi'sevoras libi, I would say that the study of much of what we think of in modern parlance of the many new fields of mathematics and the physical sciences such as the many branches of modern physics both classical and relativistic and quantum mechanics, the many branches of chemistry, biology and medicine and of course modern astronomy including much more than just solar system dynamics (mainly lunar & seasonal) and positions of a handful of stars are mandated for a very simple reason -- an understanding (the deeper the better) in these fields makes one truly understand that the world is so highly complex and functions so beautifully that this it can not be a random happening and that there must be a borei olam. A havana into the very ultra small as we find through quantum mechanics and particle physics, or into the wonders of the atom and chemistry and how things combine, or into the wonders of dynamics, optics, elec & magnetism, or the modern fields of solar and stellar astronomy and spectrographic analysis and through the beauty and understanding exposed through the many modern branches of modern math including advanced algebraic theory, statistical analysis, advanced calculus and vector and tensor analysis and the many other fields to numerous to mention here that are so useful throughout all of modern science.. These literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam. The understanding of biology from its lowest levels of its physics and chemistry to the molecular with the tremendous complexities at its molecular and cellular levels and onto its study at the organic and systemic levels, through developmental biology of the miraculous changes from conception through the fetus to birth, infancy and childhood to the adult and ultimately death. Many of these may not help much with the simple peshat of any particular sugio in shas, but they surely create emuna and tremendous yiras haromeimus. No one who has even the smallest inkling of any of this knowledge could believe that existence as we now can begin to perceive it is a bunch of random events. Just the mind boggling complexity of the functioning of a single cell is awe inspiring. With so many thousands of things happening in each cell with perfect timing, with everything just in the right place at the right time in each of the billions of cells in our bodies. Worst of all, leaving a young mind unexposed to many of these areas and without proper training in them leaves him vulnerable to the many questions he will eventually encounter as he goes through modern life. He will not be prepared to deal with evolution, cosmology, philpsophy etc that he will surely encounter no matter how well shielded he may be. In addition to the above, in our modern society some of the above may be needed merely to functional and earn a living in todays highly technical society and he will be severely limited in the types of parnasa available to him. I am sure that many will differ substantially from my position above. Please excuse my rambling and repetition at times and run on sentences in the above. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 12 10:20:51 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 17:20:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not utter the phrase with the congregation? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Apr 12 12:42:50 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:42:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "There is no way that a "Rabbinical committee (namely the Rabbanim/Poskim/Rebbeim of the respective chassidishe Yeshivos whom Simcha Felder is representing) decided that systematic secular education is forbidden by Orthodox Jewish law. The reason is that the Torah requires one to study secular subjects. I have posted part of an article by Dr. Yehudah Levi from his book Torah Study. " Of course there is. Dr. Yehuda Levi is coming from a Torah Im Derech Eretz point of view however, Chasidim and most Charedim have a different viewpoint, namely Torah only. You seem to be a classic case of someone living in an echo chamber. The only opinion/derech that you recognize as legitimate is Torah Im Derech Eretz. As I stated many times, Torah Im Derech Eretz is a small minority, the overwhelming majority of gedolim rejected it. So much so that Gedolim like R' Baruch Ber could not believe that R' Hirsch thought that it was lechatchila. R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch wrote a teshuva (end of Bircas Shmuel Kiddushin) where he explicitly forbid a secular curriculum: ?What emerges is (a) that according to the Torah the obligation of Banim Ubeni Banim means you must make your children into Geonei and Chachmei Torah ? and not merely to prepare them for life as a Jew. But rather, you must teach them and get them to learn the entire Torah, and if chas v?sholom you do not, you violate the entire Mitzvah of learning Torah as per Banim Ubnei Banim. ... (c) To learn secular studies on a regular basis is prohibited as per the Rama 246:4 ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 12 12:34:06 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:34:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu In-Reply-To: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <2dbc62b6d19545809922a3b3f1960373@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180412193406.GA7972@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:20:51PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the community to : bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the congregation responds "barchu : hashem hamevorach l'olam vaed" and the oleh the repeats the phrase in : order to be included with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait : and not utter the phrase with the congregation? See the Agur, Hil' Berakhos 98, which can be found at . The Maharam miRothenburg held the sha"tz needn't say it at all. R' Yehudah al-Barceloni says he should say. The Agur adds: and we are noheig to say it. The next source, the Avudraham (or to be accurate: Abu-Dirham), says that the sha"tz says it to be among the community of mevorkhim. He cites the Y-mi (Berakhos 7:3). And he adds that R' Yehudah b"r Barzili Barceloni (I assume the same source as the Seifer haAgur) writes in the name of R' Saadia that even though the sha"tz said "haMvorakh", and therefore didn't remove himself from the klal, he needs to return himself to the klal "legamrei" and day "Barukh H' Hamvorkh". Like in bentching, where the leader says "nevareikh" and yet repeats the responses of the rest of the zimun. No answer there. However, note that the assumption is that Borkhu doesn't need the sha"tz or the oleh to repeat it. The sha"tz needs to repeat it for his own sake, so as not to exclude himself from the kelal of mevorkhim. (Except according to the MmR, who doesn't believe the sha"tz has such a need.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 12th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Gevurah: What aspect of judgment Fax: (270) 514-1507 forces the "judge" into submission? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 01:31:53 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:31:53 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: "In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am surprised that you even bothered to quote him." And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his teshuva. There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 02:10:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 05:10:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >R' Yitzchak Levine wrote: >"In conclusion, I think that what Rabbi Leibowitz >wrote is irrelevant to today's world. I am >surprised that you even bothered to quote him." > >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with >his teshuva. If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in EY are pursuing higher secular education. >There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' >Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and >Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through >this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not >with learning any other wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to >learn through happenstance all other knowledge as long as it isn't a >book of heresy. This is what called by the Rabbis a trip in the >Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he knows the lasw of >issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even >happenstance secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas >and poskim. Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat and Yom Tov (holy days) - and furthermore, it is better to occupy oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). >And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but >Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after >them." as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as >the Mishna Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of >people are capable of studying Torah all day. Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? The following is taken from Rav Schwab on Chumash, Parshas Acharei Mos. "At all times the Torah's unchanging teachings must be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, attitudes, relationships to man and beast, and positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and evaluation of the Torah. "What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the 'ways of the Earth.' The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world that surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities that confront him. "What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more crucial it is that this wisdom be conveyed to the Jewish contemporary world. It must be transmitted in a language that our generation understands and that will attract the searching youth, the ignorant, the estranged and the potential ba 1al teshuvah to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah leader must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. "There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose life task is to enlighten and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those 'messengers of G-d' the highest respect and a loyal following. These are the kohanim and levi'im of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. "Yet education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore it becomes mandatory for the present day 'Tribe of Levi' to initiate and encourage an educational system that can serve the other "eleven tribes who comprise the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meets its challenges, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head-on the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. "The Divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Sun Apr 15 05:53:59 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:53:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies (Micha Berger) In-Reply-To: References: <001901d3d16c$9ab28420$d0178c60$@gmail.com>, <20180411162006.GH10793@aishdas.org>, Message-ID: This reply was sent earlier to R' Michah and is still valid: I agree. With respect, I did allude to ?learning skills and a mode of thinking? in both of my previous posts: ?the entire thinking process is aided by a secular education?, ? to be able to extrapolate and apply mathematical theory?, and my reference to ?the [lack of] overall intellectual integrity?. Related to this: Is it incorrect to posit that a lot of ma?amorei Chazal was formulated in accordance to their understanding and cultural absorption of sciences of their day? Can we not further Torah with our understanding of modern science, both peripheral and integral ? even though clearly lacking their sya?ato dishmayo and Ru?ach HaKodesh? Is that not the derech taught both by the Ba?al Shem and his disciples, and the GRA and his school [to use the chochmoh of the world..]? Another q: Do we view Torah SheBa?al Peh on a par with Torah SheBiKsav, in the sense that it must be learnt ?as is?, without consideration of the worldview that shaped those comments? [I rather think we can see two views in the Rishoinim.] Dovid Rubin ________________________________ From: Micha Berger Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 5:20:06 PM To: Moshe Yehuda Gluck via Avodah Cc: Moshe Yehuda Gluck; 'D Rubin' Subject: Re: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies I think there are two opposite issues that haven't yet been raised that I want to add to the discussion. 1- The iqar of learning in 1st to 12th grades is learning skills and a mode of thinking. The same is true of much of secular education. A person learns more in algegra class than the specific facts under discussion. A programmer learns tools for viewing problems that can help (if used) in general life. Social Studies teaches a way of viewing other peoples and other societies, etc... This can't be short-cut with a book on the specific facts necessary to learn Eiruvin, Chullin, or my example of the minimum size of a circular sukkah. (Which, BTW, was R/Dr Leon Ehrenpreis's launching pad for teaching calculus. See my "hesped" at .) I am leaving the question unanswered as to whether this broad perspective thing is something we should want to learn. (The regulars can guess my answr anyway.) I just wanted to add this element to the conversation. 2- Posqim. Learning may not require knowing much about the world, but applying that knowledge halakhah lemaaseh does. A poseiq can only rely on experts once he knows enough to know when to ask a question. When something that seems obvious may not be. Picture a poseiq being asked about whether it is mutar to throw some boy our of HS without knowing the world teenage boys are now living in (subjected to?), what the norms are in yeshiva, out of yeshiva but in our seviva, what temptations exist beyond the bubble...? Some psych, some social work... Would the poseiq even know where to begin when talking to an expert? Would the expert end up being so relied upon that his choice of presentation will pretty much determine the pesaq? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 11th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 1 week and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Gevurah: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 strict justice? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:39:19 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:39:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 07:45:43 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 17:45:43 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 3:01 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a > regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance > secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > > > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > > The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he > already knew shas and poskim.? > > > Can you verify this assertion? > Not really but given that the Gra was a super genius and the stories that abound about how much he knew as a child it is certainly plausible to believe so. The fact is that no one really knows how old the Gra was when he learned these things so your assertion that he learned mathematics as a youth is unprovable as well. > > > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > > Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in > 1518? > > > Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there > would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. > > > And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple according to the Rama, the study of Torah is what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get us into the world to come and the study of secular studies will not. That fact remains the same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 03:39:38 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:39:38 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >> And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi world agrees with his >> teshuva. > If so, then how do you account for the many Chareidim here in the US who > attend Touro College, enroll in TTI (See https://goo.gl/hnRCy6 ), attend > the training programs the Agudah sponsors both here in Brooklyn and in > Lakewood, as well as many other options available. Many seminaries today > offer programs leading to college degrees both here and in Israel. Touro College was established against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim see http://haemtza.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/yosefs-folly.html for example for details. > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, in > EY are pursuing higher secular education. Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a pig with a streimel (see http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html ). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: " *Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the other nations, she didn't want to burn them, rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need any outside wisdom and therefore she was priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the world with his wisdom which was solely torah based. * *We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt."* >> There is no question that the simple reading of the Rama is like R' Baruch >> Ber. The Rama writes: >> "But it is not for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >> and the halachic decisors that come after them and through this they will >> acquire this world and the world to come. But not with learning any other >> wisdoms. In any case, it is permitted to learn through happenstance all >> other knowledge as long as it isn't a book of heresy. This is what called >> by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should not take a trip in the >> Pardes until he has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and he >> knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> The Rama clearly writes that secular studies cannot be learned on a >> regular set basis. Not only that, but he writes that even happenstance >> secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. The Gra was sui generis, when he studied mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Isserles > Not only was Isserles a renowned Talmudic and legal scholar, he was also > learned in Kabbalah, and studied history, astronomy and philosophy. He > taught that "the aim of man is to search for the cause and the meaning > of things" ("Torath ha-Olah" III., vii.). He also held that "it is > permissible to now and then study secular wisdom, provided that this > excludes works of heresy... and that one [first] knows what is permissible > and forbidden, and the rules and the mitzvot" (Shulkhan Aruch, Yoreh > De'ah, 246, 4). Maharshal reproached him for having based some of his > decisions on Aristotle. His reply was that he studied Greek philosophy > only from Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, and then only on Shabbat > and Yom Tov (holy days) -- and furthermore, it is better to occupy > oneself with philosophy than to err through Kabbalah (Responsa No. 7). Not sure what you point is here, the Rama is quoted exactly as I wrote, you cal leanr secular studies only now and then and only after you know shas and poskim. > And how many people are capable of capable of learning "anything but > Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come after them." > as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah in Koheles as well as the Mishna > Brurah make it clear that only a very small percentage of people are > capable of studying Torah all day. > Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah less in 2018 then it was in 1518? From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 05:01:14 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:01:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:39 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >Again against the wishes of the Charedi Gedolim. >R' Steinman called Charedi colleges for women, a >pig with a streimel (see? >http://www.kikar.co.il/216994.html >). That same article quotes R' Yitzchak >Zilberstein (author of a widely read series on halacha) as saying: > >" Rachel Imenu sat on the idols and didn't burn >them. She wanted to denigrate the wisdom of the >other nations, she didn't want to burn them, >rather to teach the Jewish people, I don't need >any outside wisdom and therefore she was >priviliged with having Yosef who astounded the >world with his wisdom which was solely torah based.? > >We have to instill in our daughters: A jewish >home that is free of any trace of non-Jewish >wisdom and learns only Torah will never be hurt." Too bad this statement does not differentiate between un-Jewish and non-Jewish. as RSRH did. I agree that we do not want un-Jewish influences in the Orthodox world. However, there is no problem with non-Jewish influences. I wonder if they are against the use of, for example, modern medicine or electricity or running water, and countless other things that are "non-Jewish wisdom and come into Chareidi homes. >>There is no question that the simple reading of >>the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: >> >>"But it is not for a person to learn anything >>but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >>decisors that come after them and through this >>they will acquire this world and the world to >>come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >>In any case, it is permitted to learn through >>happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >>isn't a book of heresy.? This is what called >>by the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person >>should not take a trip in the Pardes until he >>has filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] >>and he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" >> >>The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >>cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >>only that, but he writes that even happenstance >>secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. > >Yet the GRA studied mathematics in his youth. > > >The Gra was sui generis, when he studied >mathematics in his youth he already knew shas and poskim.? Can you verify this assertion? >>And how many people are capable of capable of >>learning "anything but Torah, Mishna and Gemara >>and the halachic decisors that come after >>them."? ? as I pointed out earlier the Meddrah >>in Koheles as well as the Mishna Brurah make it >>clear that only a very small percentage of >>people are capable of studying Torah all day. > >Also, have not times changed since the time of the RAMA? > > >Is halacha not timeless? Is the value of Torah >less in 2018 then it was in 1518? Halacha evolves with the times. It is not static. If it were, there would be big problems, thus the values of Torah remains supreme. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 09:44:37 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 12:44:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:45 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And that is why the Rama writes "But it is not >for a person to learn anything but Torah, Mishna >and Gemara and the halachic decisors that come >after them and through this they will acquire >this world and the world to come. But not with >learning any other wisdoms. " It is very simple >according to the Rama, the study of Torah is >what Hashem wants us to do and is what will get >us into the world to come and the study of >secular studies will not. That fact remains the >same in 2018 as it was 1518, that a person >should devote himself to the learning of torah and not secular studies. The facts do not remain the same in 2018 as in 1518. The day school movement in the US as well as all of the Orthodox schools throughout the world where secular studies are routinely taught from kindergarten on show that things have changed. Please spend the time to read "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 ? 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 The Jewish Press, July 6, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916)" "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1786-1879)" "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. This article may also be read at "History of the Day School Movement in America (1654 ? 1785) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 08:07:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:07:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) Message-ID: At 04:31 AM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >And yet the overwhelming majority of the Charedi >world agrees with his teshuva. > >There is no question that the simple reading of >the Rama is like R' Baruch Ber. The Rama writes: > >"But it is not for a person to learn anything >but Torah, Mishna and Gemara and the halachic >decisors that come after them and through this >they will acquire this world and the world to >come. But not with learning any other wisdoms. >In any case, it is permitted to learn through >happenstance all other knowledge as long as it >isn't a book of heresy. This is what called by >the Rabbis a trip in the Pardes, A person should >not take a trip in the Pardes until he has >filled his belly with meat and wine [Torah] and >he knows the lasw of issur v'heter and the laws relating to mitzvos" > >The Rama clearly writes that secular studies >cannot be learned on a regular set basis. Not >only that, but he writes that even happenstance >secular studies should only be done AFTER you know shas and poskim. I must admit that I do not understand your assertion against secular studies in conjunction with Torah studies even for boys at a young age.. The day school movement in the US was founded on the principle of a dual curriculum. The model was RJJ. Today in the US the vast majority of yeshivas follow this model save for some of the Chassidic yeshivas. Gedolim like Rav Yitzchok Hutner (Chaim Berlin), (Mr.) Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz (Torah Vodaath), Rav Avraham Kalmanovitz and Rav Shmuel Birenbaum (Mir), Rav Dr. Yosef Breuer and Rav Shimon Schwab (Yeshiva RSRH) , to name just a few, headed yeshivas in which boys were taught Torah and secular studies in elementary and high school grades. I am sure they were well aware of what the RAMA wrote and paskened that it did not apply today. Even in Europe in the 19th century there were some places where secular and Torah studies were taught along side each other. The Kelm Talmud Torah was one. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelm_Talmud_Torah "In addition to Jewish subjects, students studied general subjects such as geography, mathematics, and Russian language and literature for three hours a day. The Kelm Talmud Torah was the first traditional yeshiva in the Russian empire to give such a focus to general studies. " There was the L?mel-School in Jerusalem where both Torah and secular subjects were taught. So I really do not understand why you focus on the RAMA when it is clear that yeshiva education in many places, since the 19th century and throughout the 20th century involved a combination of Torah and secular studies. What are you arguing about? YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 11:16:15 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:16:15 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> On 4/15/2018 11:10 AM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > My understanding is that more and more Chareidim, both men and women, > in EY are pursuing higher secular education. I just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different story entirely). From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 10:14:25 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:14:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 7:44 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880-1916) ... There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in have secular studies: 1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would have had no students 2. The law mandated secular studies Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a bdieved. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:22:23 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:22:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:14 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >There are 2 main reasons why yeshiva day schools and high schools in >have secular studies: >1. When the schools were founded the ONLY way to get parents to send >their kids was to have secular studies . A torah only school would >have had no students >2. The law mandated secular studies When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young people. >Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but >as a bdieved. Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! YL From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 10:29:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:29:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <57b00836-81c1-e955-d4b2-4c6d5a98e06f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <4C.65.18065.A7C83DA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:16 PM 4/15/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I Just want to point out that these colleges are for people who went >through years of yeshiva only education. The existence of these >colleges can't be used as proof that secular education is good or >should be mandatory for a 14 year old boy. (Women are a different >story entirely). And many of those who attend these institutions find their secular knowledge woefully inadequate and probably wish they had a stronger secular education when they were younger. Look at the first part of the video at https://goo.gl/WKrKyT and see what he says about his own yeshiva education. At about 2 minutes in he says he discovered that he didn't know anything when it came to being prepared to work. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 15 05:48:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 08:48:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria Message-ID: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> The leprosy mentioned here was special kind of leprosy which only the Jewish people suffered from only in Israel. It never occurred outside of Israel, even in a Jewish home. The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical but rather a spiritual disease. The Rabbis comment: b?sorah tovah hee l?Yisroel ? "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and mortar to act as if it were alive. It would be most unusual for a house to become sick just like a human being. Such an illness borders on the miraculous. Why does the Torah say that a house may be afflicted with leprosy? It means that a Jewish home is different from other homes; it has life and spirit attached to it. When the people who live in these homes are sinful, the very bricks of the home reflect that sinfulness. The Rabbis tell us that leprosy is a sign of evil and sin; therefore, it is natural that house would manifest leprosy as a sign of its inhabitants evil. Now we can understand why the rabbis say it is good news when a house is stricken with leprosy. If one can notice the disease before it spreads, he has a chance to cure it. When the disease goes unnoticed, the real trouble ensues. Since in today?s world we don?t have the warning of leprosy attached to our houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. The Bible will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible Dwight L Moody -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Sun Apr 15 11:02:08 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:02:08 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Sunday, April 15, 2018, Prof. Levine wrote: > When Rabbi Abraham Rice started his day school in Baltimore in about 1852 > there was no law requiring the teaching of secular studies to young > people. > Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a > bdieved. > Ah, so we agree that things do change with the times. Good! This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 15 12:45:46 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 19:45:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: This is not something to be happy about. This is more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very difficult decision to violate the Halacha in order to save the next generation. This was not uncommon in America of that time. Young Israel's sponsored mixed dances for the same reasons. However, now that the Torah community is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. _______________________________________________ Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Apr 15 13:08:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 16:08:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <13.9E.29097.691B3DA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:02 PM 4/15/2018, Marty Bluke wrote: >This is not something to be happy about. This is >more along the lines of es laasos lashem heiferu >torasecha. The rabbanim has to make a very >difficult decision to violate the Halacha in >order to save the next generation. This was not >uncommon in America of that time. Young >Israel???s sponsored mixed dances for the same >reasons. However, now that the Torah community >is much stronger they are trying to go back to the strict Halacha. ? On the contrary, this is something that is appropriate for our time and the future. Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? See my article "Frum or Ehrliche?" The Jewish Press, October 20, 2006, page 1. This article is also available at "Frum or Ehrlich". Letters to Editor Also see "The Obligation to Support a Family" The Jewish Press, February 18, 2015, front page. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 15:35:12 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 18:35:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] barchu Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > According to the S"A 139:7, after the oleh "commands" the > community to bless HKB"H before reading the Torah, the > congregation responds "baruch hashem hamevorach l?olam vaed" > and the oleh the repeats the phrase in order to be included > with the congregation of blessers. Why does he wait and not > utter the phrase with the congregation? Incidentally, the same situation and question applies by the Borchu prior to Birchos Krias Shema, as per S"A 57:1. I can't bring any source, but in my mind, the simple answer is that if the oleh would say it together with the congragation, he might not be heard. The delay is to insure that no one mistakenly thinks that the oleh is excluding himself. I was going to ask a related question about Kaddish that has bothered me for some time. Namely: When the Kaddish-sayer says "Yhei Shmei Raba" himself, why does Mishne Brurah 56:2 tell him to say it *quietly*? But I am *not* going to ask that question, because RJR's post has forced me to compare these tefilos carefully, and I have found a difference that might help to answer his question. RJR was very correct when he used the word "command" to describe what the oleh is saying. The word "Borchu" is indeed the tzivui/imperative form of the verb. But no comparable command exists in Kaddish. Yes, the Kaddish-leader does command them "v'imru", but he even specifies what it is that he wants them to say. Namely, a simple "amen". And so they do. May I suggest that the "Yhei Shmei Raba" is an impromptu addition, that the tzibur adds of their own accord, NOT commanded to do so by the Kaddish-leader. Thus, there is no fear of causing any illusions that he is somehow excluding himself. Indeed, he himself added to the praise by saying "Yisborach v'yishtabach", which (one might say) is simply an expanded version of "Yhei Shmei Raba". So I guess the real question on MB 56:2 is not why the leader says Yhei quietly instead of loudly, but perhaps we could ask whether the leader really needs to say Yhei at all. Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Apr 15 20:59:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 05:59:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R' Baruch Ber Leibovitch (Prof. Levine) In-Reply-To: References: <37.2D.08474.17713DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <1A.84.12295.E6F33DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <23.05.12295.ED183DA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <7D.02.08474.5BA83DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <54519ad6-5f2a-1c69-4e5f-2d8f0fa2f2a5@zahav.net.il> 1) Is the community as strong as it was back when Torah was transmitted orally? 2) Who is the rabbi who is going to overturn decisions made by the Ta'naim (as opposed to overturning decisions made by school administrators in the 50s)? On 4/15/2018 9:45 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yet we celebrate the Talmud which required the Rabbis to make a similar es > laasos lashem heiferu torasecha and never seem to have said now that the Torah community is much stronger they should try to go back to the strict Halacha. > KT From hankman at bell.net Sun Apr 15 18:13:32 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:13:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> R? Marty Bluke wrote: ?R' Chaim Manaster wrote a long piece saying that secular studies especially science "literally create emuna and awe of the borei olam". While this may be true, the Charedi response is that learning Torah is by far the best way to create emuna and awe of the borei olam and of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none. So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah.? My response to R? Marty makes a number of assumptions that may not be universally accepted but that I firmly believe. The times are different, the level of knowledge is different both in the physical sciences and in Torah hakedosha. Dare I say that these as a function of time seem to be moving on trajectories that are unfortunately inverse to each other ? particularly in the latter time frame that we live in ? most intensely over the last 10 to 12 decades but can already be clearly seen over the last 4 centuries. With each dor we can see an ongoing diminution in the level of our Torah havanah while a commensurate level of greater scientific understanding has come about (with perhaps the exception of a very few yechidei de?ah such as the Gra and a few others who may have achieved levels more common in much earlier times before them). While Chazal tell us ?haphoch v?haphoch d?kol bah? and that certainly for those who are capable of a great level of Torah understanding such as those of Chazal who were doresh all the essin or all the taggin in the Torah probably could have been able to find quantum mechanics or tensor analysis or molecular biology in the Torah if they so chose. Certainly if the scientists of our day were able to discover these facts, Chazal certainly were able to as well. But I would point out that there is no maimre in Chazal that relates to having discovered any of this knowledge through their pilpul and passing this on to us. Perhaps they did not feel it important enough to report. But this level of understanding in Torah in our times is sadly not available in our times. Given the level of limud for the average person (unlike for some of the gedolim of our times) in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics. The average person (maybe I am just giving away my matsav) will not find much yira or emuna from learning that which is typical of our yeshivos (say a sugia in shas say ?succa govoah m?esrim ama or a sugia on movuy or on tumas negaim ? of hilchos melicha or muktsa in shulchan aruch etc). For the average person these are not awe inspiring subjects and unfortunately only a true godol or great talmid chochom could extract yira and emunah from these cut and dry subjects. Such inspiration for the average yid are fewer and much further in between from most of his limud of Torah. This as a result of our sad diminution in our Torah learning ability. Today, given our greater abilities in understanding the Borei?s briah it is much easier for us to find yira and emuna from our hisbonenus in them. So ?of course the most important activity that a person can do bar none? is Torah, but a very solid adjunct in our times for a vehicle to further inspire yira and emunah would very effectively be math and scientific knowledge. Part of the mitsva of emuna, is not simply belief, but to go out and prove to your satisfaction (to be doresh v?choker) the truth of the Borei and his achdus and that he is the Borei olam and revealed Himself to us at matan Torah and so on. To the extent that science facilitates this search it is a MITSVA and not just mere secular studies at the cost of Torah studies. Clearly the experience our ancestors experienced at yetsias Mitzrayim, al hayam (ma sheroaso shifcha al hayam etc) and revelation on sinai etc was more than enough to inspire tremendous yira, awe and emunah without the need for any help from science (which was not great in their period in any case) and on through the period of the nevi?im and the batei mikadash and later Chazal inspiration was possible through there havana of Torah alone. But I do not see that to be the case in our generation and times. ?So why should we try to learn emuna from science when we can get it from the ultimate source, Torah?? Because in our day it may be another additional (I hesitate to say ?more? effective way b?avonoseinu harabim for most people) very effective way for most average people.? So today, for the yechidei olom the tried and true method of attaining great yira and emunah through limud Torah may be the best way to go as we have witnessed these great traits in our great gedolim, but that recipe may not work so well in our times for everybody else without additional help. I am also not comfortable with the notion that there are certain areas of knowledge that are off limits to even our gedolim. I feel quite confident to assert that in our time, non of even our gedolim come to discover the great advances in science through there limud hatorah. If they know these subjects it came from sources outside of their linudei kodesh. But Chazal was not constrained in their knowledge. They were required to know shivim loshonos, they studied kishuv and astrolgy and the chukos hagoyim and certainly the science of their day (sometimes even quoting chachmei ha?umos and cf the Rambam quoting Aristo often etc [I also imagine the Rambam learned his medicine in the conventional way mostly including sources outside of Torah]). I feel sad for many talmidei chachamim in our day who lack the background in (sometimes in even minimal) math and science to grasp that they are saying a peshat in a sugia that could not be, and to seek out another peshat therein or to at least realize there is a problem they need to deal with to get a proper havana. Also the chiyuv to teach a son an umnus, obviously means, other than the chiyuv to teach one?s son Torah. We do not assume that his limud haTorah will suffice to teach him an umnus as well. The conventional ?secular? methods of teaching an umnus are to be followed. If you want your son to be a carpenter, send him to carpentry school ? do not expect him to come from yeshiva a talmid chochom AND a carpenter just from his limud haTorah. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 16:30:43 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:30:43 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: Is it not likely that the prohibition is against non-Torah learning which serves no purpose other than engaging in those studies for their own interest and excitement? There is no prohibition against learning any skills for earning a livelihood. Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and research. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 18:06:13 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 21:06:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. It seems to me that there is indeed one very obvious exception, namely, the chometz which the Rav has not yet sold to the non-Jew. (I suppose that one could avoid this situation by delaying the bittul until the very end of the fifth hour, but the danger of missing that deadline scares me.) I have not seen any sifrei halacha, nor any pamphlets or bulletins or websites, that mention this point. Perhaps everyone just presumes that people have this exception in mind when they say the bittul? Here's a better way to phrase my question: Would a mental reservation be valid in this case? Perhaps halacha ignores the mental reservation, and only cares about the actual words of the bittul - which explicitly refers to ALL the chometz. If halacha does allow this exception - and people do have this exception in mind either explicitly or implicitly - then there is no problem. But I would like to hear that this is confirmed by the poskim. Some might say, "What's the problem? There is chometz in his house, but he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" No, I can see two very serious problems. But before I go further, I must reiterate that these problems would only arise in the case where one does his Bitul Chometz BEFORE the Rav transfers ownership to the non-Jew. (If the ownership transfer occurs first, then at the time of the Bitul, there is no problem, because the only chometz still in his possession is really and truly nothing more than the chometz that he is unaware of.) 1) If there is still chometz in his home, and he is expecting for it to be sold to a non-Jew several minutes or hours later, but the words of the bittul - "All the chometz in my possession, whether I know about it or not" - are to be taken a face value, doesn't this case aspersion on the sincerity/validity of the bittul? 2) Perhaps even worse: After Pesach, when it is time to re-acquire the chometz, he can no longer rely on "he got rid of it via BOTH bitul and mechira! He is surely okay!" Rather, a determination must be made. If he got rid of it via mechira (despite happening after the bittul), then the chometz may be eaten. But if, in the final analysis, he got rid of it via bitul, then it is assur b'hanaah (Mechaber 448:5, MB 448:25). So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? Akiva Miller From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Apr 16 06:35:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 23:35:36 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: I enjoy reading smatterings from the philosophical musings of the great scientists. But I suspect, that is the very reason they are banned. It is because they are NOT boring. And I suspect that unless it may assist me in my Parnassah even reading about new tech developments etc, is likely to be prohibited, not as a corrosive Hashkafa but simply as a time waster. But as the saying goes, Nobody's Perfect [which is sometimes followed by - I am a Nobody] Furthermore, the loud protests that I can already hear, are voiced by those who live in this world which is influenced by non-Torah energies. If we experience boredom when learning Torah - then is it not true that we are still far from the truth of Torah? Reb Avigdor M said - ever noticed how people yawn during Bentching? And would then wryly observe, They were not yawning a minute earlier during the ice cream. I have a friend, a Sefaradi Satmar Chossid, V Frum V Ehrlich, who asked R A Miller if he should learn ShaAr HaBechicnah in the ChHalevovos, R A asked him if he reads the newspapers, to which he replied, No - to which Reb Avigdor responded You need to learn it anyway because the streets are infiltrated with the HashpaAh of the newspapers. I apologise if I seemed to be dismissive of the scientists and their philosophical musings - and the truths that they may discuss Sure, I agree, truth is truth no matter the source. I was merely reflecting upon the reason for the ban on Alternative Wisdoms A] they are unnecessary - they are not required for Parnassah B] they waste time from Torah C] they may well harbour and cultivate life-concepts that are alien and contrary to Torah, amongst the granules of truth Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 06:51:02 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:51:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Non Torah Studies Message-ID: <20EAE8A6498E468ABF14517EBCFFBC8A@hankPC> R' Meir G. Rabi wrote: > Also many of those exciting developing sciences were closely tied to > various philosophies. Pythagoras was a cult/religious/philosophical leader. > Even today and certainly Einstien and his group discussed and wrote > extensively about esoteric life values in connection with their work and > research. Do not ignore the truth of the message because you (and we all) do not like the like the lifestyle of the messenger. Pythagoras' theorem is a central truth to much of mathematics and science, and the truth of Einstein's science has withstood the test of time and been subject to much experimental verification. So what exactly is your point -- ignore the truth because you do not like its source? Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Apr 16 11:33:13 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:33:13 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <100f9bef-3e84-6df0-e91d-87b4c01ee3c7@zahav.net.il> Last year I read the document that one signs with the Rabbinate about the mechira. It was quite clear - you sell everything.? Everything includes things that you may have forgotten about? and even things that you have no idea if you own, like stocks in some company that deals in chameitz (even if your ownership is via your pension fund). Everything? means everything. I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". On 4/16/2018 3:06 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > On Erev Pesach morning, we explicitly divest ourselves of ALL the > chometz we own, whether we know about it or not, with no exceptions. > > > > So... anyone know if any poskim write about this? > > Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 16 11:07:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:07:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Tazria In-Reply-To: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> References: <85A996D8-1C90-4899-ADA0-39F496753D98@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180416180705.GG23200@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:48:58AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The etiology of leprosy in the Torah was not a physical : but rather a spiritual disease. I like calling it spirito-somatic, coining a term to parallel "psychosomatic". Just as it stress can turn the presence of Helicobacter pulori in the stomach into having an ulcer. : The Rabbis comment: b'sorah tovah hee l'Yisroel -- : "It is good news for the Jews if a house is stricken with leprosy." : Ramban remarks that it is odd for a house made of bricks and : mortar to act as if it were alive... But they also say it's purely theoretical (Sanhedrin 71a). Although that's tied to R' Elazar b"R Shimon's side of a machloqes in the mishnah (Nega'im 12:3). R' Yishmael and R' Aqiva (the other two opinions in the mishnah) would apparently disagree. In any case, as with the rest of the cases in the gemara of laws that exist only for learning (ben soreir umoreh and ir hanidachas) it continues with tannaim saying they saw something local tradition said was evidence of one. Nowadays, house mold is known to be all too common. The actual physical side of tzara'as habayis needn't be miraculous. However, unlike tzara'as of the body, one can't invoke a soul - mind - brain causality. It would be pretty direct evidence of Divine Providence if tzra'as of the sort that would cause tum'ah struck only appropriate homes. Which is how I saw the quote. It requires people living on a level where blatant hashgachah peratis is approrpriate. As opposed to an era where even tzara'as of the body requires far more spirituality than people achieve. : Since in today's world we don't have the warning of leprosy attached to our : houses, let us hope we can pick up other signs and warnings in order to be : able to remedy whatever difficulties caused by our own sinfulness. There is a discussion of the role of learning Torah, and whether studying Torah that is non-applicabile is of value. Because of ideas like this one, it is hard to believe there can be Torah that is non-applicable. Even if the case isn't, "derosh vekabel sekhar" could refer to taking home lessons for the general principle. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 16th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Tifferes: What type of discipline Fax: (270) 514-1507 does harmony promote? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Apr 16 06:55:47 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:55:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzorah Message-ID: <672ECAA3-45E8-4B5C-A040-0A47C6B91FE2@cox.net> The second verse of this portion (14:2) states: "This shall be the law of the metzora on the day of his purification..." Since the Torah mentions that his purification takes place during the day, the Sages expound that the Kohen's declaration, which alone permits the metzora to begin his purification ritual, may be made only during the day (Rashi; Sifra). The observance of Taharat Hamishpacha has been a central feature of Jewish life for millennia. One finds Mikvehs in medieval Spain, in ancient Italy and in the famed desert outpost of Masada. This is consonant with Halacha which mandates that even before the town synagogue is built, a Mikveh must first be established. The source of the laws of Mikveh and family purity is found in this week's Torah portion. The Torah commands that when a woman has a menstrual flow, she and her husband must stay apart from one another. During this period she is "tameh," a Hebrew term that has been incorrectly translated as "unclean." In point of fact, the word tameh has nothing to do with uncleanness. When one is tameh it means that a person has had some contact with death. In the instance of a menstruating woman, it is the death of the ovum. Similarly, when a man has had physical relations (which inevitably involve the death of millions of sperm), he too is tameh. Implicit in this Biblical tradition is a great sensitivity and awareness of the natural life cycle. After a week has passed since the cessation of the woman's menstrual flow, the woman goes to the Mikveh where she undergoes a "spiritual rebirth." Various aspects of the Mikveh experience reinforce this notion of rebirth. The Mikveh itself must have 40 seah of water, the number 40 alluding to the 40th day after conception when the soul of a child enters the embryo. The woman must have no ornaments or barriers between herself and the water, for her emerging from the Mikveh is like that of the newborn leaving the waters of the womb with no ornaments or barriers. A child is the mirror of the family, he reflects the moral purity of his parents. Anonymous From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 16 08:34:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:34:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Kriyas HaTorah, Aseres Ha'dibros Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Rambam (Teshuvos HaRambam 60) writes that one who is seated should not stand up for the reading of the Aseres Ha'dibros (Ten Commandments). However, the general custom today is that the entire congregation does stand during this reading. Why is it that this ruling of the Rambam is not followed? A. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt"l pointed out that there are two versions of cantillation for the Aseres Ha'dibros. The first is called ta'am ha'tachton (lower cantillation) which punctuates the Aseres Ha'dibros into sentences in the same manner as the rest of the Torah. The second is called ta'am ha'elyon (higher cantillation), which punctuates following the order of the commandments, reconstructing the manner in which the Ten Commandments were received during matan Torah. There are two reasons why someone would wish to stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros. If one's intent is to show extra honor to this portion of the Torah, this is inappropriate. The entire Torah was given to Moshe on Har Sinai, and therefore all of Torah is equally precious. Standing for the Aseres Ha'dibros might lead some to the erroneous conclusion that only the Ten Commandments were received directly from Hashem. However, there is a second reason why one would stand during the Aseres Ha'dibros and that is to recreate the assembly at Har Sinai. We stand for the Aseres Ha'dibros in the same fashion that all of Israel stood during the original acceptance of the Torah. Today, the general custom is to always read the portion of the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'elyon. This indicates that this is not merely a reading of the Torah, but a recreation of matan Torah. Therefore, it is appropriate to stand. Rav Soloveitchik posits that the Rambam read the Aseres Ha'dibros with the ta'am ha'tachton, equating it to every other Torah reading, in which case, it would indeed be inappropriate to stand. The custom of Rav Chaim Soloveitchik, zt"l was to read the Aseres Ha'dibros both on Shavuos and during the weekly portion with ta'am ha'tachton, following the practice of the Rambam. Some, however, have the custom to read the Aseres Ha'dibros on Shavuos with ta'am ha'elyon, since this reading is a recreation of Sinai, but when parshas Yisro and parshas Va'eschanan are read on a regular Shabbos, the Aseres Ha'dibros are read with ta'am ha'tachton. In such a shul it would be best to stand from the beginning of the aliyah so as not to show more honor to one part of the Torah than another. From hankman at bell.net Mon Apr 16 17:58:57 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 19:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: In my previous post responding R? Marty Bluke I wrote: ?in our time the level of yira and emuna they might achieve may be more readily attained through a more readily available scientific study of the wonders of the very small and the vastness of the very large and the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly and so beautifully described by mathematics.? Upon reflection I wish to add to my previous thought about ?the highly intricate and awe inspiring workings of the biological world at all scales and the beauty in how it all fits together so perfectly? can lead to great awe and yiras harommeimus and emuna. I have no doubt that the pasuk jn Iyov (19:26) ?umibesori echezeh eloka? is a direct expression in Nach of this idea that my very tissues (biological systems) are great evidence and testimony to the the existence of the Borei Olam and His careful and intricate design and continuing hashgacha of the very smallest and finest, myriad intricate details of every living thing. It basically is the old argument that the existence of a complex system such as a clock implies that there must be a clock maker ? but ever so much in spades. Kol tuv, Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 17 10:59:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:59:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> Message-ID: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a : bdieved. Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. The wave of rabbis coming in when the big drive for day school education started were predominantly a particular kind of Litvak. Look who the big voices were in the Agudas haRabbanim of the first half of the 20th century. RARakeffetR makes a strong case that one of the differences between RSRH and RYBS was just how lekhat-chilah secular studies are. RSRH held that our insulation from general culture and general knowledge was a tragic consequence of ghettoization. And that we never chose that life, it was forced upon us. The Emancipation was seen as a boon, allow the full expression of Judaism again. RYBS, in RARR's opionion (and of course, others vehemently disagree) only saw secular studies as the ideal way to live in a suboptimal situation. Secular knowledge in-and-of-itself as well as its ability to help one live in dignity is lekhat-chilah only within this bedi'eved world. But had we all been able to move back to Brisk, it would be all the better. Which gets us to the eis la'asos discussion. Shas too is lekhat-chilah and a great thing. What is bedi'eved is the reality that forced Rebbe, Rav Ashi, Ravinah to canonize official texts and (according to Tosafos) the geonim to write it down. But since we are still in that reality, we still publish TSBP -- lekhat-chilah. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? : Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, : "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of secular studies. Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. I would stick to discussing financial crimes: Yafeh Talmud Torah im Derekh Eretz sheyegi'as sheneihem mishkachas avon. VeKhol Torah she'ein imahh melakhah, sofahh beteilah vegoreres avon. - R' Gamliel beno shel R' Yehudah haNasi (Avos 2:2) But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the am hanivchar means. I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does not produce people less prone to these things. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 17th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Tifferes: What is the ultimate Fax: (270) 514-1507 state of harmony? From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 17 17:25:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 20:25:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz Message-ID: . I had asked: > On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat > before Biur Chametz? I thank those who responded. I still haven't found any poskim who deal with this exact question, but the Magen Avraham does mention something very close: "All melachos are assur once the time for burning has come, until he burns the chometz, just like above in Siman 431." - Magen Avraham 445:2, at the very end Akiva Miller From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Apr 17 22:27:14 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 07:27:14 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Omer and Koolulam Message-ID: A Post by Rabbi Alex Israel. In this essay (originally posted on Facebook for public consumption), Rav Israel talks about his feelings about participating in a Koolulam sing along. If you don't know, Koolulam is an organization which gets hundreds, even thousands of people together to teach to sing one song in unison. They took this idea from the US with the twist of having regular folks and not just stars singing. For an example of what Koolulam does, here is their Yom Atzmaut video (described by many as a tefilla b'tzibbur): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxzR9Z-kG6Q (Al Kol Aleh by Naomi Shemer). Rav Israel's post is an excellent example about how people are dealing with inner conflicts of the Omer (and Three Weeks) mourning period and living in modern Israel. Note: There are rabbanim who wouldn't have allowed participation, during the Omer time or any other time. You can read the comments and discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/alexisrael1/posts/10157199448378942 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ If you have been following me on FB, you will know my obsession with Koolulam, especially their ??70th Yom Haatzmaut event. Prior to the event I was asked by 7 or 8 people, friends or talmidot/im, ?whether they could attend during the Omer. (If you watched the video, about half the participants ?were religious-looking.) ? I am generally halakhically conservative (small "c"!) and I try to keep halakha even if it disrupts my lifestyle. I ?am committed to halakhic practice and I don't knowingly contravene the law. So was it forbidden?? On the one hand this was a live event. So is it a problem? The Shulchan Arukh restricts weddings ?and haircuts as modes of marking the death of Rabbi Akiva?s 24,000 talmidim. Magen Avraham ?adds dancing and revelry to the list and I grew up not even going to movies in the Omer. Koolulam ?isn?t a wedding and did not include dancing, but was very much a public celebratory event. Could I ?go and allow others to go? I went to consult. One authoritative Posek said to me "It's not really assur (not dancing); it's not really muttar (public mass event). Go if it is ?important to you." ... But is that satisfactory?? The fundamental issue is deeper than the technical definition of ?music?, dancing? etc. In truth, ?I was going as part of my Yom Haatzmaut experience, as a celebration of life in Israel, of a people ?revived. This was not simple entertainment. Having participated in Koolulam, it was incredibly ?uplifting. My wife has described the evening as ?tefilla betzibur,? as the song?s words are essentially ?a prayer! - Just watch the "kavanna" in the video of the event! This was not merely a fun night out, although it was great fun. It was for us a Zionist ?expression, it touched a far deeper chord; it reflected faith, national unity, pride, hope, and so much ?more.? On the one hand, I see Halakha as embodying values which we aspire to imbibe. As such, I fully identify with the mourning of the ?Omer. It recalls Rabbi Akiva?s students who did not regard or interact with one another respectfully. In Israel ?today, we desperately need to be reminded annually about the need for a sensitive and respectful ?social environment and public discourse. The Omer contains a critical message. We wouldn't want to be without it. The mourning of the Omer, especially for Askenazi kehillot, also marks ?massacres and Crusades throughout the ages; another important feature, (although they may have tragically been eclipsed by the Shoah.?) But here is the problem. These practices totally fail to absorb the huge historic shift that is Medinat ?Yisrael. There is a gaping dissonance between the traditional Omer rhythm and our Israel lives. The ?traditional Omer rubric doesn't match the modern days of commemoration. For example, one ?does not recite Tachanun on Yom Hashoah because it falls in Nissan. If there is one day to say ?Tachanun, it is Yom Hashoah (I wrote about my struggle with this here ?http://thinkingtorah.blogspot.co.il/?/davening-on-yom-hasho?). And is Yom ?Haatzmaut merely a hiatus in a wider period of mourning? Moreover, in general, on a daily basis, ?as I read the Siddur, I wonder how we can ignore the huge chessed of HKBH in our generation of ?Jewish independence and the restoration of land and nationhood. How can my Siddur be the same ??(excluding the prayer for the State) as my great-grandfather? ? In this period of the year, we should be thanking God, celebrating our good fortune, revelling in ?the gifts that we feel as we move from Yom Haatzmaut to Yom Yerushalayim. Fundamentally, the ?Omer is a happy time; Ramban perceives it as a ?chol hamoed? of sorts between Pesach and ?Shavuot where we mark ?the love of our youth, our marriage with God, how we followed God ?through the wilderness? (Jeremiah 2) as we followed God from Egypt to Matan Torah at Mount ?Sinai. Where is the joy? ? So, I felt that this was a sort of Yom Haatzmaut event which yes, contravened the traditional Omer, ?but in some way lived up to our new reality. I keep the Omer - not shaving; watching how I speak ?to others and how I interact in a positive and respectful way - but we are not in the terrible era of ?Bar Kochba when the Romans massacred Rabbi Akiva's talmidim, and we are not in the period of ?the Crusades. We are in Medinat Yisrael, our thriving sovereign State, and I want to praise Hashem and celebrate my people for ?the ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ????, ?? ???????? ????? ?????? ??????? - and so I went to Kululam. ? I don't know how to square the two systems.? Later I saw a post by an amazing Rav, Rabbi David Menachem, whose post reflected similar sentiments, going even further than my thoughts. See his post here: ?https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=963243270498844&id=276752372481274 ?(h/t Yael Unterman) I?m sharing these thoughts without the ability to articulate a solution. Maybe time will change ?things. Maybe we need to push these questions to halakhic authorities and thinkers greater than ?myself.? From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 17 12:56:42 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 19:56:42 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> There have been many many posting recently about the desirability of secular education, but no one has, so far, mentioned an exceedingly important point. Bammaqom sh'eyn anashim hishtaddel lihyoth ish, so I have to step in and point it out. We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have. `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater". This is preposterous; someone who knows xokhma yvanith knows that "epi" means "above" and "tropos" means to move, or to act. An epitropos is someone who acts above someone else, i.e., a guardian, who acts above, and on behalf of, his ward. `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Posqim, especially, need to have a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages. Any poseq who is not willing to be `oqer a din in the Shulxan `Arukh is no poseq (you may attribute this quote to me). But ordinary Jews also need to know this. It is always dangerous to believe things that are untrue. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Apr 17 15:00:38 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 18:00:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: >: Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a >: bdieved. > >Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up by Shearith Israel in the 18th century taught secular as well as Torah subjects. The day school set up by Rabbi Avraham Rice did the same. While it is true that the level of Torah subjects taught was low, still there were secular subjects almost from the beginning. Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects and so did RJJ that was founded around1902. The high school that Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started in the second decade of the 20th century taught secular subjects as well as Torah subjects. The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. Please see my articles "The Early Day School Movement in America" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 145 The Jewish Press, May 5, 2017. "The Early Day School Movement in America (1786 - 1879)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 146 The Jewish Press, May 30, 2017. "History of the Day School Movement in America (1880 1916)" Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 147 "Bringing Torah Education to Baltimore" The Jewish Press, October 3, 2008, pages 57 & 75. >On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:08:16PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Do you really think that the Torah community is much stronger? >: Externally it appears so, but, as R. A. Miller once said to me, >: "There is a thin layer of frumkeit and underneath it is all rotten." > >So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of >secular studies. The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. >Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of >secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. He knew in detail how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, he did value mathematics. Once he moved to NY he enrolled his children in yeshivas that gave its students a secular education. He received special permission not to send his eldest son to public school in Chelsea, MA, since there was no other alternative at the time. (His eldest daughter did attend public school in Chelsea, MA.) Lazar Miller, his eldest son, told me when he was sitting shiva for his mother that his mother used to help him with his math. However, she used Hebrew terminology for fraction, numerator, and denominator, since she had studied at two Yavneh schools in Lithuania where everything was learned in Ivrit. >: How much Chillul HaShem do we see? How much sexual abuse do we hear about? > >Sexual abuse is as big of a problem in the worlds of the OU and Yeshivat >haKotel as in places where secular education is eschewed. > >I would stick to discussing financial crimes: ... >But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding >of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the >am hanivchar means. What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal. I will take Erlichkeit with aberrance to mitzva practice over Frumkeit any time. >I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, >have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does >not produce people less prone to these things. I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to those who possess it. Originally, higher education in America was tied to religious education, and there was an attempt to instill morality in the students. Today, there is no such attempt. Indeed, if anything, higher education is in many cases anti-morality from a Torah standpoint. Parents contemplating sending their children to a secular collage should keep this in mind. YL From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 18 13:05:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:05:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:00:38PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : At 01:59 PM 4/17/2018, Micha Berger wrote: :> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 08:14:25PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> : Secular studies were not instituted in the US as a lechatchila but as a :> : bdieved. :> Historically this was true, but maybe because of timing. : This was not historically true at all. The Talmud torah set up : by Shearith Israel in the 18th century ... : Etz Chaim in the late 19th century taught secular subjects ... : The day school established in Baltimore in 1917 taught secular subjects. None of which led to the dayschool movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? .... :> So the problem is "frumkeit" rather than ehrlachkeit, not a lack of :> secular studies. : The strength of an Orthodox community is measured by how its member : behave, i.e. to want extent they live by true Torah values.. But you haven't shown a connection between the lack of limudei chol and the extent by which people are not living according to some derekh's understanding of "true Torah values". :> Speaking of which... what would R' Avigdor Miller have thought of :> secular studies if the government wasn't forcing it on our teens? : I knew him well for over 30 years. He spent much time speaking about how : science can make us aware of the wonders of HaShem. ... And yet would have felt a student who studied science as a full time endevor to be a cause fo a cheshbon hanefesh. And consequently, due to his own lack of formal study, much of the science he uses in his examples is just plain wrong. (And similarly, someone who knew the then-latest theories of cosmogony, geology and evolution would not have found is arguments for Creationism very convincing. If you don't know what the other side of the debate believes, you end up knocking down strawmen.) : how bodily functions worked. He himself knew how to write well. It is : true that he had little use for literature, philosophy, etc. However, : he did value mathematics. Leshitakha-- Why aren't you asking how R' Miller could ignore RSRH's paean to Schiller? :> But there too, I think the main cause is frumkeit. And a misunderstanding :> of what someone else or their institution (bank, gov't) not being of the :> am hanivchar means. : What is frumkeit? Can one define it? Frumkeit tends to focus on : externalities, whereas Ehrlichkeit is something internal... Frumkeit is about ritual and a drive to satisfy one's need to be holy. Ehlichkeit is about wanting to do G-d's Will. A frum "baal chessed" wants his gemach to be the biggest in town. An ehrlicher one is happy those in his town in need have so many sources of help. See Alei Shur vol II pp 152-155 A translation of an excetp by R' Ezra Goldschmiedt My blog post on the topic . And if that's not your definition, it's the one I intended when I said that the main cause of the chilulei hasheim you raised (and the mindset that least to them which is in-and-of-itself un-Jewish) is frumeit. :> I've been in academia, but not nearly as long as you, Prof Levine, :> have. I'm sure your experience would agree that secular knowledge does :> not produce people less prone to these things. : I never meant to imply that having secular knowledge imparts morality to : those who possess it... So then why bring up immoral behavior as proof that there are problems with a lack of secular education? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 18th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Tifferes: What is imposing about Fax: (270) 514-1507 balance? From driceman at optimum.net Wed Apr 18 13:30:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:30:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eating before Biur Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > RAM: >> On Erev Pesach morning, why is it that we are allowed to eat >> before Biur Chametz? > Burning hametz is a b?dieved. In an ideal world we would eat all of our hametz before zman issuro. So Hazal gave us time to eat hametz in the morning, and instituted biur hametz soon enough before noon that we wouldn?t violate any issurim, but not much before that. Otherwise why not do the biur right after bedika? David Riceman From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 18 16:25:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:25:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> <20180418200541.GA22163@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95.6C.08474.004D7DA5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: None of which led to the day school movement. Of the three, Eitz Chaim even conformed to the started by Levatikim stereotype I gave, if just too early for what we're discussing. Etz Cahim had secular studies in the late 1880s. see below. Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day schools. MTA and BTA start later Rabbi Dr. Bernard Revel started a high school with secular studies around 1915. . R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied began, but initially, it didn't have to. In any case, the schools we all attended are a product of a later trend. When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah? This is not true. > From my article "The Founding of Yeshiva Etz Chaim" The Jewish Press, May 2, 2008, pages 48 - 49. From the amount of time allocated to secular subjects, it is clear that the directors of the yeshiva considered these far less important than the students? limudei kodesh studies. Abraham Cahan, who would eventually become the editor of the Jewish Daily Forward and a prominent figure in the Socialist movement in America, became one of the first teachers in the English department in 1887. Cahan records that the curriculum was loosely drawn to provide for the study of grammar, arithmetic, reading, and spelling ? all within the ?English Department.? But because the directors of the school had no clear idea of what should be taught, the English Department functioned haphazardly, more out of a perfunctory acknowledgement for these subjects than a sincere desire to ?provide the children with a modern education.? The English Department was divided into two classes. The first was taught by a boy about fourteen, who had just graduated from public school and the second was taught by Cahan, who was a little less than twenty-eight years old. The students ranged from the ages of nine or ten to fifteen and many were exposed to the formal study of secular subjects for the first time. One of the native students received his first lessons in the English language when he entered the Yeshiva after passing his thirteenth birthday. The young immigrants presented an immense challenge to their devoted teachers. The students drank up the instruction with a thirst centuries old. Cahan frequently remained long after the prescribed teaching hours to tutor his pupils, who were uniformly poor in reading and mathematics and who regarded grammar as an exquisite form of torture. On these occasions, the directors would ask Cahan why he ?worked so hard,? saying that the students ?already knew enough English.? And from my article "The Founding of the Rabbi Jacob Joseph School" The Jewish Press, September 5, 2008, pages 26 & 66. Setting The Pattern For Future Yeshivas The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was unique in that it was the first elementary parochial school that taught basic Jewish studies as well as Talmud. Yeshiva Etz Chaim, founded in 1886, was an intermediate school that enrolled boys at least nine years old who already were somewhat proficient in Chumash and Rashi. Yeshiva Etz Chaim?s goal was to give its students a thorough grounding in Gemara and Shulchan Aruch. In addition, it provided some limited secular studies in the late afternoon. The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School was different in that in addition to providing a first rate religious education, it sought to provide its students with an excellent secular education at least equivalent to that offered by the public schools of the time. Nonetheless, limudei chol (secular or ?English? studies) was considered much less important than limudei kodesh (religious studies), and this attitude was clearly displayed in the constitution of the school. It required that there be two principals, one for each department. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hankman at bell.net Wed Apr 18 17:35:48 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 19:35:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge Message-ID: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> R? Jay F, Shachter wrote: ?We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. Two examples will suffice. Rambam in his commentary to `Eruvin 1:5 says that pi is irrational (I am not able to read his commentary in the original Arabic, I am saying this based on my reading of a Hebrew translation). This is the Mishna that says that pi is 3. Rambam defends the Mishna by saying that pi is of course, not 3, but any value we give would have to be an approximation, because pi is irrational (he does not use that word, or more precisely the Hebrew translator does not, but from his circumlocutions that is clearly what he means), so the only question is how accurate an approximation we need, and 3 is good enough for the halakha, since the exact value cannot be calculated anyway. A reader without a secular education would think that Rambam knew what he was talking about. He did not; he was guessing (as it happens, correctly). Rambam did not know that pi was irrational. The irrationality of pi was not proved until 1761, and the proof (and all subsequent proofs) required mathematics that Rambam did not have.? To this I respond: First, I certainly would not wish to set myself up as one who is capable ?to come to a correct judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us,? despite having some modern math and scientific knowledge. I think such a broad statement goes much too far. Not having any significant knowledge of Greek, I will refrain from commenting on your second example. However the first example you cite regarding Pi and the Rambam is one that I am willing to challenge. You are of course correct about the dating of the formal proof[s] (there are more than one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_%CF%80_is_irrational), date to modern, post Rambam times. However, it is very possible and probably likely that the Rambam intuited this on his own, even if without the benefit of a formal proof, that Pi had to be or was most likely to be irrational. I know I did so and probably most reasonably good students of math do so as well, long before they are aware of any formal proof for that fact. One reason for this is the well known method to approximate the value of Pi to any precision desired (even if very slow to converge) that requires little more than the knowledge of how to analyze a triangle. Simply inscribe a polygon of N equal isosceles triangles in a circle and calculate its perimeter and then divide by twice the length of the long side (= diameter of the circle). then do the same for N+1, and N+2 etc. a process in theory you could do infinitely many times for greater precision. So to intuit irrationality is very plausible even if not proven in our modern sense. Practically, note, that no matter how far you carry this exercise you will not get a repeating decimal that is the mark of the rational number. So I think you are far from ?judging the credibility? of the Rambam based on this example you cited. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Apr 18 15:33:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:33:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . R' Ben Waxman wrote: > I asked around with several rabbanim and they told that "Truth > of the matter is, once you sell your chameitz there is no real > need to do a bedika. Anything in your house, whether you know > about or not, is owned by the non-Jew." > > The question that came up for me later was "OK, so we do a bedika > anyway because that is the custom. But why say a bracha?". I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant was that once you sell your chameitz there is no *d'Oraisa* need to do a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, and that's why we say the bracha. This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the only reason. Mishneh Brurah 431:2 writes: "Also: Because people are used to chometz all year long, if there is still some in his house and his possession, they made a gezera because he might forget and eat it." Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of the chometz that we found. But this is an error, in my opinion, because the concern raised by the MB was that one might happen to come across some chometz, and thoughtlessly eat it. Mechira will NOT prevent this. Mechira will ONLY remove the chometz from one's ownership, but it will not help against forgetfullness. I would like to close by showing that Bedikah and Mechira BOTH have strengths that the other lacks, and that is why people should do both: Mechira removes all chometz from ownership, regardless of where it might be, and (I think) regardless of my sincerity, but if I didn't clean the house well enough I may have left some around. Bedika removes (or greatly reduces) the chance that I might come across some chometz accidentally, but the chometz that I didn't find is still in my ownership. A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had intended to type!) Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 00:09:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 03:09:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Rambam and Pi - was Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> Message-ID: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day. In his day it was considered acceptable to say "Look, pi is obviously an irrational number", and nobody would lift an eyebrow, because it *is* obvious. Only later did mathematicians start to say, well, yes, it is obvious, but let's see if we can actually prove it. And eventually they did so, and guess what, they confirmed what everyone including the Rambam already knew. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Apr 18 23:13:45 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 08:13:45 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Ben On 4/19/2018 12:33 AM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I suspect that you misunderstood those rabbanim, and what they meant > was that once you sell your chameitz there is no*d'Oraisa* need to do > a bedika. We do the bedika anyway because it is a Chiyuv D'Rabanan, > and that's why we say the bracha. > > This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do > Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 03:27:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:27:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rambam and Pi In-Reply-To: <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> References: <027172947F2F4D2CAE57DB5A88D657A2@hankPC> <4d0afe09-3df8-fa82-ec38-3d524b2d53d5@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180419102714.GA11722@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:09:29AM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : To put it in plain language, the very concept that one must have a : rigorous mathematical proof for a proposition before one can state : it as a fact didn't exist in the Rambam's day... I fully agree. But there is an irony here. When it comes to theolgy, the Rambam holds the chiyuv is to know, ie to believe because they had proof -- not tradition, not pur faith, etc... I think the Rambam believed he had a proof that pi was irrational. However, he had a differnt definition of the word proof. Continuing on this tangent... I think the definition of "proof" and therefore of "Rationalism" changed so much since the Rambam's day, the Rambam really wouldn't qualify as a "Rationalist" in our sense of the word. For example, science wasn't invented yet. The things the Rambam believed about Natural Philosophy were not backed by anything comparable to the rigor of scientific process. (Which itself is only rigorous at narrowing down the search space. Actual theories are constructed inductively, patterns found from a number of examples, and only have Bayesian levels of certainty. There can always be a black swan out there that, once found, requires replacing the theory with a new one. But *disproving* theories? That black swan does with certainty. Jumping back to before this parenthetic digression...) Similarly in math. The Rambam didn't have a modern mathemetician's definition of proof in mind. Even though he knew Euclid. But he did and always expected knowledge to be backed by some kind of proof. Archimedes spent a lot of time trying to "square the circle", i.e. come up with a geometric way of constructing a square with the same area as a circle. Numerous people tried since. This is the same thing as failing to find the rational number that is pi. Say the square they were looking for had sides of length s. So, the are of the square would be s^2. To "square the circle" would mean to find a square whose sides, s, are such that the ratio between s^2 and r^2 is pi, so that the areas s^2 (the square) and pi * r^2 (the circle) are equal. Repeatedly failing to find s by geometric construction eventually led people to conclude it was a fool's errand. By the Rambam's day, it was taken as a given that geometric construction could not find an s, and therefore that the ratio between them, pi, was irrational. (Weirdly, there still could have been a "black swan", the geometric construction that hadn't yet been found. The level of confidence the Rambam had would parellel that of a scientist believing the results of repeated experiment, but not that of a modern methematician.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Apr 19 08:04:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:04:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 04:05 PM 4/18/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Eitz Chaim did evolve into something, but YU and RIETS aren't day >schools. MTA and BTA start later. R' Matlin started Eitz Chaim as a >post-PS program in his apartment. I don't know when secular studied >began, but initially, it didn't have to. I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was never separate from the study of Torah. He emphasized the importance of unifying Judaism and secular studies. Often speaking of the, "harmonious union of culture and spirituality," he believed that knowledge of the liberal arts would broaden one's understanding of Torah. However, Revel's dedication to Orthodox Jewry was undisputed. For instance, he forbade the use of a female vocalist in the 1926 Music Festival, as a female singer is a violation of Orthodox Jewish law. He did not allow Reform Jews to serve on Yeshiva College's national board of directors. He was also staunchly opposed to mixed seating in synagogues. "He wrote: 'Yeshiva aims at unity, at the creation of a synthesis between the Jewish conception of life, our spiritual and moral teaching and ideals, and the present-day humanities, the scientific conscience and spirit to help develop the complete harmonious Jewish personality, once again to enrich and bless our lives, to revitalize the true spirit and genius of historic Judaism.'" From https://goo.gl/hbRw8S "Rabbi Revel's first step as the new head of RIETS was the creation of an affi liated high school. The high school, Talmudical Academy, had its fi rst entering class in September 1916." Regarding Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin please see "Rabbi Moshe Meir Matlin, Torah Education Pioneer in America" The Jewish Press, April 4, 2008, pages 42 & 91. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 03:19:45 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 06:19:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> References: <1e85c461-67df-f6ad-8284-d81dd2f767b4@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <81715a05-f9f9-f57e-95b1-03dc5240cb96@sero.name> On 19/04/18 02:13, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > You need to do a bedika even if you do bitul, not a mechira. AFAIK there > is no issur in having a goy's chameitz sitting in your property. Nor is there an issur in having hefker chametz sitting in your property, but you have to search for it and put it away or get rid of it, for fear that if you come across it during Pesach you may absentmindedly eat it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Apr 19 07:45:48 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:45:48 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: . I just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this permission? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:33:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:33:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: <2302358AAAAE48459360D9C56671A42A@hankPC> <20180417175910.GB28622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180419153325.GA3724@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:04:09AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : I would like to continue to correct what you wrote in an earlier post. : : From https://goo.gl/e4pm3b : : "Revel consistently maintained that secular knowledge in Judaism was ... Before the wave in question, but not the cause of the day school explosion. I do not know why this is so hard of a point to get across. Being around first but not starting a trend does not make something the source of the eventual trend. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is flawed reasoning. In fact, he didn't run a day school. And for that matter TA wasn't fully seperate from REITS. It wasn't a HS model that caught on anywhere. The model of day school and HS that actually catches on across American O through the middle of the 20th cent was the product of compromises between R ("Mr") SF Mendolovitch and his parent body. When TA evolved into MTA and BTA, it was because other schools have already created different expectations of what a HS was. Being in the same track as the eventual college degree, so that going from TA to any other college but YC was more like a transfer, was not sellable. (Although it did make AP courses moot; just take a college course in your 3rd year, if you were ready to.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Apr 19 04:25:17 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:25:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach Message-ID: The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately precedes the Amidah. I gave the following response: Soncino gives a very poignant explantion. ?O Lord, open Thou my lips; and my mouth shall declare Thy praise.? David?s lips had been sealed by wrongdoing, because praise of God would then have been blasphemy. If, then, God opened his lips and he was again enabled to offer Him praise, it was a sign that he had been granted pardon. What a profound thought before one of the most prominent and central prayers of our entire liturgy. We are all sinners and hope for the same pardon that King David was granted. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 08:59:45 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:59:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] H' S'fatai Tiftach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180419155945.GA30717@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 07:25:17AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : The question was asked why H' S'fatai Tiftach immediately : precedes the Amidah. Technically, it is part of the Amidah. That's why we say it between ge'ulah and tefillah in Shacharis and Maariv. Unlike "Ki sheim H' eqra", which is only said before the Amidah of Minchah and Mussaf, because there is no Birkhas Ge'ulah, and therefore no problem of interruption. This is particularly relevant to a Chazan, as Chazaras haShatz should begin with "H' Sefasai Tiftach", not Birkhas Avos. Tangent, since we're looking at what the pasuq is about. Safah is at the edge. The word is not only used for a lip, but also for the seashore (sefas hayam). The peh is what stands behind the sefasayim. So, when I say this pasuq, and when I have the time and yishuv hadaas to think about what I am saying, my thoughts are about Hashem removing the externalities that block me from expressing my real inner self. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 09:23:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <15240130020.702ca89f.79418@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20180419162328.GB30717@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 07:56:42PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: : We need to have a secular education in order to come to a correct : judgement about the credibility of the sages who preceded us. : ... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro comments on the word "epitropos" on Bikkurim 1:5. : He says that it is someone who acts as someone else's father although : he is not the real father, and he derives it from "pater"... : `Ovadia MiBertinoro got it wrong. Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge to that we know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon am? Mind you, I believe in the value of secular knowledge in-and-of-itself. Not just what you need to increase the likelihood of paying the bills. But I just don't see this particular argument. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 19th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Tifferes: When does harmony promote Fax: (270) 514-1507 withdrawal and submission? From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 19 09:25:22 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:25:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> On 19/04/18 10:45, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I? just realized another complication. After the rav sells my chometz, > then I don't own any chometz any more, and as RBW wrote, there is no > longer any need to say Bitul (on a d'Oraisa level). > > But wait! There's more! It seems that at this point in the morning, I > MUST NOT burn the chometz that I have saved for the Biur, because it is > no longer mine to burn. It belongs to the non-Jew, and I must not > destroy it without his permission. Does the Shtar Mechira include this > permission? It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu Apr 19 11:55:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahMusings] The Best Charity Message-ID: <20180419185537.GA11736@aishdas.org> People who both know my own proclivities and read this to the end will understand why I just HAD to share this post by RGS. >From https://www.torahmusings.com/2018/04/the-best-charity/ Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings The Best Charity Apr 19, 18 by R. Gil Student My friend, Rav Shlomo Einhorn, is once again attempting a superhuman feat of Torah teaching. A little over two years ago, he taught Torah for 18 live-streamed hours to raise money for the yeshiva he heads. This year, on Lag Ba-Omer, he will be attempting to break that record by teaching for 19 straight hours. This is a cause worth supporting -- or is it? I. Which Charity? Many people in the Jewish community have achieved varieties of financial success, allowing them the privilege of supporting many charities. This raises questions of communal and philanthropic priorities. Others have limited charity funds but still want to allocate them effectively. The issue is a blessing but also a complex problem, with multiple angles. Rav Hershel Schachter discussed this with me a few years ago in [48]Jewish Action. I would like to explore a specific subject that I have seen discussed in the responsa literature -- what is the best charity if you have to choose only one? In mid-sixteenth century Turkey, a wealthy man passed away without leaving instructions for the disposal of his charity funds. The local rabbis decided that some of that charity money should be given to the deceased's poor brother but the sons of the deceased objected that they should inherit the money and decide what to do with it. The question was brought to the Maharshdam, Rav Shmuel Di Medina of Salonica (Responsa Maharshdam, Yoreh De'ah 158). Maharshdam says that we have to try to determine the deceased's desires for the charity fund. Since in this case we do not know his intentions, we should give the money to the highest level of charity. The Tur (Yoreh De'ah 259) quotes his father, the Rosh, as saying that a town may reallocate to a study hall money that was donated to a synagogue or cemetery. Maharshdam argues that if in a case in which we know with certainty that the donor intended for the money to go to a synagogue we can use it for a study hall, then certainly when we do not know the donor's intention we can use the money to support Torah study. If we give the money to a lesser charity, we risk misusing the donation. II. Higher Torah The question then becomes which Torah study organization receives higher priority. Maharshdam quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 119b) that the world survives because of the Torah study of children, who due to their age are free of responsibility from sin. Additionally, more people doing a mitzvah together has greater merit than fewer people. Therefore, concludes Maharshdam, the money should be given to ththe highest charity -- a large elementary school. Similarly, Rav Ephraim Navon in early eighteenth century Turkey addresses a related question (Machaneh Ephraim (Hilkhos Tzedakah 11). A man donated money to establish in a small town a part-time kollel of ten men studying Torah. However, the town could not find ten men willing to enroll. The donor wished to change the endowment from a kollel to a full-time elementary school teacher. Rav Navon permitted this reallocation for technical reasons but adds that this new purpose is higher than the original because the Torah study of children sustains the world. III. God's Place However, Rav Yosef Eliyahu Chazzan challenges this argument (Ma'arkhei Lev vol. 1 no. 25). He quotes the Gemara (Berakhos 8a) which states that nowadays God only has the four cubits of halakhah. Therefore, He loves the distinguished gates of halakhah more than all the synagogues and other study halls. According to this passage, high-level Torah study merits higher priority than any other study. This seems to contradict the earlier passage, which gives priority to children's Torah study. This question gains greater strength when we note that the priority of high-level Torah has practical implications. Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Tefillah 8:3) rules, based on the above Gemara, that it is better to pray in a study hall than a synagogue. Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chaim 90:18) rules likewise. Since the two passages seem to contradict and the latter is quoted authoritatively, it would seem that an elementary school should not be given priority over adult Torah study. Rav Chaim Palaggi (Chaim Be-Yad nos. 64-65) favors the interpretation of Rav Chazzan. However, he struggles with the many authorities who side with the Maharshdam. Rather than taking a minority view against the majority, in an impressive act of intellectual humility Rav Palaggi adopts a middle position that gives due weight to the majority with which he disagrees. IV. Jewish Behavior Perhaps a reconciliation of the two passages lies in the Rambam's interpretation. Rav Chazzan and Rav Palaggi follow Maharsha's interpretation that the Gemara is praising high-level study of halakhah. In the introduction to his commentary to the Mishnah (ed. Kafach, vol. 1, p. 21), Rambam sees the passage about the four cubits of halakhah as a general declaration about the uniqueness of true loyalty to the letter and spirit of halakhah. Synagogues and study halls may be full of people studying Torah but not enough of those students apply these teachings properly to develop a faithful Torah personality. Only someone who internalizes the messages of halakhah can reach out fully to God. If so, the distinguished gates of halakhah may overlap with elementary schools. Schools that teach proper character traits seem to qualify as remaining within the four cubits of halakhah, whether for adults or children. An elementary school that trains its students to follow the law, to embrace and internalize the messages of Judaism regarding behavior and thought, serves in the same capacity as a high-level kollel. Both types of institutions are distinguished gates of halakhah. Elementary schools have the additional benefit of purity, discussed above. If this is correct, the highest charity would be an elementary school that emphasizes proper behavior and attitudes, a mussar-focused cheder that directs pure children on the proper path. About Gil Student Rabbi Gil Student is the founder, publisher and editor-in-chief of Torah Musings. From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Thu Apr 19 18:08:35 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 01:08:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> ?When R "Mr" Schraga Feivel Mendelovitch had limudei chol instituted in Torah vaDaas, do you think the "vaDaas" was his idea of lekhat-chilah?? One thing I learned in my years as an attorney is that a rhetorical question is not an argument. I, of course, do not know what Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue to be observant in a work environment. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Fri Apr 20 11:40:26 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:40:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> References: <106D8230-FF1C-478F-B777-A3C1B2B5B1D1@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <20180420184026.GA7707@aishdas.org> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 01:08:35AM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : I, of course, do not know what : Mr. Mendelovitch thought. What I do know is that in the 40s TV was very : proud of the secular academics and business successes of its graduates : and the fact that they were role models for those who wanted to continue : to be observant in a work environment. Historical (and hagiographical) accounts portray the request for secular education that would make college and professions possible options came from the target audience, a majority of the parents of Brooklyn, not R "Mr." Mendlowitz. His launching of the HS was by convincing 8th grade parents to keep their sons in TvD "just one more year", as the parents wanted their boys to go to Public HS. That was the importance of getting a real American education had to his customer base. Then, it was another "just one more year" into 10th grade, until he had his first graduating class. There wasn't an issue for him of getting secular education into TvD, it was an issue of getting parents to agree to commit time to limudei qodesh! So of course TvD made a big deal about the quality of their secular studies. The whole point their marketing had to make was that the son can learn Torah without parents feeling afraid their boys would be held back. Getting back to the main conversation: What R-"Mr"-SFM thought is more of a historical issue. My point was that the push for limudei chol in day schools at the time the movement (not the first day school!) was getting started came from the parents, not the idealogues. There is no indication the decision was lechat-khilah, as this wasn't a lechat-khilah situation. Limudei qodesh without a guarantee of pre-college quality education wasn't a vaiable option in most communities, not a choice on the table. Meanwhile, the big voice in American O Rabbinate of the time was the East European Rabbi, and not an ideological immigrant who had a pull to America, but someone who came fleeing either progroms or Nazism. We know the majority of them considered limudei chol an assimilationist force. Or is that too under question? (I used the name "R 'Mr.' SF Mendlowitz" [or misspelled as per the usual pronounciation "-olovitch"] because he asked people to call him "Mr." and therefore I thought it respectful to acknowledge it. Even though here, "R" is the default title for men. Then I was afraid people who didn't know the history would think insult was intended, so I am adding this parenthetic explanation.) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 20th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 2 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Tifferes: What role does harmony Fax: (270) 514-1507 play in maintaining relationships? From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:54:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:54:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Some thoughts on the passing of a teacher and friend Message-ID: <5f552137ab7f4015af43f057f925c5ae@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> With the greatest trepidation I will share a few thoughts. I knew (to the extent one can know someone) R'Ozer Yeshaya Glickman Hacohain Z"L for 40 years. In the early years we learned together. He certainly was far more able than I but we did discuss many tum issues over the years. I don't think he would be happy being held up as a unicorn even though his blending of both worlds was the reason he felt he was asked by the Yeshiva to be "on the road" so much. I believe he felt that anyone could do what he did at their own level. When the hurley burleys done the question the yeshiva needs to ask itself imho is have they encouraged (or perhaps should they-my uninformed sense is that RIETS looks at the separate mountain approach as a vision -a la r'ybs) broad lives( a la r'hutner) in any of their best and brightest? do they seek out role models of that nature or only exceptional examples in specific accomplishments (e.g big TC or big $ but not a balancer)? Balancing priorities is a big challenge in life, if one wants to honor R'OYG Z"L imho one might start with some cheshbon hanefesh looking at his balance and its message for us (no two of us will likely reach the same conclusions but that's what is to be expected-it's the process not the results) yhi zichro baruch KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sat Apr 21 11:53:20 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 18:53:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?R=92YBS-Feminist/Talit_Story?= Message-ID: <9fc9dd88e16649d48fc183b298bbfe74@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I believe this version of the story told by R? S Mandel in Jewish Action-not the ?gotcha? version I?ve heard. When a group of feminists visited him and demanded that he permit them to wear tallitot, he listened to them, showed he understood their reasoning, and proposed that there first be a trial period during which they would wear colored cloaks as tallitot, but without tzitzit and without reciting a berachah. He asked them to note how they feel wearing them and to come back after two weeks and confer with them again. After two weeks, they reconvened, and when the Rav asked these women how they felt, they told him how inspired they felt when wearing the cloaks. The Rav replied that that was excellent, that they should definitely continue wearing the cloaks and praying with kavannah, and that there was no need to wear the tallitot with tzitzit that men wore. Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Apr 22 11:27:12 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:27:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah is Not Religion Message-ID: We are counting towards Shevuous which commemorates the giving of the Torah. The question is "What is Torah?' The following is from RSRH's essay Sivan I that I have posted at Sivan I (Collected Writings I) The Torah, however, did not spring from the breast of mortal man; it is the message of the God of Heaven and Earth to Man; and it was from the very beginning so high above the cultural level of the people to which it was given, that during the three thousand years of its existence there was never a time yet during which Israel was quite abreast of the Torah, when the Torah could be said to have been completely translated into practice. The Torah is rather the highest aim, the ultimate goal towards which the Jewish nation was to be guided through all its fated wanderings among the nations of the world. This imperfection of the Jewish people and its need of education is presupposed and clearly expressed in the Torah from the very beginning. There is, therefore, no stronger evidence for the Divine origin and uniqueness of the Torah than the continuous backsliding, the continuous rebellion against it on the part of the Jewish people, whose first generation perished because of this very rebellion. But the Torah has outlived all the generations of Israel and is still awaiting that coming age which "at the end of days" will be fully ripe for it. Thus, the Torah manifests from the very beginning its superhuman origin. It has no development and no history; it is rather the people of the Torah which has a history. And this history is nothing else but its continuous training and striving to rise to the unchangeable, eternal height on which the Torah is set, this Torah that has nothing in common with what is commonly called "religion." How hopelessly false is it, therefore, to call this Torah "religion," and thus drag it by this name into the circle of other phenomena in the history of human civilization, to which it does not belong. This is a fundamentally wrong starting point, and it is small wonder that it gives rise to questions such as the following, which have no meaning so far as the Torah is concerned: "You want Judaism to remain the same for ever?" "All religions rejuvenate themselves and advance with the progress of the nations, and only the Jewish 'Religion' wants to remain rigid, always the same, and refuses to yield to the views of an enlightened age?" See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Apr 22 04:12:36 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 07:12:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav Message-ID: . Tumas meis and sheretz, for example, are supernatural phenomena. If someone has been in contact with tumah, and is infected with that tumah, there is no physical evidence of this infection. We are aware of the tumah if and only if we know about the events that took place, and the status of the things in those events. Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses. But they are spiritual illnesses, not medical ones. And in fact, Torah Sheb'al Peh is chock full of spiritual reasons why a person would become a metzora - Lashon Hara being the most famous of these, miserliness and others being mentioned less frequently. My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve myself in general." (Please note: This post is NOT an attempt to categorize all the many kinds of tumah. The first two paragraphs are designed only to show a similarity between tzaraas and zav, and then to highlight a difference.) Akiva Miller From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:02:03 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:02:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Re: R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 RYL quoted R? Yonasan Eybeshutz: --quote-- For all the sciences are condiments and are necessary for our Torah, such as the science of mathematics, which is the science of measurements and includes the science of numbers, geometry, and algebra and is very essential for the measurements required in connection with the Eglah Arufah and the cities of the Levites and the cities of refuge as well as the Sabbath boundaries of our cities. The science of weights [i.e., mechanics] is necessary for the judiciary, to scrutinize in detail whether scales are used honestly or fraudulently. The science of vision [optics] is necessary for the Sanhedrin to clarify the deceits perpetrated by idolatrous priests; furthermore, the need for this science is great in connection with examining witnesses, who claim they stood at a distance and saw the scene, to determine whether the arc of vision extends so far straight or bent. The science of astronomy is a science of the Jews, the secret of leap years to know the paths of the constellations and to sanctify the new moon. The science of nature which includes the science of medicine in general is very important for distinguishing the blood of the Niddah whether it is pure or impure and how much more is it necessary when one strikes his fellow man in order to ascertain whether the blow was mortal, and if he died whether he died because of it, and for what disease one may desecrate the Sabbath. Regarding botany, how great is the power of the Sages in connection with kilayim [mixed crops]! Here too we may mention zoology, to know which animals may be hybridized; and chemistry, which is important in connection with the metals used in the tabernacle, etc. ?end quote-- >>>>> ? Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual, or even for every member of the Sanhedrin, to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry.? It is not necessary for all these subjects to be part of the standard yeshiva high school curriculum.? It is only necessary that there be in the world mathematicians, zoologists, chemists, doctors, astronomers and so on.? It is not even necessary that they be Jewish.? It is only necessary that their expertise be accessible when needed.? It is not uncommon that poskim confer with physicians, for example, when they need certain medical information in order to posken shailos in specific situations.? The poskim don?t first have to go to medical school.? ? Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. ?It is necessary that they exist in the world. ?It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies. ? If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Sun Apr 22 00:55:19 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 03:55:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> ? In a message dated 4/9/2018 RYL wrote: ? >> ?There was no bigger masmid than the Vilna Gaon who slept only 4 half hours in 24 and spent essentially all of the rest of his time studying Torah. Yet he found it important to master many secular subjects. The following are selections from http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rabbinic_openness_leiman.pdf --quote-- R. Abraham Simcha of Amtchislav (d. 1864): I heard from my uncle R. Hayyim of Volozhin that the Gaon of Vilna told his son R. Abraham that he craved for translations of secular wisdom into Hebrew, including a translation of the Greek or Latin Josephus, ?through which he could fathom the plain sense of various rabbinic passages in the Talmud and Midrash?. By the time the Gaon of Vilna was twelve years old, he mastered the seven branches of secular wisdom .... First he turned to mathematics ... then astronomy?. R. Israel of Shklov (d. 1839): ?. It took place when the Gaon of Vilna celebrated the completion of his commentary on Song of Songs. . . . He raised his eyes toward heaven and with great devotion began blessing and thanking God for endowing him with the ability to comprehend the light of the entire Torah. ?.He indicated that he had mastered all the branches of secular wisdom, including algebra, trigonometry, geometry, and music. ?. ? --end quote-- To me it seems that the only conclusion one can draw from this is that the study of secular studies is crucial for the learning of Torah. YL ? >>>>? ? ? To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn: ? [1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ? [2] If you can master the ?seven branches of secular wisdom? before your bar mitzvah, that?s fabulous!? Because after your bar mitzvah you have to be mindful of ?vehagisa bo yomam velayla.???But before your bar mitzvah, you can play ball, roller-skate, and memorize the encyclopedia to your heart?s content. ? [3] Funny you should quote R? Chaim of Volozhin.? The famous Yeshiva of Volozhin did not include any of these seven branches of wisdom in its curriculum.? Anyone happen to remember why and when the Yeshiva of Volozhin closed its doors? ? Let me add a passage written by Rabbi Dr. David Berger (who, BTW, was my Jewish history professor for four wonderful semesters in Brooklyn College): ? --quote? ? Although various Geonim were favorably inclined toward the study of philosophy, it is clear that the curriculum of the advanced yeshivot was devoted to the study of Torah alone?.The private nature of philosophical instruction in the society at large [early medieval intellectual Islamic society] made it perfectly natural for Jews to follow the same course; more important, the curriculum of these venerable institutions [the yeshivot] went back to pre-Islamic days, and any effort to introduce? a curricular revolution into their hallowed halls would surely have elicited vigorous opposition.? ? --end quote? ? [Above is from R? Berger?s essay ?Judaism and General Culture in Medieval Times,? in the book *Judaism?s Encounter with Other Cultures* edited by Jacob J. Schachter.] ? Please note these words:? ?the private nature of philosophical instruction.?? The Vilna Gaon studied secular subjects on his own, as many yeshiva students have done over the years. ? Elsewhere RYL has indicated his desire that the NY govt require chassidishe schools to provide a good secular education to their students. ? You don?t have to impose your preferences on others, or get the government involved to force changes in school curricula. ? I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 01:06:16 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:06:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies In-Reply-To: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec599f48-c8e-a886@webjas-vab111.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <6b2084c852a745458c68c6f7836e4477@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> To me it seems that a few other conclusions can be drawn:[1] If you are a genius with an IQ of 180 and you only need four hours of sleep a night, you can master kol haTorah kulah AND also learn all other branches of knowledge in your spare time. ================================== IIUC, the Gaon?s theory of limud torah was that there was no such thing as spare time (any time one does not have to be doing something else must be spent learning) Thus assumedly he felt time spent on secular studies was required. Unless one posits that he had a need for ?recreation? which was study of secular studies or that he really only studied them when Torah learning of any sort was forbidden. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Apr 23 05:39:50 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:39:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halacha Yomis - Hafrashas Challah, At Large Factories Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. How does the OU separate Challah at Jewish owned factories that manufacture bread and related items that require Challah separation? Is there a mashgiach separating a piece of dough from every batch? Isn?t that impractical? A. For OU-certified restaurants and caterers, the mashgiach separates Challah from every batch of dough. However, in factories it is not practical to have a mashgiach present each time a batch of dough is made. Instead the OU uses what we call the ?Tevel Matzah system.? Open boxes of matzah that did not have Challah separated from them (i.e. tevel) are placed in these factories next to the mixers. The mashgiach declares that each time a batch of dough is made, a designated piece of the matzah should become Challah and exempt that batch of dough. Even though the matzos have already been baked and the mixer contains unbaked dough, we have already seen that one can separate from baked matzah on raw dough when both are obligated in Challah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Mon Apr 23 06:34:22 2018 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 13:34:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> References: <162ec28dd8f-c88-a84d@webjas-vae096.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. On Sunday, April 22, 2018, 11:29:56 PM CDT, Toby Katz wrote: > Yes, all the sciences are necessary for Torah. It is necessary that they > exist in the world. It is not necessary that any given yeshiva student > take away time from learning Torah in order to pursue other studies. > I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female > physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. How > fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn > Torah day and night that men have! ... > If Gemara is the main course while other studies ("tekufos vegimatrios") > are just "parperaos lachochma," I say let the gentlemen eat meat and > potatoes, while the ladies enjoy dessert. Not that this is optimal, Those that have the ability, and desire should spend as much time as they want/need to achieve the Torah knowledge we all rely on to live our lives. We all need Gedolim that these kinds of people become to naser the difficult Shaylos that constantly arise as we progress through time. For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah. This that misdirect those strengths - being urged to use their strengths to learn Torah are in my view shortchanging them. They are discouraging Jews from serving God and his people in the best way they can. Where their strengths where they really lie. More to say - no time. HM Want Emes and Emunah in your life? Try this: http://haemtza.blogspot.com/ From dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk Mon Apr 23 01:26:05 2018 From: dcr.man at hotmail.co.uk (D Rubin) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:26:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:23:28 -0400 From: Micha Berger > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the metzi'us > they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) that a poseiq > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon > am? What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, and what they are teaching us, whilst simultaneously utilising our understanding of the era's terms and sciences to better probe the intentions of the original statements. Dovid Rubin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 08:15:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 11:15:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Need For Secular Knowledge In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423151544.GD1065@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 08:26:05AM +0000, D Rubin wrote: : > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, ... : > from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such things. But the hamon : > am? : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) ... Just to clear up the word, I meant non-posqim. I needed something that meant someone who wasn't "from LOR on up", and therefore shouldn't be pasqening for themselves. : What about the 'hamon am' (not sure why i don't like that term here - : patronising? unclear? unwarranted in this context?) having a deeper : understanding of what chazal meant? We can appreciate the meforshim, : and what they are teaching us... Yes, as I said, I too believe in a role for limudei chol beyond the utilitarian study of things that will eventually help you pay the bills. I was addressing what I thought was a flaw in a particular argument. There is enough Torah to keep one busy for a lifetime without topics that require a formal secular education. The question is what to do when "Mah shelibo chafeitz" is something like hil' qidush hachodesh. Which brings me to a totally new aspect of this discussion: formal vs informal education. Secular study in one's spare time was the norm in places like Volozhin and Slabodka. (Although Slabodka students were more likely to be reading Freud...) To the extent that RSRH thought Volozhin were "fellow travelers on the path of Torah im Derekh Eretz" and described them as such to his followers when fundraisers for the yeshiva approched Frankfurt aM. And yet the same Litvisher rabbanim and RY would campaign against university and formal education. Perhaps their primary concern was leaving the bubble prematurely leading to assimilation, rather than expecting their talmidim to define away the concept of "free time" or afraid of which ideas their students might be exposed to. Although the Alter of Slabodka would make a case-by-case diagnosis and give each student different guidelines, at least we could say there were stduents for whom he thought secular study on one's own was appropriate. And apparently the norm. Remember, these are the same bachurim for whom the leading pass-time when not learnig was chess. Yeshiva wasn't for everyone; the guys who went were a bunch of intellecturals. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From t613k at aol.com Mon Apr 23 09:33:07 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:33:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: <1192193499.3509451.1524490462967@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <162f35a0504-c8b-11ca6@webjas-vab001.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Mon Apr 23 12:43:36 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:43:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: << I would add that we live in an amazing age where there are female physicists, physicians, astronomers, zoologists and botanists. ?How fortunate this is, since women do not have the same obligation to learn Torah day and night that men have! ?There is less need than ever for men to take time away from Torah study in order to pursue other studies.>> And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of science the women should pasken the question -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:00:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:00:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180423210037.GA8959@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:43:36PM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : And when there is a halachic question that involves detailed knowledge of : science the women should pasken the question Except that it's arguable that pro forma women can't pasqen. It means a poseiq needs to know enough to ask intelligent questions of the expert. Even if the experts would end up being women, BTs who studied the subject before accepting ol mitzvos, unobservant Jews or non-Jews. Which is a good deal of knowledge, but doesn't require years of formal education. When I brought this thread over from Areivim to Avodah, my intent was not to have a bunch of pro-secular education posts. Rather, my focus was on the eilu va'eilu of saying that even though I believe in the value of secular education, I cannot say it's the One True Derekh. For example, the gemara only says that many tried to follow Rashbi's Torah-only derekh and failed. Not that R Yishmael was right. But that pragmatically, one worked for the masses and the didn't. And if the context changes, so that the welfare state makes it possible for more to succeed toing things Rashbi's way? The gemara says nothing against it. Assuming they don't bankrupt the state that way or other Modern Israeli political, governmental and economic issues, but again, that's the balebatishe problem of the system failing. Even if it were chilul hasheim issues (just to pre-empt that line of reasoning), that's not about eschewing secular studies. I would say the gemara leaves both options open. And for today... For every kid who leaves chareidi life going OTD because they feel hobbled by the lack of secular education, or the lack of worldliness in general, or just plain constricted by the paucity of their choices of how to live as adults there is a Mod-O kid who leaves because of too much opennees, a lack of structure, an attraction to the other lifestyles they're exposed to, a feeling that their parents are fooling themselves with compromise... To survive, we need all our options. That said, I find it interesting that none of the arguments in favor of limudei chol actually involved what I consider their real value: There is too much we can't learn from Torah. Not that it's not there, just that we don't know how to extract it. Like when RALichtenstein saw the Chevra Qadisha try to rush the aveilim at one levayah through so that they could begin another, he commented that had they read Hamlet they never could have acted that way. Not that such middos aren't in Torah sources, but they're more accessible sometimes in literature. And for all the awe one may get from the Wisdom of the Author when learning Torah, it hits harder when you see Chokhmas haBorei in the physical world, outside the context of "religious studies". Also, by studying other topics one learns other modes of thought, and becomes more able to think in other ways, reach other conclusions. Mathemeticians, programmers and lawyers all learn a precision of thought and attention to detail that helps in real-life problem solving as well as learning. Vekhulu for other displines. In short... The value I find in limudei chol only starts with knowing more and having more data to put into the Torah and the parnasah mills. They change how one thinks in ways that improve both Torah and life skills. Simply by having more tools in the toolbox. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 11:08:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:08:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. When I was a kid, it was a big deal that we couldn't buy chameitz from Walbaum's, including the supermarket whose parking lot was directly across the street. It means that for a couple of months, I couldn't be sent to the store on Fri for many of those last-minute purchases. I presume (given who my parents would have asked in that era) that was R' Fabian Schoenfeld's pesaq. But as the broohaha over beer this year indicates, there is a machloqes. We could view the sale as valid, and the Jew wrongfully selling merchandise that belongs to someone else. Theft, rather than chameitz she'avar alav es haPesach. Which would imply that in our case, where bi'ur chameitz is done later than the rav's mechirah, we would view it as wrongfully destroying someone else's chameitz. Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? I would think the latter. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 14:07:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:07:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> On 23/04/18 14:08, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:25:22PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : It was obvious from your actions that you didn't include it in the mechira. > > With this line of reasoning, one would be forced to hold like the posqim > who don't allow buying from stores (or NY's dominant beer distributor) > that sell their chameitz via a rav before Pesach, and then continue to > treat it as merchandise to be sold over Pesach. Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But here your actions show that you were completely serious about the mechira, but you didn't intend this to be included in it. The shtar you signed doesn't specifically say this *is* included. Its description of what's included very much depends on your intentions as revealed by your actions. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 23 14:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend to include ANY item? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 23rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Netzach: How does my domination Fax: (270) 514-1507 stifle others? From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Apr 23 14:51:13 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:51:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Vilna Gaon and Secular Studies Message-ID: <07.CD.29097.DC55EDA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:31 AM 4/23/2018, RN Toby Katz wrote: >I sent my own kids to normal Orthodox schools where they got a >reasonably decent secular education.? That was my preference.? I >never would have sent them to chassidishe schools.? But I would >never lobby the government to remove from chassidishe parents the >option of giving their children the education they prefer.?? >? >? >? >--Toby Katz I find your terminology "normal Orthodox schools" somewhat surprising in the context of Chassidic yeshivas. What exactly do you mean by this terminology when contrasted with Chassidic schools? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Apr 23 21:57:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:57:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name> <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> <8b30afea-0fe9-5189-bccc-464defda30d0@sero.name> <20180423214916.GB896@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/04/18 17:49, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 05:07:54PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : Not so. The owner clearly *did* intend for this chometz to be > : included in the mechira, so that Jews would be able to buy it from > : him after Pesach. That he doesn't take the mechira seriously is a > : completely different matter, and devarim shebelev einam devarim. > > But it's no more shebaleiv! Chameitz was sold within minutes of when > the mechiras chameitz was chal. What the difference between my actions > showing that I didn't intent to include this item I am then mevateil or > burn, and the beer distributors actions showing that he didn't intend > to include ANY item? Again, you are conflating two questions, one of which depends on your intentions and one which does not: 1) Is the mechira valid? Yes, regardless of your intentions. 2) What is included in the mechira. Certainly anything explicitly included in the shtar. But the shtar's language is vague; does it apply to *this* piece of bread? Only if you meant it to. That which you've set aside for breakfast is clearly not included, even if the mechira happened early in the morning. Ditto for that which you set aside to burn. Did it include an item on your store shelves, which you ended up selling just 20 minutes later? We can approach this two ways: a) It did, because you intended it to. Your intention was that your inventory should not become treif; this is inventory, you don't want it to be treif, therefore it's included. b) I bo'is eima, fine, let it be as you say, and the act of selling an item -- whether 20 minutes after the zman or 20 minutes before the end of Achron Shel Pesach -- shows that it was not included. Even if we were to accept this proposition (which I do not), whatever remains on the shelves that you did *not* sell remains included. Not only did you do nothing to indicate an intention to exclude it, you clearly did intend to include it, since your whole purpose was that it should not become treif. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Mon Apr 23 22:18:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:18:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> References: <0052103b-4235-1b3d-c83d-37be9c5b4095@sero.name>, <20180423180818.GA3449@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > Assuming even the sale is effective as-of the last possible moment, therefore > guratanteeing the usual bi'ur of known chameitz would happen first, there is > still the question of what to do in case of error. Is chameitz found between > chatzos erev Pesach and tzeis at the end of the last day destroyed, or > moved to a location you told the non-Jew where to look? > > I would think the latter. > ?????- Iiuc they sold the whole business, not just the stock Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Apr 24 04:53:01 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 07:53:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz Message-ID: I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira. There have been conjectures that the person's actions might reveal his intentions, or maybe not. But it seems to me that the starting point should be that which has been mentioned in writing. And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser degree of detail. In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this thread. But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other details. It seems to me that the "stam daas" of this person would be that he is selling only what is on the list, and the bittul is on everything else. Akiva Miller From hankman at bell.net Tue Apr 24 06:15:47 2018 From: hankman at bell.net (hankman) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 09:15:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R. Yhonason Eybeschutz on Secular Subjects Message-ID: <0401042908D24434A2102FDD03A26A7A@hankPC> R?n T. Katz wrote: In a message dated 4/23/2018 9:34:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmaryles at yahoo.com writes:? Yes, the Torah commands us to learn Torah day and night, But as my Rebbe, RAS said, this Mitzvah can be fulfilled by simply reciting Kriyas Shema in the morning and the evening. ? Not that this is optimal.... ? For the rest of us, we should follow and develop our strengths and serve God that way, while being Koveah Itim to fulfill the Mitzvah of Limud HaTorah.... >>>>> ? I agree with this. ?I am aware of the opinion that "vahagisa bo yomam velayla" can be minimally fulfilled by saying Shma. ?Despite this, it is not necessary for every individual to personally study math, geometry, algebra, physics, optics, astronomy, medicine, botany, zoology and chemistry. ? ? ? --Toby Katz I would go well beyond that and possibly suggest that when done ?the right way? that certain limudei chol? (read math and natural sciences) could be a better and more efficient way of attaining emunah including drosh vachakor and yiras harommeimus and the goal of understanding ?beHai? boro osom, or the gevuros of masseh bereishis, the intricacies of the olam koton and the actual vast olom not to mention the numerous sugios in shas and halacha that require knowledge of the real world and it science (its understanding). I propose a thought for consideration, that while for some yechidim their level of Torah learning is sufficiently high that Torah is the best and most efficient path to attain these goals. Unfortunately for many (most) of us, our level of Torah havanah is not even close to that level and as a practical fact a more direct path to getting a start on these Torah goals is through studying the briah and its science put there by G-d in the maseh beraishis. Someone like the GRA whose level of Torah study most of us can not even begin to imagine would relegate his study of science to only when it was not in opposition to his limud of Torah (such as the B?HK etc) as the best manner (for him) of achieving this goal was through his limud of Torah. But for most of us to take this as also applying to our situation is wishful thinking. As many times as I learn parshs Bereishis, my havana of ?beHai? boro osom has not really grown very much nor my level derosh vachakor. For us it may be a lekatchila outside the B?HK to set times for scientific study if done with the appropriate approach in support of our Torah understanding and growth in yira and emunah even when not just for parnasa. Kol tuv Chaim Manaster --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Apr 24 08:12:26 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 15:12:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Some_FAQs_about_the_OU=92s_=93Tevel_Mat?= =?windows-1252?q?zah_system=94?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Here are some FAQs about the OU?s ?Tevel Matzah system? that were described in yesterday?s Halacha Yomis. Q1. What would happen if the box of tevel matzos that was left in the factory was accidentally discarded? A1. If the matzo is discarded, the Tevel Matzah system becomes in-operative. Because of the concern that the tevel matzos might be lost, the OU also arranges a backup Hafrashas Challah each day in the OU offices to cover any factory that did not have a proper Hafrashas Challah done on premises. Q2. Is there any special reason that the OU chooses to use matzos for their tevel system? Couldn?t plain dough or bread be used instead for this purpose? A2. The main advantage of using matzos for Hafrashas Challah is that they have a very long shelf-life. A matzah can easily last from one year to the next and still be edible. Another obvious advantage of using matzah is that it can remain in the factories on Pesach. Q3. From how many batches of dough can one separate Challah using one box of tevel matzos? A3. When the mashgiach places the box of matzos in the factory, he declares that 1/5 of a gram of matzah should become Challah for each subsequent batter that will be produced. Considering that a box of matzos contains approximately one pound of matzos (454 grams), this means that a box of matzos will cover the Challah for more than 2,200 batches of dough. Even if a factory makes ten batches a day, a single box of matzos will last for over 6 months! Q4. Given that a box of matzah can be used to separate Challah for over 2,000 batches of dough, if a factory only makes one or two batches of dough a day, could a single box of matzos be used for several years? A4. No. One cannot take Challah from dough made from wheat that grew in one year on a batch of dough made from wheat that grew in a different year. The cutoff for determining which year the wheat grew is Rosh Hashanah. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Apr 24 08:24:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:24:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:33pm EDT, R Akiva Miller wrote: : This is actually a very old question, usually phrased as: "If I do : Bitul, why do I need a Bedika also?" I concede that the *main* answer : to this is that the Bitul might not be sincere, but that is not the : only reason. I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? The MB's other reason (gezeira) and discussion thereof, elided. : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of : the chometz that we found... "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? ... : A better question to ask, I think, might be: If I have sold my : chometz, why do I also need the BITUL? After all, the Mechira already : removed ALL chometz from my possession, and there's nothing left for : me to nullify! (Hmmmm... I wonder if that might be what RBW had : intended to type!) Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? A shade over 6 days later, on Tue, Apr 24 at 7:53am EDT, RAM wrote: : I am amazed that this discussion has gotten this far without anyone : referencing the text of the Shtar Mechira... : And this is a significant point, because I'm aware of at least two : major styles of this shtar: Some rabbis simply identify each person : who is selling their chometz. Other rabbis require that the seller : must itemize the chometz that he is selling, to some greater or lesser : degree of detail. I thought there are so many versions, referencing "the text" or even "a text" is meaningless. I therefore viewed the issue when you raised it last week (?) morein terms of: Does your LOR address this issue, and if so, how? : In the former case, where each seller is selling "all" of his chometz, : I can see a great deal of room for a discussion of whether we must : take "all" literally, or whether we can/should figure out his actual : intentions. And that's the situation I had in mind when I started this : thread. Bitul and "all my chameitz" are mutually exclusive sets. It it's hefqeir, it's not mine. (BTW, in Israeli Aramaic the word was "hevqer", which I kept on reading as though it was "the cattle.") Espectially is we allow later actions as evidence of what was intent at the time of the sale. : But in the latter case, where the seller has listed the chometz that : he is selling, that list surely omits "the bag that I'll be burning", : and I imagine that there is much less wiggle room to debate other : details... Without "and any other chameitz which may be"? That version would solve all your problems, but affords less protection against issur. Since all the mechirah is belt-n-suspenders with bitul anyway, no big deal. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 24th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 3 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Netzach: When does domination or Fax: (270) 514-1507 taking control result in balance and harmony? From zev at sero.name Tue Apr 24 09:03:23 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:03:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Bittul Chometz precedes Mechiras Chometz In-Reply-To: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> References: <20180424152434.GI6776@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1df6ecc6-8417-7966-0620-412e6633fa66@sero.name> On 24/04/18 11:24, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > I don't see how this works as a reason. Is an insincere declaration of > hefqeir less real than an insincere asmachta of a sales contract? Yes, I think it is. Hefker, especially when the item is still in your property, depends on your willing renunciation. If you still regard it as yours then it's not hefker, regardless of your declaration. Either because the insincere declaration is defective, or because the moment you think of it as yours you regain it through kinyan chatzer. > : Some may question what I am writing in this post, and they will point > : out that Mechira is more effective than Bedika, because (as RBW wrote) > : Mechira gets rid of ALL the chometz, whereas Bedika only gets rid of > : the chometz that we found... > > "Dechazisei udelo chazisei"? Bedika != Bittul. By definition Bedika cannot get rid of what is not found. > Can you sell something you didn't know you owned? I don't see why not. If you inherited an unspecified estate you can surely sell it as a lot, sight unseen, and leave it to the buyer to discover what exactly is included in it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From JRich at sibson.com Tue Apr 24 23:26:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 06:26:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hand washing Message-ID: The gemara (Shabbat 62b) states that being derogatory (mzalzel) concerning ntilat yadaim(hand washing) causes poverty. Rava then clarifies that this is only talking about the case where one doesn't wash at all. The gemara then rejects Rava's interpretation based on R' Chisda saying that he had washed his hands with a lot of water and got a lot of good (in return?). As part of a broader shiur, I was wondering : 1. Is it possible that water was not as readily available then and so this focus on the amount of water might not be applicable today? 2. Why would the gemara accept a rejection of Rava without a more specific refutation source? 3. How is R' Chisda's statement a source of rejection? (Rava could well agree that using more than the minimum is praiseworthy but still hold poverty only comes for those who don't wash at all) That's enough to start :) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Tue Apr 24 10:57:13 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:57:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed during the Rav?s lifetime. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Apr 24 05:30:39 2018 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Apr 22, 2018 09:28:10 pm Message-ID: <15245910390.9bBE36.37982@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Are you arguing that we need to know secular knowledge [s]o that we > know when Chazal, rishonim or acharonim based their post-facto > explanations are errors? What's the deep value of that? So that we > question their wisdom about things that have nothing to do with > emunas chakhamim and the fealty to the actual kelalei pesaq? > > If you were arguing that we need to know what to pasqen about, not > post-facto rationalizations that are in error but opinions of the > metzi'us they are pasqening for... I agreed (and already posted) > that a poseiq from LOR on up can't pasqen without knowing such > things. But the hamon am? > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- correction. At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that requires supernatural explanation. Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass them. There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter 6424 N Whipple St Chicago IL 60645-4111 (1-773)7613784 landline (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice jay at m5.chicago.il.us http://m5.chicago.il.us "The umbrella of the gardener's aunt is in the house" From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 06:05:39 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:05:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <23688d43-325f-1109-9d85-fcb94a75b7e7@aishdas.org> On 4/24/2018 1:57 PM, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit > and others tell a different version. He believes one. Because of the > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav's talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav's lifetime. The one that Rabbi Mayer Twersky quotes is in the name of an impeccable source, Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, who was personally involved. KT, YGB From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 07:25:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:25:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425142550.GB15047@aishdas.org> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:57:13PM +0000, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: : RJR tells one version of the story of the Rav and women and Tallit : and others tell a different version. He believes one... Actually, you can go see RSM's version for yourself. No need to mix RJR into this. From the current Jewish Action: https://jewishaction.com/the-rav/observing-the-rav > conflicting versions and after speaking to several of the Rav?s talmidim, > I believe neither. I note that they were not published or discussed > during the Rav?s lifetime. Actually, the "a woman" version was. I remember the discussion in shul, because I thought that the story as told belittled the woman too much. (Unlike RSM's impression, "Most of the women accepted this response, because the Rav treated their question with genuine respect and listened to their grievances.") Tamar Ross (2004) records R' Meiselman and the Frimer Brothers telling the story https://books.google.com/books?id=vkvNNioH--4C&lpg=PA91&pg=PA91#v=onepage I found R' Meiselman (published Fall 1998) here (near the bottom of pg 9 [5th page of the PDF]): http://bit.ly/2HQBwHm And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 They say they were told the story by Rabbi Yehuda Kelemer, former rabbi of the YI of Brokline, and that it happened in the mid-70s. Remember (unlike RSM) your "several of the Rav's talmidim knew the NY RY, not the Rabbi of Boston. There is really enough detail in R' Meiselman and R's Frimer version to rule out the story being legend. I would attribute RSM's version to memory drift; it has been some 40 years since the events, after all. 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? From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Apr 25 07:37:22 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:37:22 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Translation of Makkos / Binfol oyivcha al tismach In-Reply-To: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> References: <4FE8DCE5.5060308@gmail.com> Message-ID: Revisiting an issue that comes up repeatedly--do classical sources support the approach that we should feel sorrow for / not rejoice over, the suffering of our persecuting enemies. Yeshayahu (15:5) declares, ?My heart cries out? over the destruction of Israel?s wicked enemy, Moab. TargumYonason (and Radak and Metsudos) take this as the prophet quoting the enemy. But Rashi takes it as the prophet expressing his own heart?s thoughts, and he writes, ?The prophets of Israel are unlike the prophets of the umos ha-olom. Bilaam sought to uproot Israel for no reason. But the prophets of Israel [who had good cause to wish for their persecutors? destruction, nevertheless] mourn over the punishments coming upon the nations (miss-o-ninnim al pur-annos ha-ba-ah al ha-umos).?? (Artscroll cites both explanations, but adds a commentary by ''Sod Yesharim (I could not find it on HebrewBooks.org) who, like Rashi, takes the prophet to be referring to his own grief, but contra Rashi declares, ''The prophet had no cause to grieve over the downfall of the wicked nation of Moab, or of other unworthy nations. However, every nation had its own type of impurity that tempted the righteous and was a challenge that they had to overcome. When they did so successfully, they grew in stature. Now, with the demise of Moab, that particular challenge disappeared, and with it the potential for growth.) Also, I did have occasion to directly ask Rav Dovid Feinstein what he meant in the Kol Dodi Hagadah by ''shofchim l'eebud ha-makos and we don't drink them.'' Did he mean we pour out the wine out of sympathy for the Egyptians' suffering the makkos (as I had translated it), or did he mean that after taking the drops of wine out of the cups, we throw them (the drops of wine representing the makkos) out as waste, rather than drinking them (as R. Zev Sero insisted). And how that relates to the issue of ''al tismach.'' Sorry, but he did not commit to either way, comfortable with both approaches towards rejoicing over the downfall of Israel's enemies. Nevertheless, by my request, the next printing of the Kol Dodi Haggadah should have the translation changed to R. Zev's. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 08:32:13 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:32:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". Does _anybody_ here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? Perhaps a bar mitzvah boy the first time his tefillin "counts", or, perhaps the first time one dons a tallis at shul after marriage, or the first time one does birchas hachama? (As a baal teshuva, I have had a plethora of opportunities to do a mitzvah for the first time, and sometimes I get a spiritual high. And it's quite possible that I didn't do all of them correctly the first time, and that sometimes I wasn't even yotzie b'deived. No, I don't check my tzitzis every time I put on my tallis). Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce inappropriate? The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an inappropriate thought? -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Apr 25 13:03:11 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 16:03:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages Message-ID: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:26 AM 4/25/2018, Jay F. Shachter wrote: Let me begin with Daas Torah. Some years ago Rav Zelig Epstein, ZT"L was describing how the Mir Yeshiva left Vilna and got to Japan. He pointed out that almost all of the yeshivas were at this time located in Vilna and that almost all of the hanhalla of the yeshivas were opposed to leaving Vilna, because they feared that the Russians would arrest the yeshiva boys for trying to leave the "Communist paradise." However, several yeshivas boys were strongly in favor of leaving. The following is from my article Rabbi Aryeh Leib Malin And The Mir Yeshiva Glimpses Into American Jewish History Part 154 The Jewish Press, February 2, 2018. "Rabbi Malin [a top Mir student] felt it was a matter of life and death that the Mir Yeshiva students leave Vilna. He is reported to have said, "I will get a gun and shoot anybody who tries to stop us from leaving!" (This was verified for me by Reb Zalman Alpert, who served as a librarian at Yeshiva University for many years and told me he heard it from two former Mir Yeshiva students.) " When one of the boys heard that the yeshiva students went against what the hanhalla said, he asked, "But what about Daas Torah?" Reb Zelig replied (and I do not know if he was serious or kidding), "This was before Daas Torah was invented." I was told that Reb Chaim Shmuelevitz, who was against the yeshiva leaving, later apologized to Reb Leib with tears in his eyes. The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. Regarding asking and following what a rov tells you, I am convinced that when they ask in the World to Come "Why did you do this or that?" and someone replies, "I asked a Rov and he told me to do this." the response will be, "You were given free will and expected to exercise it." Certainly one needs to ask a rov difficult halachic questions, but need one ask about most things in daily life? A friend of mine who is a therapist told me that some of his patients are afraid to do almost anything on their own. How sad. Even the Avos were not perfect and RSRH points this out. See his essay Lessons From Jacob and Esau (Collected Writings VII) where he points out that Yitzchok and Rivka made errors in educating Eisav. See also his commentary on what Avraham did when he said that Sarah was his sister. He follows the RAMBAN who says Avraham made a "big" mistake when he did this. Sadly there are some who do believe that whatever scientific assertions Chazal made must be valid. Rabbi Moshe Meiselman is one such person. His book Torah, Chazal and Science takes this position. It is hard for me to understand how a nephew of RYBS can hold this view. Regarding believing things that are not true, see my article "My Mind Is Made Up. Do Not Confuse Me With The Facts!" The Jewish Press, August 25, 2004 pages 7 & 77. YL >It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > >Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what >you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when >you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages >have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same >moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- >correction. > >At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the >moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the >dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah. You will rely on >yourself, in areas where you should rely on yourself. In the 1930s, >the majority of gdolim in Europe were opposed to leaving Europe, and >advised Jews not to leave Europe. The docrine of das Torah directly >caused the death of millions of Jews (this is hyperbole). > >Members of this mailing list have, in the past, written on this >mailing list that our gdolim do not have perfect knowledge, but still >we must do what they say, because on whom else can we rely, if not on >our gdolim? The answer is that you must rely on yourself. Even in >matters of halakha you must rely on yourself, if you know the halakha, >even if all the gdolim are against you; it is the first Mishna in >Harayyoth. Of course, you must have the intellectual honesty to admit >when they know the halakha better than you do. Qal Vaxomer you must >rely on yourself when deciding whether to buy stock in General Motors. >If nothing else, ending the pernicious doctrine of das Torah will >increase variety in our behavior, and we want that, in matters where >the halakha does not demand uniformity of behavior, for the same >reason that we want genetic diversity in our crops. > >That our sages can be wrong, and wrong about imporant things, we know >already from 1 Samuel 16:6. But it helps if you can see it yourself, >and it helps to the extent that you can see for yourself, how often, >and how much, our sages have been wrong. Otherwise you will take >literally midrashim that attribute 1 Samuel 16:6 to 1 Samuel 9:19 and >you will think that any time our sages are wrong it is an event that >requires supernatural explanation. > >Moreover, knowing how often and how much our sages have been wrong, >and thus reducing the perceived distance between you and them, makes >you more likely to understand, and to believe, that you can be like >them. Every reader of this mailing list is able to be a Moshe, a >Xuldah, a Hillel. Their intellectual achievements may be beyond your >abilities but their moral achievements are not. Knowing that it is >a possibility will lead to your striving to make it a reality. Some >of you will succeed. Some of you will surpass them. > >You will not do this if you think that our sages were of a different >species than you, if you think that Moshe was 6 meters tall, that >every Tanna had the ability to resurrect the dead, that a Talmid >Xakham of sufficient stature can look into the Torah and derive all >scientific truths from it, they could have found in the Torah a >vaccine for smallpox but they chose not to because plagues bring us >closer to God. People with these characteristics are a different >species from you. You will not strive to be like them, because you >will know that you do not have it in you to be like them. You are >different, you are lesser, you are inherently flawed, all you can do >is admire them, and obey them, but you cannot equal them, or surpass >them. > >There are reasons for a secular education (which was the original >topic of the thread that led to the current posting), other than >bringing us to a correct judgement of the credibility of our sages, >that have not been mentioned on this mailing list. Secular education >inculcates the empirical mode of thought, which is indispensible for >all innovation and all progress, even progress in Torah knowledge, and >progress in Torah knowledge is possible at least according to some >people, Samson Raphael Hirsch believed that he knew the reason for the >Parah Adumah. Without the empirical mode of thought, no well-grounded >innovations, no innovations based on reality, will ever occur. There >is a member of this mailing list who is very intelligent, perhaps he >is the most intelligent member of this mailing list. But he will >never create anything useful with his mind, because he believes that >he has a religious obligation to believe in dibbuks. > > > Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter > 6424 N Whipple St > Chicago IL 60645-4111 > (1-773)7613784 landline > (1-410)9964737 GoogleVoice > jay at m5.chicago.il.us -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 14:03:32 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:03:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish Message-ID: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> >From The Jewish Press , by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev [literally, "the fish of the sword"] is kasher. Why is it widely considered to be not kosher, then? Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different consistency - or something like that - from those of other fish. So he decided it was a treife fish. But that's absolutely not correct. The commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch say dag hacherev is kasher. Professor [Shlomo] Sternberg, a big genius in learning and math, published an essay maybe 20 years ago in which he writes that Rabbi Soloveitchik asked him to conduct research on the status of swordfish. He did. He showed Rabbi Soloveitchik the scales of a swordfish and Rav Soloveitchik said, "It's a kashere fish!" Professsor Sternberg writes that he still has the envelope with the scales he showed Rav Soloveitchik in his Gemara Chullin. If the commentaries on the Shuchan Aruch say dag ha'cherev is kosher, how can Rabbi Tendler claim it isn't? Rabbi Tendler claims "dag hacherev" is a different fish. It's not true. But Rabbi Tendler did a service to the Orthodox Jewish community because at the time there were Conservative rabbis who were giving hashgachas, so he laughed them out of existence and said they don't know what they're talking because [they were giving swordfish a hechsher when] swordfish is really treif. So the Orthodox realized you can't rely on the Conservatives. L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue, but Rabbi Tendler accomplished his goal. Well, that's a lot of egg (roe?) on my face after what I said repeatedly in the 1990s in soc.culture.jewish[.moderated] O/C/R Wars... But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. "L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! There is a tie in here to what R JFSchachter posted here yesterday (? no time zone) at 12:30:39 +0000 (WET DST) under the subject line "Judging The Credibility Of The Sages": > It is always dangerous to believe things that are not true. > Not knowing something is an intellectual failing. Not knowing what > you are talking about is a moral failing. Making up an answer when > you do not know the answer is a moral failing. Knowing when our sages > have displayed this moral failing makes you more able to see the same > moral failing in yourself. It leads to self-awareness, and self- > correction. I was okay attributing ignorance to Chazal, but not violating epstemic virtue like "making up an answer". I would think that by the end of the period, subconsious biases wouldn't have made it into the final result. > At the same time, and this is not a contradiction, knowing both the > moral and the intellectual failings of our sages protects you from the > dangerous and deadly doctrine of das Torah... Except that daas Torah only requires belief that one is obligated to listen to halachic leadership on social and personal issues where the unknowns are not halachic (or even aggadic). Not that they are necessarily right, nor even that they are more likely to be right. (Infallibility was never Agudah doctrine; but you do find it among the population.) And I am not sure that when it comes to halakhah Chazal *can* be wrong. It's like saying that the house john built is inconsistent with the house John built. Pesaq is constitutive, not truth finding; expecially when you are the nation's authoritative halachic source (eg the Sanhedrin or shas as keSanhedrin, depending on when you think the Sanhedrin actually closed its doors). A pesaq made by CHazal based on incorrect science may still be correct halakhah because they define correctness. We would need to revisit our recurring tereifos discussion. But in any case: 1- I refuse to believe Chazal "made up answers" of had other epistemic moral failings (as a group, including peer review, what made it into shas, etc...) And I wonder how emunas chakhamim would work without that kind of assertion. 2- And yet, that may have happened here, among our contemporary posqim. No one is interested in fixing the science error (among those who believe it is in error) because C loses this way. 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? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 12:49:44 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 15:49:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180425194944.GC6722@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:32:13AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : > And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at (pg 41 : > [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 : : Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav : concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense of : 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something else" : and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". ... : The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he is : *thinking* that he is being mekayum a mitzvah? Is believing that one is : doing ratzon HaShem, or believing that one is getting closer to Hashem, an : inappropriate thought? I think it's more that the high isn't from the halachic aspect of what they're doing. Rather than it having to be halkhah qua halakhah. I am not sure that "one is doing ratzon H'" is different than "being mequyam a mitzvah" anyway. As for "getting closer to H'", Litvaks would talk more about sheleimus than deveiqus. IMHO this is part of RYBS being, fundamentally, a Brisker. Here's a quote I feel is on a similar theme, from "The Rav: The World of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik", starting on pg 54: Judaism must be explained and expounded on a proper level. I have read many pamphlets that have been published in the United States with the purpose of bringing people closer to Judaism. There is much foolishness and narrishkeit in some of these publications. For instance, a recent booklet on the Sabbath stressed the importance of a white tablecloth. A woman recently told me that the Sabbath is wonderful, and that it enhances her spiritual joy when she places a snow-white tablecloth on her table. Such pamphlets also speak about a sparkling candelabra. Is this true Judaism? You cannot imbue real and basic Judaism by utilizing cheap sentimentalism and stressing empty ceremonies. Whoever attempts such an approach underestimates the intelligence of the American Jew. If you reduce Judaism to religious sentiments and ceremonies, then there is no role for rabbis to discharge. Religious sentiments and ceremonies are not solely posessed by Orthodox Jewry. All the branches of Judaism have ceremonies and rituals. This is not the only reason why we must negate such a superficial approach. Today in the United States, American Jewish laymen are achieving intellectual and metaphysical maturity. They wish to discover their roots in depth. We will soon reach a point in time where the majority of our congregants will have academic degrees. Through the mediums of white tablecloths and polished candelabras, you will not bring these people back to Judaism. It is forbidden to publish pamphlets of this nature, which emphasize the emotional and ceremonial approaches. There is another reason why ceremony will not influence the American Jew. In the Unitesd States today, the greatest master of ceremony is Hollywood. If a Jew wants ceremony, all he has to do is turn on the television set. If our approach stresses the ceremonial side of Judaism rather than its moral, ethical, and religious teachings, then our viewpoint will soon become bankrupt. The only proper course is that of Ezekiel's program for the priests: "And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and the common, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean" [Ezekiel 44:23] The rabbi must teach his congregants. He must deepen their appreciation of Judaism and not water it down. If we neutralize and compromise our teachings, then we are no different than the other branches of Judaism. By RYBS's standards, being moved by music at a kumzitz is "ceremony". Meanwhile, Chassidus, Mussar, RSRH, Qabbalah-influenced Sepharadim (following the Chida and Ben Ish Hai) and numerous other derakhim have no problem with ceremony. For that matter, before it became minhag, specifying specific patterns of hand washing (RLRLRL or RRLL) was also ritual once. And many of those Academics that RYBS foresaw want their Nesivos Shalom, Tish, kumzitz.... Neochassidus is a big thing in YU. This idea that ceremonies that aren't defined by halakhah are inherently empty and its sentimentalism is cheap rather than reinforcing the cognitive and halachic, is, as I said, only something a Brisker would write. Even within Brisk... RYBS went further in this direction than did the Brisker Rav (R Velvel, his uncle). The BR holds that one makes berakhos on minhagim that have a cheftzah shel mitzvah (eg lighting a Chanukah menorah in shul), and that the Rambam and Rabbeinu Tam don't argue about that. What they do argue about is whether Chatzi Hallel is close enough to Hallel to qualify for a berakhah. This is a non-started for RYBS, who requires minhagim have a cheftzah shel mitzvah or else they're ceremoial. RYBS even fit the minhagim of the 3 Weeks and 9 Days to fit this shitah by insisting they must follow what was already established aveilus and sheloshim, respectively. Oops. I just notied I'm repeating something I worte a decade ago. See . At least the berkhah-in-minhag part was posted in 2011, so that this post had the value of combining the two earlier ones. Beqitzur, I don't know of two many people (aside from our mutual rebbe-chaver) who would agree with RYBS on this one. 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? From zev at sero.name Wed Apr 25 14:37:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 17:37:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish In-Reply-To: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 25/04/18 17:03, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I don't understand the basic content. The CLJS permitted swordfish > because while the adult does not have scales, it starts out with > scaled. No one is questioning the quality of the scales when the fish is > young (AFAIK), or the lack of scales on adult fish. (Wiki: Swordfish are > elongated, round-bodied, and lose all teeth and scales by adulthood.) > So how this sample of swordfish scales prove kashrus? The question > seems to be whether a fish needs to keep its scales for it to qualify > as qashqeshes, not what kind of scales swordfish has. There can be no question that a fish does *not* have to keep its scales to remain kosher. The posuk says fish only have to have their scales in the water, not when they leave the water. A fish that sheds its scales when caught is kosher, and no rabbi has the right to say otherwise. And I don't see a difference between shedding when caught and shedding on reaching adulthood. As I understand R Tendler's claim, it was that swordfish never have true scales, that even the ones they have as juveniles are not kaskasim. And this seems not to be true. BTW R Ari G and R Ari Z dispute the claim that adults swordfish (or landed swordfish) lose all their scales. They claim that this is the result of not examining adult landed fish closely enough, and that if one does one finds kosher scales still attached to the skin. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed Apr 25 16:33:33 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 23:33:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] R?YBS-Feminist/Talit Story Message-ID: <06705270-E689-4937-BAAF-0C7AE035E469@tenzerlunin.com> I simply note that (a) all the stories were published after the Rav died and (b) all appear to be least first degree if not more hearsay. (It?s unclear how R. Mandel knows the story. His article doesn?t say if he saw it, heard it from the Rav, or heard it from someone else.) But the difference between the two ways the story is told is striking and, I believe, calls it into question. But I guess we?ll never know. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From JRich at sibson.com Thu Apr 26 05:25:12 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:25:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sifrei torah Message-ID: <6fef9ae673744a11a2ede85a210fb782@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Can anyone point me to information concerning the history of the difference between the physical element of Ashkenazi (atzei chaim) and Eidot Hamizrach (containers) Sifrei Torah? The differences in the timing and physics of hagba and glila ? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Apr 26 10:06:01 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 17:06:01 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Unknown Days of the Jewish Calender Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NZ9BN1 This coming week, an unsuspecting person wishing to catch a minyan, who walks into a random shul in many places around the world, might be in for a surprise. After the Shemoneh Esrei prayer on Sunday there will be no Tachanun. On Monday there will be Selichos; and on Thursday there again won?t be Tachanun! Why would this be? No Tachanun generally signifies that it is a festive day[1]; yet, no other observances are readily noticeable. As for the reciting of Selichos on Monday, they are usually reserved for a fast day; yet no one seems to be fasting! What is going on? See the above URL for more about this. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rygb at aishdas.org Wed Apr 25 19:43:43 2018 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 22:43:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> On 4/25/2018 11:32 AM, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: >> And the Frimers' article (Winter 1998, a half-year before) is at >> (pg 41 [37th of the PDF]) http://bit.ly/2FfK715 > Let me ask the obvious question here. According to the story, the Rav > concluded: "It was obvious, therefore, that what generated her sense > of 'religious high' was not an enhanced kiyum hamitzvah, but something > else" and therefore was "an inappropriate use of the mitzvah". > Does anybody here get a "religious high" from doing a new mitzvah? ... > Now, suppose you got that "high" but later found out that the mitzvah > was done incorrectly. Does that mean the "high" one felt was perforce > inappropriate? > The more obvious question: doesn't one sometimes get a high because he > is thinking that he is being mekayum a mitzvah?... For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a problem. KT, YGB From meirabi at gmail.com Thu Apr 26 15:58:32 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 08:58:32 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach Message-ID: Yeshayahu (15:5) My heart cries out over the destruction of Israels wicked enemy, Moab. Rashi understands, the prophet is expressing his own agony - The prophets of Israel, unlike the prophets of the world, like Bilaam, seek to destroy us without provocation. Our prophets however, mourn for our persecutors when they suffer Divine punishments. As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness, that is certainly more of an intense and personal loss than the millions of Egyptians who perished - but we mourn them all from the perspective of lost potential, lost opportunity to be loyal to HKBH, and HKBH's failure to successfully persuade them to open their eyes and do what is right. That is why we spill wine from the cup we use for Hallel - HKBH's praise is incomplete, He was not fully successful - the gift He gave humanity, free choice, can, and was, used against Him. Obviously the cup should not be topped up. Each plague was a lesson and a plea from HKBH to all who witnessed these astonishing events - do the right thing, reconise that I am the King of all kings, The Master of the universe. Every Yid deserves 600,000 to attend his funeral. The Gemara explains - As it was given So it is taken away. Every Y, even the most Poshut or unlearned, is a potential recipient of the entire Torah and we must visualise their departure as the loss of that tremendous potential. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Apr 26 18:35:26 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:35:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BinFol O'YivCha Al TisMach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2499630f-df1d-04ef-9897-ef18103da093@sero.name> On 26/04/18 18:58, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote: > As stated previously on this forum - we mourn for the loss of 80% of > descendants of YaAkov who perished during the plague of darkness Where is this written? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri Apr 27 01:04:10 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 10:04:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] R'YBS-Feminist/Talit Story In-Reply-To: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> References: <7638724f-f2c8-20e1-31b9-89f074a074f0@aishdas.org> Message-ID: When I was in yeshiva, one of my rabbanim told us that we should dance when we "get" a Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Ben On 4/26/2018 4:43 AM, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer via Avodah wrote: > For a Brisker, certainly inappropriate. For others, not so much of a > problem. > > KT, > YGB From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Apr 29 07:49:48 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 17:49:48 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: A while ago we had a discussion about farfetched ukimtas. In yesterday's daf (Zevachim 15) the Gemara made a very startling statement about farfetched ukimtas. The Gemara has a question about whether Holachah without walking is Pasul or not. The Gemara brought a proof from a braisa If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher (even though when it spills, some if it spreads out towards the Mizbeach, i.e. Holachah without walking). The Gemara answered that none of the blood spread towards the Mizbeach.The Gemara then asked, surely, it spreads in all directions! The Gemara gave 3 answers 1: It fell on an incline. 2: It fell in a crevice. 3: The blood was very thick, and almost congealed. It did not spread at all. Then the Gemara made the following startling statement to reject these answers: It is UNREASONABLE to say that the Tana taught about such unusual cases The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? I brought an example from Bava Basra 19-20 which had at least as farfetched ukimtas and yet the Gemara didn't think they were unreasonable. Here is the example that I quoted from Bava Basra A Baraisa states that the following block Tumah, grass that was detached and placed in a window, or grew there by itself; rags smaller than three fingers by three fingers; a dangling limb or flesh of an animal; a bird that rested there; a Nochri who sat there, a (i.e. stillborn) baby born in the eighth month; salt; earthenware Kelim; and a Sefer Torah. The Gemara then proceeds to ask questions on each one that it is only there temporarily and the Gemara gives ukimtas, qualifications, for each thing to explain why it is not there temporarily. 1. Grass The grass is poisonous. The wall is ruined (so the grass will not destory it) The grass is 3 tefachim from the wall and does not harm the wall but bends into the window 2. Rags The material is too thick to be used for a patch It's sackcloth which is rough and would scratch the skin. It's not sackcloth, it's just rough like sacklocth 3. Dangling limb of an animal The animal is tied up and can't move. It's a non-kosher animal. It's a weak animal. 3. Bird The bird is tied down. It's a non-kosher bird. It's a Kalanisa (a very lean bird). It's not really a kalanisa, it's just lean like a kalanisa. 4. A non-Jew He is tied up. He is a ?????. He is a prisoner of the king 5. Salt The salt is bitter. There are thorns in it. It's resting on earthernware so it does not harm the wall. 5. Sefer Torah It's worn out. It's burial will be in the window. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Sun Apr 29 22:24:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 05:24:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched ukimtas? There are far fetched ukimtas all over shas and yet for some reason this ukimta was considered so farfetched that it was rejected. What does this say about far fetched ukimtas elsewhere? Does the Gemara anywhere else reject a farfetched ukimta like this? -/////---- One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the already known outcome. Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon Apr 30 01:22:56 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:22:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The question is why specifically here does the Gemara object to farfetched >> ukimtas? ...` > One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition > as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with the > already known outcome. It doesn't sound that way from the Gemara, The Gemara goes as follows: 1. Ula makes a statement that Holachah without walking is Pasul. 2. The Gemara brings a proof against him from a Mishna (where the blood spills, etc.) 3. The Gemara answers for Ula with an ukimta for the Mishna which doesn't contradict his din 4. The gemara says the ukimta is unreasonable Nowehere does it sound like we are reconciling sources with a known outcome. It sounds like a typical give and take found all over shas where ukimtas are simply accepted. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sun Apr 29 18:59:29 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 21:59:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Question from the Book of Yechezqeil Message-ID: In Yechezqeil, 44:31, he writes that a Kohen shall not eat nevayla (or T?refah). Nobody can eat it so why is there a prohibition for just the Kohen? I?m aware of what Kimchi and Rashi say, but it seems to be a weak explanation. To say the Kohen needed a special warning is stretching it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:55:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:55:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 05:24:19AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : One line of approach is that the Gemara had a separate line of tradition : as to what the Halacha was and simply was reconciling The sources with : the already known outcome. I don't know if that works here. I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and there are no counterveiling issues involved. Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish case. Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the floor of the azarah and not spread. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From micha at aishdas.org Mon Apr 30 14:51:05 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:51:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180430215105.GB12997@aishdas.org> My first thought was somewhat off topic but feel like it should be related... R' Yirmiyah's banishment from Bavel was over his habit of checking shiurim by posing implausible edge cases. He ends up in EY, and succeeds in the Y-mi. The final question (BB 23b) before his expulsion was whether we assume owned a bird that had one leg within 50 amos of the dovecote (ie within the shiur for the chazaqah for assuming that's its origin) and one leg outside? But there is also when he questions tevu'ah growing at least 1/3 before RH if harvested on Sukkos. Veqim lehu lerabbanan? How can you measure such a thing? (RH 13a) And his question on hashavas aveidah of 1/2 qav in 2 amos, or 2 qav in 8 amos? We assume yi'ush if we find less than 1 qas scattered across 3 amos. Is that a ratio? (BM 2a) How can you say that a revi'is is the amount of mayim chayim that the blood of a metzorah's birds would be niqar within? Wouldn't it depend on the size of the bird? (Sotah 16b) What if a kohein becomes a baal mum while the dam is in the air between his hazayah and it landing on the mizveiach? (Zevachim 15a) According to R' Meir, a miscarriage that was developed enough to have the shape of a beheimah causes tum'as leidah. (As opposed to saying it must be human shaped.) So, R Yirmiyah asked R Zeira, according to R Meir, what if a woman gives birth to such a baby, a girl and the father was meqadeish her to a man? R' Zeira points out that the child wouldn't live 3 years anyway, so bi'ah isn't an issue. R Meir asks: but what about marrying her sister? This one may or may not count, as R' Acha bar Yaaqov says that R Yirmiyah's point was to get R Zeira to laugh. (Niddar 23a) But it does reflect what kind of thing would come to his mind. (Tangent: There are a number of stories that indicate R Zeira needed chearing up. Like the golam Rava sent him. RMMS tied this to "Rav shachat lei leR Zeira".) But when he gets to EY, the Y-mi accepts his question. (Not that the Y-mi ever answers questions that involve guessing what the tanna / amora would have said...) A picker can eat a snack (quantity discussed) before tu"m was taken from the crop. As long as he is holing them. R Yirmiyah asked whether a picker can eat an olive he was juggling -- and thus didn't put down but also isn't just picked. (Maaseros 3:4, vilna daf 17b) Maybe the issue in the OP is about this time rejecting an absurd -- R Yirmiyahu-like -- oqimta is just the difference in styles in different batei medrash? Too haskala-ish to be satisfying? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 30th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation Fax: (270) 514-1507 result in holding back from others? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Mon Apr 30 20:47:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:47:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tuesday, May 1, 2018, Micha Berger wrote: > > > I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is > the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and > there are no counterveiling issues involved. > > Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish > cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish > case. > > Here, the constraint isn't that there may be an overriding issue, it's > that it is hard to imagine a situation where blood would fall on the > floor of the azarah and not spread. And it?s easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn?t seem more unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:00:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:00:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 06:47:36AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: :> I like the idea RETurkel repeated here some time ago that an oqimta is :> the gemara's way to construct a case where the stated law holds, and :> there are no counterveiling issues involved. :> Which might allow us to distinguish between dinim that have outlandish :> cases suggested, and a din in which could only apply in the outlandish :> case. : And it's easy to imagine that the grass is poisonous or the man is a : prisoner (example from bava Basra)? This ukimta doesn't seem more : unreasonable then so many others. In fact, it seems relatively reasonable. But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. I suggest exploring if the distinction is between a din that could only apply in the farfetched case and dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from the distcussion. This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See . (He offered to send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. In a different post, I suggested another line to explore, if you prefer it. Diffierent batei medrash had different tolerances for R Yirmiyahu's questions, and those too also used farfetched cases. And if so, maybe there was one beis medrash during the course of the ccenturies of amoraim that simply had no patience for odd oqimtos; even though they were atypical that way. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 31st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Hod: What level of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 results in harmony and balance? From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 1 03:34:33 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 13:34:33 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > > But I didn't argue that those other oqimtos weren't farfetched. > > I suggest exploring if the distinction is between > a din that could only apply in the farfetched case > and > dinim that could impact halakhah, but for clarity are illustrated > in a case that is farfetched, but eliminates oextraneous dinim from > the distcussion. > > This is based on R' Eli Turkel's post of R' Michel Avraham's thought > in last year's discussion of oqimtos. See > . (He offered to > send anyone interested a PDF of the article.) RMA argues that the oqimta > serves to accompilsh the latter. So, it seemed to me they were upset in > this case because it wasn't about elimminating other factors. > The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without walking from the equation. It would seem to be a perfect example to apply R' Michel Avraham's thesis and yet the Gemara rejects the ukimta as being unreasonable -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue May 1 04:40:42 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 11:40:42 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: Please see https://goo.gl/ESJERH for two links to a talk given by Rabbi Dr. Shnyer Leiman titled The Strange History of Lag B'Omer. Please see https://goo.gl/s2KHAVfor [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] The Spreading Fires Of Lag Baomer: Tempting Quick & Easy ?Spirituality? vs. Enduring Ruchnius goo.gl In the past we have discussed at length (5771, 5772, 5773A, 5773B, and 5773C) how Lag Baomer is marked in minhag Ashkenaz, and contrasted it with other, more recent customs, that have become popula? See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) No less an authority than Chasam Sofer was strongly opposed to Lag B'Omer celebrations. He argued that one should not make a new Yom Tov that is not based on a miraculous event, that has no basis in Shas and Poskim, and that is based on the death of someone. (See here for links.) See https://goo.gl/Zma8pS [https://s0.wp.com/i/blank.jpg] No ? No ? No ? No ? No ? Minhag Ashkenaz & Recent Lag Ba?omer Innovations ? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ?????, ??? ?????, ??????, ?????, ??? ???? goo.gl Yes, it is that time of the year again. Lag ba?omer is almost here. And with it, all the hype and solicitations for trips to Meron, Chai Rotel Mashkeh donations, upsherin, bonfires, and the l? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 1 03:54:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 06:54:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:34:33PM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The case in Zevachim under discussion would seem to be the latter : (eliminating extraneous dinim) . The Mishna is stating a principle that : blood that falls on the floor can be collected and still be kosher. The : ukimta simply eliminates other extraneous dinim such as holacha without : walking from the equation... I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Tue May 1 04:25:47 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 14:25:47 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas In-Reply-To: <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> References: <20180430215548.GC12997@aishdas.org> <20180501100030.GA862@aishdas.org> <20180501105404.GA23208@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I thought it's dealing with the impossibility of blood falling on the > stone floor of the BHMQ and staying put. > And as the din could only come up in the case of that stone floor, it's > not eliminating factors to clarify something that might apply elsewhere. The Gemara starts with Ula stating a din that holacha without walikng is pasul. The Gemara then brings down the following statment from a Mishna If blood fell from the Keli on the floor and it was gathered, it is Kosher. The Gemara then asks on Ula from this Mishna, namely that the blood must have moved towards the Mizbeach, e.g. holacha without walking and it is kosher. The Gemara then answers with the implausible ukimtos to explain the Mishna. In other words, it seems that the ukimtos are there to explain the Mishna namely that the Mishna provides a principle that blood that falls on the floor is kosher and the ukimtas are there to remove any extraneous factors such as holacha without walking. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 1 15:57:50 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 18:57:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ahava Eternal Message-ID: <2060439B-6A01-4D14-AC06-6D6675AC6381@cox.net> I heard a beautiful d?rash by Rabbi Yosef Shusterman (Chabad of Beverly Hills). He said the following: If you ask 20 people the definition of ?LOVE,? you will get 20 different responses. However, the best definition of love is the Jewish definition. He uses gematria. The gematria of Ahava is 13 and the gematria of Echod is 13. ?Love" is when you are at ?one? with whomever or whatever. Theologically, the love of God is when you are at one with God. Sometimes it takes an entire lifetime to reach that madreiga. I am in you and you in me, mutual in divine love. William Blake (18th c. poet, painter and printmaker) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 2 01:33:44 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 08:33:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of?= =?windows-1252?q?_Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/W49XHX Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. See the above URL for more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 07:10:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 10:10:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <64a22eb4-af1e-fab5-373f-889b1083cd08@sero.name> On 02/05/18 04:33, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From https://goo.gl/W49XHX > > > Toras Aba ?just put up an interesting post > discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to > similarity with ancient practice of idolators. > > See the above URL for more. And yet your precious Minhag Ashkenaz was to (have a nochri) make a bonfire and dance before it (or around it) on Simchas Torah. R Wosner was asked about doing so in camp, stam on a Wednesday, not on Lag Bo'omer when it is, at least in Meron, Chevron, and a few other places in Eretz Yisroel, a long-established minhog practiced by tzadikim and chachomim who were much greater than R Wosner or anyone else you can cite. I don't believe it occurred to him that someone might apply this teshuvah to those fires, and it's dishonest to do so. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 09:04:58 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:04:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 08:33:44AM +0000, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: : From https://goo.gl/W49XHX : Toras Aba just put up an interesting post discussing a halachic concern regarding dancing around a bonfire, due to similarity with ancient practice of idolators. Most of us have little problem with Israel's Moment of Silence on Yom haZikaron and Yom haSho'ah, at least not Derekh Emori problems. And we wear ties. There are limits to invoking Derekh Emori. To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last days too. And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah kekhol hayom". At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled later than the norm, this evening.) I don't know the origin. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 09:45:50 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 12:45:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> On 02/05/18 12:04, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag > baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) > and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas > simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo > velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than > waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the > Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last > days too. > > And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo > you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I > have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah > kekhol hayom". > > At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. (And I > know it's at tzeis and not sheqi'ah because my nephew's wedding scheduled > later than the norm, this evening.) > > I don't know the origin. The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. A cessation of mourning, such as the last day of shiva, obviously begins in the morning. Nor is it an occasion for joy; when one gets up from shiva one doesn't go dancing and singing. Thus the restrictions are lifted only after daybreak, and tachanun is said at mincha on the previous day, just as it is on the other three days whose observance begins in the morning, viz Pesach Sheni, Erev Rosh Hashana, and Erev Yom Kippur. But the celebration of Rashbi is a positively happy occasion, so it starts immediately at nightfall, and no tachanun is said at the previous mincha. The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and relies heavily on the Magen Avraham. (He later expressed regret over his over-reliance on the MA, which is one reason why he wrote a second edition, only a few chapters of which are extant.) So it's not surprising that this is the psak found there, however it is not the psak that was followed in Chabad, which means in practice he paskened differently. (Sometimes it means he changed his mind, but sometimes he never paskened in practice as he wrote in the SA, for the reasons I mentioned above.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 2 10:53:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 13:53:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : >I don't know the origin. : : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain how or when the older minhag was changed. And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. ... : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 32nd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Hod: What type of submission Fax: (270) 514-1507 really results in dominating others? From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 11:25:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 14:25:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> On 02/05/18 13:53, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:45:50PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : >I don't know the origin. > : > : The origin is with the shift in the significance of the day from the > : end of mourning for R Akiva's students to the celebration of > : Rashbi's happy day, the day of his "wedding", when he revealed the > : Idra Zuta and returned to his Maker. > > That's is the taam behind the post-change practice. It does not explain > how or when the older minhag was changed. It follows that the minhag changed when the significance of the day changed. In other words, the minhogim of the day when R Akiva's talmidim stopped dying did not change, but on top of them came a whole new layer of minhogim for the new holiday that occupies the same day on the calendar. For a similar example, the significance of 3 Tammuz in Lubavitch changed dramatically in 5754. The earlier significance of that day and whatever practices it had did not go away, e.g. those who did not say tachanun on 3 Tammuz before 5754 still don't say it, while those who did still do, but the new significance, and the host of practices that came with it, overwhelmed the earlier significance and observance. > And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" > is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. Doesn't the Idra Zuta say that Rashbi asked for his hilula to be celebrated rather than mourned? > You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, > after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, > in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) > that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, > Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. Whether it's the correct explanation of the Pri Etz Chaim or not, it is the one held by the people actually doing the celebrating, and thus fully explains their practices. > ... > : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which > : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and > : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... > > I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to suppose they didn't exist in his day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 2 15:57:53 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 18:57:53 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> References: <20180502160458.GA31994@aishdas.org> <6d1cf9db-7dc3-a786-108a-7621011ad709@sero.name> <20180502175317.GA5188@aishdas.org> <38be78da-ba7c-298f-d7b5-3e8ee2bb279d@sero.name> Message-ID: <4b464085-efab-7164-2d33-7726eba6a069@sero.name> On 02/05/18 14:25, Zev Sero wrote: >> >> : The first edition of SA Harav, and especially Hilchos Pesach, which >> : is the first section he wrote, follows nigleh, not nistar, and >> : relies heavily on the Magen Avraham... >> I do not know if celebrations the night of Lag baOmer existed yet even. > They certainly existed in the next generation, so there's no reason to > suppose they didn't exist in his day. PS: Indirect evidence that in the AR's day the night of Lag Baomer was already considered part of the simcha is that in his siddur (as opposed to his SA) he wrote that tachanun is not said at mincha of erev Lag Baomer. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 3 07:01:56 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 03 May 2018 10:01:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?iso-8859-1?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Foreign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= References: Message-ID: At 12:04 PM 5/2/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >To my mind, what's more problematic is ending omer mourning before Lag >baOmer morning. The SA has you wait for haircuts until 34 laOmer (493:2) >and the Rama cites the Maharil and minhag on the 33rd "umarbim bo qetzas >simchah, but explicitly writes, "ve'ein lehistapeir ad La"G be'atzmo >velo miba'erev". With exceptions for cutting before Shabbos rather than >waiting for Sunday and for berisim, lekhavos haMilah. In se'if 3, the >Rama excludes the night of Lag baOmer for people who mourn on the last >days too. > >And you need part of the 33rd day too, so that with miqtzas hayom kekulo >you have 33 days. The SA haRav (the only Chassidic code of halakhah I >have access to) agrees in 493:5 -- "aval laylah, afilu kulah, einah >kekhol hayom". > >At some point a minhag originated to end the aveilus at tzeis. Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of Aveilus on the 34th day? If so, how can Sefardim go to Meron on the night of the 33rd? I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at Tzeis and who started it. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 3 06:04:34 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:04:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] tzedaka priorities Message-ID: The S"A in O"C 152:1 codifies a prohibition against tearing down a synagogue before building a new one (one must build the new one first). The M"B (4) gives the reason for this prohibition as a concern that if one had not built the new one first, a case of pidyon shvuyim(captive's redemption) might arise requiring funds to be diverted from the new construction. 1. Why couldn't the chachamim make a takana in that case? 2. Why would the chachamim work around required priorities? 3. Doesn't 152:6 says you would sell a synagogue anyway in a case of pidyon shvuyim? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 09:03:10 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 12:03:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on the > night of the 33rd? The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve either of those things. (There is no issur on music during sefirah; that seems to be a modern invention, presumably because in modern times we've become lenient on the prohibition against music at any time, so we need to impose a restriction during sefirah, whereas earlier generations who were strict with the general prohibition didn't feel a need to strengthen it now.) > I would like to know when the minhag originated to end the aveilus at > Tzeis and who started it. As I wrote earlier, it seems associated with the adoption of the Rashbi's celebration on top of the earlier marking of the end of the plague among R Akiva's students. Thus it would probably have started in Tzfas in the late 16th century and spread into Europe in the 18th century together with the AriZal's kabbalah. (Note that according to the AriZal, not cutting hair is not connected to avelus, and applies on Lag Ba`omer as well, except for upsherenishen. But not having weddings is because of avelus, so if we're celebrating Yom Simchas Rashbi they should be permitted.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 10:13:07 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:13:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Fore?= =?cp1255?q?ign_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=92s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on : >the night of the 33rd? : : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve : either of those things... An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 10:17:41 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 13:17:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?Dancing_Around_A_Bonfire_=26_Concern_of_Forei?= =?utf-8?q?gn_Practices=3A_Rav_Wosner=E2=80=99s_Responsum?= In-Reply-To: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> On 03/05/18 13:13, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:03:10PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > : On 03/05/18 10:01, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : >Don't the Sefardim hold all of the 33rd day and stop the Minhag of > : >Aveilus on the 34th day?? If so,? how can Sefardim go to Meron on > : >the night of the 33rd? > : The same way they can go during the day. Haircuts and weddings are > : still forbidden, but the celebration of Rashbi doesn't involve > : either of those things... > An upsherin / chalaqah is very much part of the Meron celebrations. For children, who are not obligated in aveilus anyway. But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and the answer is the same way they go by day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 3 11:56:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 14:56:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and : the answer is the same way they go by day. The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both Ashk and Seph? Yes, if the party happened to be during the day, I would have the same question WRT Sepharadim (only). So how does pointing out that fact help me any in answering it? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 33rd day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Hod: LAG B'OMER - What is total Fax: (270) 514-1507 submission to truth, and what results? From simon.montagu at gmail.com Thu May 3 16:36:11 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 02:36:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > See https://goo.gl/Hc6as9 > > > Five Things You Should Know About Lag B'Omer Number 2 is > > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did that before the 16th century. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 3 12:08:37 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 15:08:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> On 03/05/18 14:56, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote: > : But in any case the question was about how Sefardim go at night, and > : the answer is the same way they go by day. > > The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > Ashk and Seph? And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do so from nightfall. (b) The Meron celebrations, which the question was about, don't violate the sefira observances anyway. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 05:04:16 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 08:04:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer Message-ID: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 06:24 AM 5/4/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: > > There is no evidence that anyone at all celebrated Lag B'Omer before the > > 17th century. (Please correct me if you have evidence otherwise.) > > > >I wonder if the author of this article recites Kabbalat Shabbat and sings >Lecha Dodi on Friday nights. There is no evidence that anyone at all did >that before the 16th century. In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to show that it was not really part of the davening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 05:14:32 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:14:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Bow_and_Arrow_on_Lag_B=92Omer?= Message-ID: >From http://www.collive.com/show_news.rtx?id=50532 A 4-year-old son of a Shliach in Florida was hit in his eye by an arrow on Lag BaOmer. Please pray for Baruch Shmuel ben Chana. I do hope he has a refuah shleima. This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. >From https://goo.gl/kumYeX One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn?t even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a break from their Torah studies. It is also surprising that they should pass the time with such a martial activity, seemingly out of character with the day devoted to the man of peace. Rav Menachem Mendel of Rimanov, one of the early Hasidic Rebbes, explained that the custom is based on the Midrash which states that all the days of Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai, the rainbow didn?t appear in the sky. (Ketubot 77b the same is said there of Rebbe Yehoshua ben Levi.) Rashi explains that the rainbow is the sign of the covenant that the world will not be destroyed, and if there is a perfect tzaddik in the world there is no need of such a sign. (Cited by B?nei Yissachar on Lag BaOmer.) See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 07:58:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:58:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both :> Ashk and Seph? : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do : so from nightfall... You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something aggadic. But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from what I was raised to believe on that. I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and rishonim couldn't have known about? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 4 07:05:58 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:05:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Mysterious Origin of Lag Ba-Omer Message-ID: Please see http://www.hakirah.org/Vol20First.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 4 09:57:47 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 18:57:47 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Bottom line: They do it or they don't? Ben On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time,? and I > was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it to > show that it was not really part of the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:41:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:41:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Let me begin with Daas Torah. ... : The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a : result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this : was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. So what are those formulations? Here are 3 I know of: 1- Given how the gadol's mind is shapeds by his learning, he is a useful resource for advice. He could be wrong, but aren't your odds better by asking? 2- Asking a gadol will get you the answer Hashem wants you to act on, whether it is the truth or not. E.g. the error of advising agaisnt fleeing the Nazis was because that was what Hashem wanted of us. But it was still pragmatically in error. I also see hints of this model in RALichtenstein's "Im Ein Daas, Manhigut Minayin?" but with the added caveat that RAL didn't expect to find daas Torah in practice. (Not since RSZA.) Again, just implications; I could be reading too much into the essay. 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, they are supposed to lead. RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like the same model. Notice that all advocate listening to gedolim even on non-halachic matters, but not because of any guarantees about accuracy. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 4 09:52:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:52:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Metzora and Zav In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180504165212.GC13247@aishdas.org> On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 07:12:36AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Both tzaraas and zav are examples of a different sort of tumah. They : have physical symptoms that are easily visible to the untrained eye : (although not everyone is qualified to evaluate those symptoms), so : much so that they can be easily confused with medical illnesses.... The relationship to a kohein is trickier than that, as their is no tum'ah until after the declaration. He is more parallel to an eid qiyum than an eid birur. For example, Vayiqra 14:36 tells a person to remove all the items from his home before the kohein comes to inspect a potential nega in it. Even even if the kohein sees the same unchanged splotch and declares it a nega, those itsems are not tamei. It wasn't a nega until the declaration. ... : My question is this: Are there any suggestions why a person would : become a zav? If a person finds that he is a zav, does this indicate : some specific aveira or midah that he needs to work on? Or is it just : another case of, "Oy, look what happened to me; I need to improve : myself in general." Tum'as leidah isn't because something is spiritually awry with the mother. So I am not sure we have to assume that zivah is like tzara'as. Lefi RSRH, tum'ah comes from things that could make us overly identify with our bodies -- death, birth, the kinds of sheratzim that share our homes (in EY), niddah... Zivah and leidah would fit that pattern. So would tzara'as, because it too feels like the body is rebelling against the will. The difference is that chazal is saying the body really is rebelling (or made to show rebellion) against a tainted will. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 34th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 4 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Hod: How does submission result in Fax: (270) 514-1507 and maintain a stable relationship? From zev at sero.name Fri May 4 11:15:17 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:15:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire & Concern of Foreign Practices: Rav Wosner's Responsum In-Reply-To: <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> References: <20180503171307.GE12866@aishdas.org> <15f13143-0b97-3588-24bb-f8a8ad15213f@sero.name> <20180503185308.GC19824@aishdas.org> <9495f232-c103-87af-fb63-30ba0f9d86f2@sero.name> <20180504145816.GD1720@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 04/05/18 10:58, Micha Berger wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 03:08:37PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > :> The question is: How does anyone go at night, as the minhag hage'onim > :> (? early rishonim?) includes Lag la-/baOmer night according to both > :> Ashk and Seph? > > : And the answer is that (a) Yom Simchas Rashbi, which was unknown in > : the days of the Ge'onim and Rishonim, begins at nightfall. Thus > : their words, which are about the day the plague stopped, aren't > : applicable to the new holiday, so those who drop aveilus for it do > : so from nightfall... > > You are okay with uprooting what was then a 700+ year old minhag, > nispahseit bekhol Yisrael, codified in the SA, in light of new > information? That's exactly the process question I'm asking about. Nothing is being uprooted. Something new has come. Just as when a local "Purim" or lehavdil a fast is declared. > If we were talking halakhah, I do not think we could overturn a > comparably accepted accepted pesaq because someone learned something > aggadic. > > But moving on to the hashkafic implications of your statement: Never mind > the need to believe that this new information is part of a "continuous > revelation" model of matan Torah; I already knew Chassidim differ from > what I was raised to believe on that. > > I wonder. According to RMMS, Yom Simchas Rashbi is a logical consequence > of the end of the plague. R' Aqiva couldn't teach the whole generation > anymore; so he started teaching 5 new leaders, so that they can take > over. One of whom was R' Shimon. So, what was revealed to the Ari (in > this understanding of how the Ari got his Qabbalah) that geonim and > rishonim couldn't have known about? They didn't know about the Zohar, let alone the Idra Zuta and R Shimon's request that people rejoice at his "hilula". -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 11:51:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 14:51:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:57 PM 5/4/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >Bottom line: They do it or they don't? > >Ben >On 5/4/2018 2:04 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >>Kabbolas Shabbos was not accepted in Frankfurt for some time, and >>I was told that in one place the Shatz did not wear a talis for it >>to show that it was not really part of the davening. > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the beginning are said responsively. The Shatz stands at the table where leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 4 12:06:28 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 15:06:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Judging The Credibility Of The Sages In-Reply-To: <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> References: <0B.D5.12295.C7FD0EA5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180504164155.GB13247@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <7E.8C.04381.0DFACEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 12:41 PM 5/4/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:03:11PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Let me begin with Daas Torah. >... >: The idea of the infallibility of religious leaders is, IMO, a >: result of the Chassidization of Yahadus. I do not believe that this >: was prevalent in the non-Chassidic world prior to WW II. > >It is also not normative Aggudist thought today. I cannot speak to the >popularity of the idea, but it's not what they mean when their ideologues >speak of it. Daas Torah has a number of formulations, none of which are >infallibility. This is simply a strawman nay-sayers like to address. Please see the article To Flee Or To Stay? at http://www.hakirah.org/vol%209%20bobker.pdf At the end of the article it says, "This article is excerpted from Joe Bobker's "The Rabbis and the Holocaust," to be published by Geffen Books in the summer of 2010." However, to the best of my knowledge this book was never published, and I have always wondered why. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 5 11:45:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 05 May 2018 20:45:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B"omer In-Reply-To: <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <06.A2.04381.3DC4CEA5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <99415458-eea9-d00f-3812-68c934c28f6b@zahav.net.il> <9C.FF.27933.55CACEA5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <1ed3f3d3-7cb6-927c-da0f-e22d19aa3a4e@zahav.net.il> Bseder. We are all agreed that even Frankfurt changed their seider Tefilla sometime in the last few hundred years. Many shuls have someone, even a child, say (sing) the tehillim from the bimah. Ben On 5/4/2018 8:51 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > Minhag Frankfurt says Kabbolas Shabbos, but the Tehillim at the > beginning are said responsively.? The Shatz stands at the table where > leining takes place and wears a talis. After Kabbolas Shabbos is over > he moves to the front where the Shatz normally leads the davening. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun May 6 01:53:37 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 11:53:37 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Farfetched Ukimtas Message-ID: Yesterday's daf (Zevachim 22) has another wild ukimta that seems to just be there to answer a question on an amora and not provide a sterile environment to learn out a new principle. Here is the gist of the Gemara: R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina states if the Kiyor does not contain enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim, it is invalid - "v'Rachatzu Mimenu Moshe v'Aharon u'Vanav." The Gemara asks a question from the following Baraisa: One may be Mekadesh from any Keli Shares, whether or not it contains a Revi'is of water (this is much less then the water needed for 4 people) Rav Ada bar Acha answers: The case is, the Keli Shares was carved into the Kiyor (so the water comes from the Kiyor, which contains enough water to be Mekadesh four Kohanim). I don't see any way that you can say here that the ukimta is to remove extraneous dinim etc. The ukimta here seems to serve one and only one purpose, explain the Barisa that it is not a question on an Amora. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From saul.mashbaum at gmail.com Sun May 6 06:41:09 2018 From: saul.mashbaum at gmail.com (Saul Mashbaum) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 16:41:09 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag B'Omer Message-ID: RYL >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. Saul Mashbaum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 05:28:41 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 15:28:41 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Dancing Around A Bonfire Message-ID: << And, the first mention that the Peri Eitz Chaim's "yom simchas Rashbi" is a day for our simchah is Chamdas Yamim. With the problem that raises. You also insert your own explanation of "yom simchas Rashbi". It could, after all, still be his yahrzeit, or as per your own rebbe (RMMS, in a letter to R' Zevin; unforunately I don't have a mar'eh maqom) that it was the day R' Aqiva started over with 5 talmidim -- thus, Rashbi's simchah as one of those 5. >> Fore details about the printing error to give rise to the idead that Lag Baomer is Rashbi's yahrzeit see http://seforim.blogspot.co.il/2011/05/ changing subjects one of the weirdest experiences I had was a bunch of black coated Chevra kadisha dancing about a grave in Bet Shemesh at 12 midnight with just a flashlight for light -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 6 07:21:11 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 17:21:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: <> OTOH there is the gemara that when there was the dispute in Yavneh between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. This story took place many years before talmidim of R. Akiva (who was junior at that time) died. If so Rashbi was a known talmid many years before R. Akiva revived Torah . As an aside other taananim survived the bar kochba wars including talmidim of R, Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at mail.aol.com Sun May 6 11:22:13 2018 From: t613k at mail.aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 14:22:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bow and Arrow on Lag B'Omer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16336b09884-c88-1c19@webjas-vaa039.srv.aolmail.net> In a message dated 5/6/2018 7:51:35 AM EST, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org writes: From: "Professor L. Levine" > This got me to wondering why a bow and arrow are associated with Lag B"Omer. > From https://goo.gl/kumYeX >> One custom often mentioned in connection with Lag BaOmer, though it is >> less common than formerly, is for the young students to play with bows >> and arrows. It is remarkable that the day devoted to the memory of Rebbe >> Shimon bar Yochai, who was so absorbed in Torah learning that he didn't >> even take time for prayers, is marked by having the youngsters take a >> break from their Torah studies..... Torah sages and their students learned Torah secretly in the woods, hiding from the Roman soldiers. They took bows and arrows with them and if they were found in the woods, they would say they were out hunting. That's what I was told when I was a little girl. I don't know if this is associated with R' Akiva and his talmidim, or with R' ShBY. As a child I thought the story was about young children and didn't realize until later that it must have been adult students with bows and arrows in the woods. (Yes I know Jews don't hunt for food or for sport, but maybe the Romans didn't know that. Or the Jews could plausibly say they hunted for hides and fur.) PS All my Areivims and Avodahs lately are deformed by great quantities of question marks. If anyone knows how to stop this from happening, please let me know. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com -- From driceman at optimum.net Sun May 6 17:58:21 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 19:58:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> RMB: > 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus > stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the > Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act > as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make > gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on > personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, > they are supposed to lead. > > RYBS's hesped for R CO Grozhinsky, "HaTzitz vehaChoshen" was made before > RYBS's split from Agudah. His thesis was that the same kohein gadol who > carries "Qadosh Lashem" on the tzitz is the same one who carries the > names of the shevatim on the choshen, and whose Urim veTumim is asked > questions of dividing nachalah or whether to go to war. Sounds much like > the same model. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? David Riceman From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sat May 5 12:17:25 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 5 May 2018 22:17:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Sacrificies Message-ID: Question: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat had to bring the animal to as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result in hundreds -- Eli Turkel From marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 7 04:19:36 2018 From: marty.bluke at mail.gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 14:19:36 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices Message-ID: R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he was permanently a Kohen; From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:37:00 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:37:00 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 06/05/18 10:21, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > This story took place many years before talmidim?of R. Akiva (who was > junior at that time) died. On the contrary, R Akiva was very senior at the time of these disputes. In the mishna in Rosh Hashana he was one of the two who counseled R Yehoshua to obey R Gamliel's order, and in Berachos when R Gamliel was deposed he was one of only three candidates considered to replace him. > If so Rashbi was a known talmid?many years before R. Akiva revived Torah > .?As an aside other taananim?survived the bar kochba?wars including > talmidim?of R, Yishmael What have Bar Kochva or his wars got to do with any of this? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 07:45:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:45:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> References: <0B40C764-63EF-4F2D-86EF-079F4776FC08@optimum.net> Message-ID: <44c411ba-2fee-9ae7-82d6-de3850c6417a@sero.name> On 06/05/18 20:58, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > RMB: >> 3- R' Dovid Cohen's formulation is based on melukhah. When malkhus >> stopped, muich of the king's power fell to the Sanhedrin. When the >> Sanhdring stopped, rabbanim inherited much of their authority, or act >> as their sheluchim in abstentia. Therefore, we are obligated to make >> gedolim our communal leadership. (Nothing to do with asking Daas Torah on >> personal issues, which this model does not speak about.) Right or wrong, >> they are supposed to lead. > How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim who are to guide them. There need to be askanim because the chachamim have no time for klal work; they're busy learning and will neglect it. So those who lack either the head or the bottom for full-time learning can be the administrators, and when they need guidance they will consult the chachamim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Wed Apr 25 14:17:16 2018 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:17:16 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Swordfish References: <20180425210332.GA5806@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5AEFEEE1.1030601@biu.ac.il> Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: >>From The Jewish Press >, >by RHSchachter, "Is Swordfish Kosher?", posted Apr 19th (5 Iyyar): ... > Because around 60-70 years ago, they asked Rabbi [Moshe] Tendler if > he could make a list of which fish are kosher and which aren't. Rabbi > Tender decided to list swordfish as a treife fish because he called > up an expert who told him scales on a swordfish are a different... ... >"L'maaseh, the Conservatives were right on this issue..." Wow! The attached has lots of relevant information. [Attachment stored at -micha] From zev at sero.name Mon May 7 08:00:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 11:00:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sacrifices In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 07/05/18 07:19, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > R' Zev Sero wrote on Areivim that Moshe retained the status of a Kohen > even after the 7 days of the miluim. It actually seems to be a machlokes > in Zevachim 102. The Gemara there has a discussion whether Moshe was > considered a Kohen and says k'tanay. Chachamim say, Moshe was a Kohen > only during the seven days of Milu'im (inauguration of the Mishkan); > others say, the Kehunah ceased only from Moshe's descendants, but he > was permanently a Kohen; Thank you. Note the context: Rav stated outright that Moshe was a cohen gadol, and the gemara cites this braisa to show his source, that he was ruling like the Yesh Omrim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 8 12:40:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 15:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 3000 Year Old Mansion Implies a Sizable Malkhus Beis David Message-ID: <20180508194052.GA19392@aishdas.org> >From . What struck me is what appears to be the weakness of the objection -- some of the results are from a poor source, and even though they converge with other results, we'll question the whole thing? Does This 3,000-Year-Old House Confirm King David's Lost Biblical Kingdom? By Owen Jarus, Live Science Contributor | May 3, 2018 02:50pm ET Archaeologists have discovered a sprawling, possibly 3,000-year-old house that suggests a biblical kingdom called the United Monarchy, ruled by King David and later Solomon according to the Hebrew Bible, actually existed. The archaeologists who excavated the house, at a site now called Tel Eton, in Israel, said in an article published online March 13 in the journal Radiocarbon that the date, design and size of the house indicates that a strong organized government existed at Tel Eton around 3,000 years ago. They added that this government may be the United Monarchy. The site is located in the central part of Israel in a region called the Shephalah. ... In their paper, Faust and Sapir argue that evidence supporting the existence of the United Monarchy is often not studied because of a problem they call the "old house effect." The site of Tel Eton, including the massive house, was destroyed by the Assyrians during the eighth century B.C. As such, the house held a vast amount of remains dating to that century, but relatively few remains that date to 3,000 years ago when the house was first built. This "old house effect" is a problem commonly seen in Israel and at archaeological sites in other countries, the archaeologists said. "Buildings and strata can exist for a few centuries, until they are destroyed, but almost all the finds will reflect this latter event," wrote Faust and Sapir, noting that archaeologists need to be careful to dig down and find the oldest remains of the structures they are excavating so they don't miss remains that could provide clues to the United Monarchy. Israel Finkelstein, a professor at Tel Aviv University who has written extensively about the United Monarchy debate, expressed skepticism about the results. Two of the four samples used for radiocarbon dating are olive pits, which pose a problem, he said. "The single olive pits come from fills [material that accumulated on the surface of the floor before the floor broke apart]. They have no importance whatsoever [for] dating the building. At Megiddo, my dig, samples like this, single items/fills, are not being sent to the lab to be dated, because they enter bias into the dating system," Finkelstein said. "There is no connection whatsoever between the finds at Tel Eton and the biblical description of the United Monarchy." Faust told Live Science he expects that some archaeologists would be critical of the use of material found in the remains of the floors for radiocarbon dating. He noted that all the radiocarbon dates, those from the olive pits and from the charcoal, converge around 3,000 years. "The convergence of the dates suggest that we are on safe grounds," Faust said. He also noted that one of the charcoal samples is not from the floor but from the foundation deposit (the chalice), strengthening the conclusion that the house was built around 3,000 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 38th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Yesod: How does reliability Fax: (270) 514-1507 promote harmony in life and relationships? From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue May 8 13:05:25 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 23:05:25 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer Message-ID: >>> In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. >>>> This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag in the places I have seen -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Tue May 8 15:31:28 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 01:31:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 11:05 PM, Eli Turkel via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > >>> > In Ashkenaz shuls it used to be the custom (and probably still is in some > places) that Kabbolas Shabbos was said from the shulchan where the Torah is > leined rather that from where the Shatz normally davened for the Amud. > This is to show that Kabbolas Shabbos was an addition to the davening. > >>>> > > This is the universal practice in Ashkenazi shuls in Israel. >> > > Just to be sure I assume Saul meant Ashkenazi as opposed to edot mizrach. > In terms of nusach both nusach sefard and nusach ashkenaz have this minhag > in the places I have seen > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Tue May 8 17:28:19 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 20:28:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Me > >> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? RZS: > > Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those > doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim > who are to guide them. Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. David Riceman From eliturkel at gmail.com Wed May 9 00:33:02 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:33:02 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: A while ago there was a debate about gebrochs while some condemned the minhag others defended it. I suggest reading an article by Brown https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 (4th on the list) It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those practices that can be traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a select few don't count. He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of elitism that only gedolim count. OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at most) His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in terms of protecting their communities from modernism. I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. Again see the above article for more details -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Tue May 8 21:46:46 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 14:46:46 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer & Rashbi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2700442c-cb3b-4267-b4bc-7e47e0d3efc8@yypwn-sl-yzhq-hkhn-blbyn> See also From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 02:53:57 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 05:53:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 01:31:28AM +0300, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: : In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but : parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together or : by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing up and : acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame Madlikin or only : at Kaddish before Barechu At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night (in the US, mostly Syrian), everyone chants everything together. No shatz, and no one taking the lead even section by section. As per the first clause above. Somoene takes the lead for Bameh Madliqin from their seat. Chazan starts at pre-Qaddish material for Arbit. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:12:47 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:12:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 18:31, Simon Montagu via Avodah wrote: > > In Sepharadic batei kenesset that I have seen, there is a different but > parallel minhag: Kabbalat Shabbat is recited by the kahal all together > or by individuals taking turns section by section with nobody standing > up and acting as Shatz. The Shatz typically begins either at Bame > Madlikin or only at Kaddish before Barechu In other words, the same as pesukei dezimra, or the ashre and uva letzion before mincha. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed May 9 10:59:33 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 19:59:33 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Baomer In-Reply-To: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> References: <20180509095357.GC19756@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At the Yemenite place I go to Friday night, everyone chants Kabbalat Shabbat together (same tune, every week, for the whole thing). An elderly person will get the kavod of saying the first line of Lecha Dodi out loud, but the rest is sung together. After Lecha Dodi, they say four lines from Shir HaShirim and then one person leads them in a "Bar Yochai" song (this kavod is auctioned off). After that, all together for BeMah Madlilin and Mizmor L'yom Hashabbat. On 5/9/2018 11:53 AM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > At the Sepharadi minyan I frequent Fri night . . . From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:21:40 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:21:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha (David Riceman) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 08/05/18 20:28, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: >> Me >> >>> How does this fit with Pesahim 112a al tadur b?ir sherasheha talmidei hahamim? > > RZS: >> >> Very nicely. R Akiva's advice clearly refers to the askanim, those >> doing the actual work of administering the city, not to the chachamim >> who are to guide them. > > Are there other examples of ?rosh? meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not the rav who guided him. Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. But at any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to do their job properly they can't be learning all day. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 05:27:09 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:27:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 03:33, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 9 12:54:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 19:54:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation Message-ID: Many years ago when my two oldest grandsons were in elementary school in yeshiva, they began to speak in a derogatory manner abut non-Jews. They had heard these things from their fellow students. Their father, my oldest son, and I made it clear to them that this was not the appropriate way to speak about human beings who were created by Ha Shem with a neshama. Fortunately, they listened to us and changed their attitude. No one is saying that one must be "buddy buddy" with gentiles, but they are to be treated with proper respect. I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters at http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/letter_11.pdf While I suggest that everyone read the entire letter, below are some excerpts from it. MISHPATIM. All these insights, however, are of value only if you truly live your life according to what you, as man and Yisraelite in God's world, with your God-given powers, have recognized. The first requirement is, therefore, that you practice justice: -Respect every being in your surroundings, as well as everything within yourself, as a creation of your God, -Respect whatever is theirs as given to them by God or as having been acquired according to Divinely sanctioned law. Let them keep, or have, whatever they are entitled by right to call their own; do not be a source of harm to -others! -Respect every human being as your equal. Respect him, his inner self as well as his outer garment-his body-and his life) Respect his property, too, as a legal extension of his body. Respect his claim to property or services that you have to render to him, 1 properly measured or counted, as well as his claim to compensation for harm done to his body or property. -Respect his right to know the truth and his right to freedom, happiness, peace of mind,P honor and a peaceful existence. -Never abuse the frailty of his body, mind or heart/ and never misuse your legal power over him. The Chukkim require of you: -respect for all that exists, as God's property: do not destroy anything! do not misuse it! do not waste! use everything wisely -respect for all the species: their order was established by God-do not intermingle them;u respect for all creatures: they are servants in the household of Creation; v respect for the feelings and instincts of animals;w respect for the human body, even after the soul has departed;x respect for your own body: maintain it, as it is the repository, messenger and instrument of the spirit; -limitation of your own instincts and animal-like actions: subordinate them to God's Law, so that, truly human and sanctified, they can help you attain the holy goal of mankind and will not turn you into a mere animal; -respect for your soul, when you nourish its tool, the body: supply the body only with such nourishment that will enable it to act as a pure and willing messenger of the world to the spirit, and of the spirit to the world, rather than giving it food that will induce sluggishness and sensuality; -concealment and sublimation of the animal in you, rather than according it too much respect and attention: only thus will the conflict within you ultimately be resolved, and the animal in you will also aspire only to the truly human; -lastly, respect for your own person in its purest expression-your power of speech. In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources can express a derogatory view of gentiles. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed May 9 19:50:36 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 22:50:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Torah Attitude Toward Gentiles, Animals, and Vegetation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 09/05/18 15:54, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have posted letter 11 of RSRH's 19 Letters [...] > [...] > In light of the above I simply cannot understand how some Torah sources > can express a [contrary view] How about because they are Torah sources, and are therefore not required to agree with your favorite 19th-century writer. On the contrary, you should ask how he could contradict Torah sources. (The answer being that he found some contrary sources which appealed more to him, so he adopted their view; that was his right, but nobody else is required to do the same.) -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From sholom at aishdas.org Wed May 9 08:15:51 2018 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:15:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 9 20:09:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 23:09:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] quick parshas Behar question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180510030910.GB2931@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 11:15:51AM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: : We know Rashi's famous question and answer: that shmita eitzel har sinai : here is to show us that this, too, and all the details, were also given at : har sinai. See my vertl at . That's the Sifra that Rashi is quoting. : My question, however, is: why davka _this_ mitzvah (shmita/yovel)? Other : mitzvos could have been used to demonstrate the point that Rashi mentions. Rashi mentions that shemittah isn't taught in Devarim. The Malbim explains that this is unexpected, since shemittah didn't apply until entering EY, and such mitzvos tend to be the ones introduced in Devarim. : Thoughts? I ran with it... Suggesting that the whole point is that the reductionist approach doesn't work to understanding Torah. This was brought to light bedavqa with a mitzvah that isn't needed to be known yet for its own sake. But the whole picture was given at Sinai, even shemittah, so that we can understand any of the picture. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 39th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Netzach sheb'Yesod: What is imposing about a Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliable person? From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 01:57:15 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:57:15 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim Message-ID: > I suggest reading an article by Brown > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/hillel/1633fd7c1ed2a4a7 > (4th on the list) Linking to gmail isn't helpful unless the article is already in ones gmail account (assuming one even has one). Even then it's unlikely to be fourth on everyone's list. Do you have a link to somewhere on the web? >> My apologies. See https://www.academia.edu/36530833/A_translated_chapter_from_The_Hazon_Ish_Halakhist_Believer_and_Leader_of_the_Haredi_Revolution_The_Gaon_of_Vilna_the_Hatam_Sofer_and_the_Hazon_Ish_-_Minhag_and_the_Crisis_of_Modernity_English_?auto=download&campaign=weekly_digest which has several articles besides the one by Brown, Alternatively, send an email to eliturkel at gmail.com and I can send the article -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Thu May 10 02:43:30 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:43:30 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh > between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it was Rashbi that was involved. I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya 3rd line in the widest lines near the bottom and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about 130-135 CE. Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died about 20 years earlier (see eg wikipedia on Gamliel II) It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 07:51:16 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 10:51:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Me: >> >> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. RZS: > > Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every > Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not > the rav who guided him. No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. > Ditto for the Resh Galuta, who (if he were a > yerei shamayim) would be expected to defer to the chachamim. Again the Reish Galusa determined public policy, the hachamim determined halacha. > But at > any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the > full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to > do their job properly they can't be learning all day. The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his role? David Riceman From micha at aishdas.org Thu May 10 09:08:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:08:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:51:16AM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : The claim that "da'as Torah" is derived from din melech is precisely the : claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise : in other fields... That's NOT the way I understood R' Dovid [haLevi] Cohen at all. We want a melekh, separate from the beis din hagadol. Although one person can be in both roles, like when Chazal refer to "Shelomo uveis dino." However, ba'avoseinu harabbim we lost the melukhah. The obligation of obeying the melekh devolved into obeyind the Sanhedrin. (This would have to have been some time between Gedaliah and Ezra, inclusive.) Obeying the melekh wasn't based on the melekh's comptenecy, but the need for order in running a society. (And, I guess some reason(s) why HQBH advised monarchy in particular as the means of getting that order, except according to some readings of RAYK. But RAYK didn't hold of the shitah we're looking at, so ein kan hamaqom leha'rikh.) Then, we lost the Sanhedrin. Today's rabbanim fill in -- either as their shelichim, or . The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. And just as the melekh might not be the expert across all of society, the Sanhedrin or today's rabbanim might not be. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 40th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 5 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Hod sheb'Yesod: When does Fax: (270) 514-1507 reliability/self-control mean submitting to others? From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 10 06:30:06 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93normal_practice=94?= Message-ID: <4ee8a413f67f49da89acceed596b8f72@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> I was bothered by the gemara-Megilla 26a where it says Jerusalem apartment ?owners? took ?gifts? by force as ?rental? from olei regal. The Beit Mordechai (2:16), who lived in the early 20th century, raises the same question and says since the normal practice in Israel was for renters to leave something for the innkeeper in addition to the rental payment, so innkeepers in Jerusalem would take it by force since they could not charge rent. He admits that it?s possible that this would be considered stealing but because of this ?normal practice? of leaving something, it?s almost like they had a legal claim and therefore they felt they could take the items. Interesting that I couldn?t find earlier authorities bothered by this but maybe I missed something. Any thoughts appreciated. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 08:15:24 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 11:15:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6f2cda5f-ce57-a7a3-36af-3cc0b767dc9f@sero.name> On 10/05/18 05:43, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > << > OTOH there is the gemara?that when there was the dispute in Yavneh >> between Rabban Gamliel and R. Yehoshua it wasRashbithat was involved. > > I've looked at all three disputes, in Rosh Hashana 25a, Bechoros 36a, > and Berachos 27b, and I could not find any mention of R Shimon. > > > Look on Berachos 28a at the end of the sugya?3rd line in the widest > lines near the bottom > and the student that originally asked the question was R Shimon Ban Yochai Thank you. > Rabbi Akiva was involved in the Bar Kochba revolt and so died about > 130-135 CE. Why do you suppose he was killed around that time rather than much later? If he was killed then, then he would have been born around 10-15 CE, have started learning Torah around 15-20 years before the churban, and have come back home with all those talmidim 4-9 years after it. Doesn't it seem more likely that his Torah learning started after the churban, and after Kalba Savua had resettled somewhere and reestablished himself, which would mean his death was also several decades after Bar Kochva? > Rabban Gamliel is assumed to have died?about 20 years earlier (see eg > wikipedia?on Gamliel II) > > It is difficult to believe that the students of R Akiva died before the > story in Yavne when R Yeshoshua, R Tarfon, R Gamliel etc were all alive. Why is this at all difficult to believe? What makes it difficult? > So the assumption is that the students of R Akiva died about the time of > the Bar Kocba revolt whether in battle or from disease is irrelevant If you assume both that the students died then and that he himself died then, then when did he have time to teach his five new students? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu May 10 05:57:21 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 08:57:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim Message-ID: At 10:44 PM 5/9/2018, R Eli Turkel wrote: >I suggest reading an article by Brown >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2Fu%2F0%2F%23search%2Fhillel%2F1633fd7c1ed2a4a7&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce7f2ed89c0b04a153b9008d5b61fe896%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C1%7C636615170523842613&sdata=KHDvBEGhAvUsiq8oxUjnwZDX%2Bt0hzpo7D25XR2o0CPA%3D&reserved=0 > > >It is an English translation from his book on the Chazon Ish > >Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent >past >basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those >practices that can be >traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable. Even achronim except for a >select few don't count. >He further argues against the article by Haym Soloveitchik and claims that >the attitude of CI was already present in Russia before WWII and even >communities not affected by modernism. It was basically an attitude of >elitism that only gedolim count. > >OTOH Hungarians led by Chasam Sofer strongly fought to preserve mighagim of >the kehilla. This was even more stressed by the Chassidic community. In >fact what distinguishes one chassidic group from the other ones is their >unique set of minhagim most of them fairly recent (last 100-200 years at >most) > >His conclusion is that both approaches have their pluses and minuses in >terms of protecting their communities from modernism. >I conclude that the debate over gebrochs mirrors the debate between >litvaks and chassidim over the value of "recent" minhagim. I believe you are referring to an article that recently appeared in Hakirah that is at https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjyg6mKmfvaAhVCuVkKHeutBeYQFggtMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hakirah.org%2FVol24Shandelman.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3XZQch0OGem-hvrLpivEHB (I cannot access the link you give above, because I do not have a google account.) I found this article most disappointing and sent the email below to the Editors of Hakirah Subject: The Gaon of Vilna, the Hatam Sofer, and the Hazon Ish: Minhag and the Crisis of Modernity To the Editor: I must admit that the title of this article truly attracted my attention. However, after reading it I was sorely disappointed. The author writes at the beginning of the article, "We have seen that from the 1930's to the 1950's at least, the position of the Hazon Ish remained consistent and unyielding: A minhag has no normative status of its own, and at best can only be adduced as evidence for an actual halakhic ruling, which in turn derives its authority strictly from corroboration by qualified halakhists." He then goes on to point out that both the GRA and the Hazon Ish did not observe many minhagim that most people do observe. However, he does not give us a list of the minhagim they did not observe nor does he give us a list of the minhagim that they did observe. Surely these should have been included in detail in this article. Later in the article the author writes, "These two Orthodox groups [the Hungarian Orthodox and the latter-day hasidic] turned minhag into an endless opportunity for the creation of new humrot. And this only goes to show that it is not always a broken connection with the 'living tradition' that facilitates the creation of a dynamic of humrot. Again, I think that the article should have included a detailed list of these Chumras. In my opinion, this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much substance. What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about nothing." Dr. Yitzchok Levine -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 10 06:58:22 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:58:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Wild Wild State of Kashrus Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/2bPRtq It was an innovative way of saving money. The municipality worked it out that they would outsource the financial cost of the Department of Health inspectors. From now on, it would be the restaurants themselves that would hire the health inspectors. The restaurants would pay them, they would take out the FICA taxes, the worker?s comp ?? the restaurant would handle it all. The move ?worked wonders? for the state of health in the restaurants. Eateries that were previously designated with a C minus rating were now rated A plus and health violation write ups were down too. The astute reader will detect an obvious problem here. This is what is called a classic conflict of interest. The upgraded rating and lowered violations are probably due to the unique financial arrangement. When an inspector is paid by the people he supervises there is a risk that his judgment and actions will be unduly influenced. The safety of the restaurant consumers has been placed at risk. Indeed, the general public has also been placed in danger. SAME FOR KASHRUS The same should be true in the field of Kashrus. The mashgiach is there to protect the public from eating non-kosher or questionable items just as the health inspector is there to protect the public from anything that can compromise their health and safety. RAV MOSHE FEINSTEIN ZT?L Indeed, last generation?s Gadol haDor, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, in his Igros Moshe (YD Vol. IV #1:8) writes that the Mashgiach should not be paid by the facility receiving the hashgacha, but rather should only be paid by the Vaad HaKashrus itself. Indeed, he should have no direct monetary business dealings with the company. See the above URL for more. Keep in mind that when it comes to private hashgachos the person giving the supervision is always paid by the person or organization being supervised. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 10 09:28:29 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 12:28:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> Message-ID: <2dd3576d-2d8e-762e-5afc-570ef2dbaa9c@sero.name> On 10/05/18 10:51, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: > Me: >>> >>> Are there other examples of "rosh" meaning subordinate? It's a surprising usage. > > RZS: > >> >> Certainly in more recent usage it's not at all surprising; in every >> Jewish community the Rosh Hakahal was the layman who did the work, not >> the rav who guided him. > > No. The kehilla had the authority, not the rav. The rav was an expert > on halacha and (in smaller kehillot) the town judge, but the kehilla voted > on policy, with each household having some share of the vote. But if the rav paskened that they were wrong they had to obey him. >> But at >> any rate there can't be any doubt that R Akiva is referring to the >> full-time administrators, because his whole point is that if they're to >> do their job properly they can't be learning all day. > The claim that ?da'as Torah? is derived from din melech is precisely the > claim that learning Torah all day does produce authoritative expertise in other fields. And indeed it does; how do you see a contradiction from R Akiva? He didn't say TCh don't have the knowledge to run the town, but that they don't have the time. > Incidentally, it also raises a question: why is there a melech at > all, shouldn?t the leader of the Sanhedrin be more qualified for his > role? Same story: He is qualified, but he has no time, so he will neglect the work and the town will suffer. That's why we need and have askanim to run things, but they have to know that they are not in charge but must defer to the chachamim. Note that not even the biggest haredi calls for the gedolei hatorah to sit in the knesset themselves, let alone to be mayors and city councillors. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From driceman at optimum.net Thu May 10 12:43:38 2018 From: driceman at optimum.net (David Riceman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 15:43:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: RMB: > > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. I already raised the objection of R Akiva?s advice to his son; RZS?s response is conceptually clean, but (a) it doesn?t fit the words of the text, and (b) according to you it is internally contradictory - - if the rabbis who run the city have a din melech how can they be supervised by others? There?s also the sugya of b'nei ha'ir kofin zeh et zeh ?. Naively the authority of the kehilla comes from din melech, but then why b'nei ha'ir, why not the town rabbi? David Riceman From saulguberman at gmail.com Thu May 10 11:51:40 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 14:51:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > RMWillig has a kezayis of 22.5cc, and writes that Middos veShiurei > haTorah pg 277 reports matzah has half the weight of an equivalent > volume of water. So, RMW says a kezayi matzah weighs 11.25gm. (1cc of > water weighs 1gm, by definition. So, the weight of 2cc of matzah is 1gm.) > We buy matzah by the pound, so you can estimate a kazayis pretty > accurately if you know how many matzos are in a 1lb box. (2lb boxes, > divide by 2, naturally.) There are 40.3 or so kezeisim in a pound. > > matzos / lb -> kezayis matzah > 6 -> 2/13 of a matzah > 7 -> 1/6 > 8 -> 1/5 > 9 -> 2/9 > 10 -> 1/4 > > :-)BBii! > -Micha I wish I had remembered to use this at the seder. My rabbi tells me that he got an electric scale this year and had the grandkids make shiurim bags for the sedorim on erev pesach. Has the benefit of having something for the kids to do and moves the seder along. When I mentioned to my Rabbi that I was looking into smaller shiurim,that are smaller than the plastic sheet that is so popular, he was not interested in continuing the conversation. My daughter informed me that one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in the base of their calculation. Saul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:13:50 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:13:50 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <1be6e645-8a41-f71b-3d11-7c7d0823c398@zahav.net.il> IIRC the Ramban writes that David took a census because he made a mistake, he thought that the issur didn't apply anymore. I found that Ramban to be shocking. How is it that no one, no rav, no navi, came to David and said "No, you can't do that"?? Answer - David never bothered to ask and no one had the job of being his poseik. Similarly, there are certain acts that the chachamim praised Hezkiyahu for doing and others that they disagreed with him. I read that as meaning "after he made the decisions, the rabbanim weighed in". I don't get the feeling from any navi that they stood by the sides of the kings and told them "yes you? can do this, no, you can't do that". They only weighed in when society or the melucha was totally out of sync. or when they were specifically consulted or when God told them "Go to the king". I admit that there is an incredible tension between even the good kings, the ones trying to rule according to the Torah, and the prophets (forget the evil kings). The former? were not able to live up to the expectations of the latter. From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 11 03:50:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:50:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] melucha In-Reply-To: References: <1FE7F0E7-6C61-48F3-BB49-79F2D580F004@optimum.net> <20180510160829.GA15455@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180511105019.GA17192@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:43:38PM -0400, David Riceman via Avodah wrote: : RMB: : > The claim of this version of DT is that just as today's rabbanim took : > over WRT pesaq, they also inherited the role of filling in for melekh. : : The melech?s commands are binding, and he has an obligation to give : commands as needed. Hence this opinion implies that Rabbis should be telling us : what to do in non-halachic contexts, and we should do as they say. Not "implies", we are talking about R Dovid [haLevi] Cohen's explanation of Da'as Torah -- it's the thesis he is trying to justify! However, unlike some other versions of DT, it only speaks of rabbis as communal leadership. Not as advisors on personal matters (whose open questions are not halachic in nature). It has this in common with [pre-Mizrachi] RYBS's version of DT, "hatzitz vehachoshen". : I already raised the objection of R Akiva's advice to his son... There is also the historical precedent of the leadership of the Vaad Dalet Aratzos. There is no record of rabbinic leadership on civil issues. They dealt with halachic matters, eg shochetim, batei din, a law to require haskamos on all published sefarim... :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 41st day, which is micha at aishdas.org 5 weeks and 6 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Yesod sheb'Yesod: What is the ultimate measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 of self-control and reliability? From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 10 21:02:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:02:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The article is one chapter from an entire book. You walked into the middle of a movie, that's all. Ben On 5/10/2018 2:57 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > In my opinion,? this article contains a lot of "fluff" and not much > substance.? What came to mind after reading it was "Much ado about > nothing." From isaac at balb.in Thu May 10 21:23:47 2018 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 14:23:47 +1000 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Eli Turkel asked: During most of the years in the desert there were only 3 cohanim. However, > from most sacrifices a portion is given to a cohen. This is most difficult > for shelamim. During the years in the desert anyone who wanted to eat meat > had to bring the animal as a sacrifice of which a portion was given to the > cohen. How could 3 cohanim eat all these portions from 600,000+ families of > whom if only a tiny fraction ate meat (in addition to the man) would result > in hundreds I suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim. [The Ramban in the 3rd Shoresh there isn't happy with this] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 11 01:40:10 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 08:40:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Shiluach Hakein, Performance of Message-ID: >From yesterday's OU Halacha Yomis Q. How is the mitzvah of Shiluach Hakein performed? A. Before sending away the mother, one should have the intent to fulfill a mitzvah. There is a difference of opinion as to how one should send away the mother. According to the Rambam (Hilchos Shechita 13:5), one should grab the mother bird by the wings and send her away. Though the Torah prohibits capturing the mother-bird when she sits on the nest, when the intention of grabbing the mother is to send her away, this is not considered an act of capturing. However, Shulchan Aruch (YD 292:4) rules in accordance with the Rosh and the Tur that one need not grab the mother bird. Rather, one may use a stick or the back of one?s hand to send away the mother. According to these Rishonim, the important factor is not that you grab the mother but that you cause her to fly away. The Binyan Tziyon (Chadashos 14) writes that some Rishonim disagree with the Rambam on two points. They maintain that if one grabs the mother and sends her away, a) the mitzvah is not fulfilled, and b) one transgresses the prohibition of taking the mother-bird (even though the intent is to send the bird away). It is therefore best to use a stick or, as Rav Belsky, zt?l advised, to push the mother bird off the nest with an open hand, the palm facing upwards so that the mother bird is not accidentally caught. Once the mother bird is chased away, one should pick up the eggs or chicks and take possession of them. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Fri May 11 02:25:19 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 12:25:19 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Rashbi Message-ID: Instead of answering Zev's questions directly let me try and describe how I see the events. I fully admit that the sources of dates for Taananim seem very sparse and I welcome any more information >From the chabad site R Yochanan be Zakai dies in 74 The Sanhedrin under Rabban Gamliel moved about 86 Bat Kochba Rebbelion ended in 133 R Akiva put in prison 134 Mishna completed 189 ------------------------------------------ First most historians take the story that R Akiva (along with several others) lived for 120 years as an exaggeration. Typical dates given are 50-135. This also implies that magic split into 3 sections of 40 years each is also an exaggeration This would give his learning under Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua as after the death of R Yochanan ben zakai about the year 75 when he would be 25 years old I again stress that all dates are speculation. It seems unlikely that R Akiva would have 24000 students when so many older teachers were around. Hence, extremely unlikely that this happened while the yeshiva was in Yavne under Rabban Gamliel. The one date I saw for the death of Rashbi was 150. What seems to be clear is that Rebbe compiled the Mishna after the death of all 5 talmidim of R Akiva (of course we know that the compilation was done over a period of time beginning at least with R. Meir and probably R. Akiva and earlier). Pushing off the death of R. Akiva decades later would give little time for the activities of his talmildim after his death before the time of Rebbe who is the next generation. One date I have seen for Rebbe is 135-220 (again approximately) R Sherira Gaon lists the year 219 as the year Rav moved to Bavel The gemara (Kiddushin 72b) states that Rebbe was born when R Akiva died which gives the birth of Rebba as about 135 assuming he died as part of the Bar Kochba revolt (which the Chabad site seems to also assume) As an aside the dates of Rebbe would seem to be connected with the debate over who was Antoninus see Hebrew Wikipedia on Reeb Yehuda HaNasi This post started with my claim that Rashbi was a student in Yavneh years before the plague that kille3d the 24000 students and so he became a student of R Akiva later in life. I note that the other talmidim also had other teachers. Thus, the gemara notes that R Meir also learned with R. Yishmael and certainly with R. Elisha ben Avuyah though R. Akivah was his main teacher 'The students were given semicha by R Yehudah be Buba R Benny Lau claims that R. Yehuda bar Ilai was mainly a talmid of his father and R Tarfon and only secondary by R. Akiva. R Yisi ben Chalfta also learned mainly from his father and then R. Yochanan ben Nuri both of whom stressed the traditions if the Galil. We have no statements of R. Elazar ben Shanua in the name of R. Akiva. R Benny Lau concludes that the two "talmidim muvhakim" of R. Akiva are R. Meir and Rashbi but both of these also had other teachers besides R. Akiva. Hence, we cannot take the story literally that R. Akiva went to the south and found 5 youngsters who became his students. Rather all 5 were already serious talmidei chachamim before R. Akiva. In addition even later many kept up relations with R. Yishmael -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brothke at mail.gmail.com Mon May 14 09:54:07 2018 From: brothke at mail.gmail.com (Ben Rothke) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 12:54:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel Message-ID: I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential chillul shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:19:14 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 02:51:40PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : My daughter informed me that : one of her seminary Rabbonim wrote a sefer on measurements and his are even : smaller than RMW. Here is a link. http://margolin.ravpage.co.il/kzayitbook : It seems to me that everyone is making assumptions and leaps somewhere in : the base of their calculation. But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be invalid anyway? We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more binding than historical reality? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 44th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Gevurah sheb'Malchus: What type of justice Fax: (270) 514-1507 does unity demand? From saulguberman at gmail.com Mon May 14 12:28:24 2018 From: saulguberman at gmail.com (Saul Guberman) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:28:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > But does that prevent their pesaqim from being binding? In other words, > the vast majority of the observant community accept that a kezayis > is somewhere between the Rambam's estimate and the Chazon Ish's. Does > that mean that regardless of what an archeologist might prove an actual > olive's volume was, lehalakhah a shitah outside that range would be > invalid anyway? > > We know the ammah changed in size over the centuries between Sinai > and Churban Bayis Sheini. Is this due to a change in height of people > causing a change in shiur, or is it that pesaqim in shiurim are more > binding than historical reality? > I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon May 14 12:06:21 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 15:06:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180514190620.GC7492@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:33:02AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : Brown makes the argument that CI and much of litvishe gedolim in the recent : past basically rejected minhagim as the practice of the masses. Only those : practices that can be : traced to the gemara or rishonim are acceptable... So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 15 04:05:47 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 07:05:47 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . Shemos 12:39 teaches us: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. Various meforshim deal with halachic problems of this pasuk. For example, they were commanded to eat matzah, and being rushed out had nothing to do with it. Or, chometz was forbidden, and being rushed had nothing to do with it. This thread WILL NOT discuss those issues. If you want to discuss those issues, please start a new thread. My questions have nothing to do with halacha. They relate to the sequence and timing of the events of that night. They relate to "lir'os es atzmo" - I try to imagine myself in Mitzrayim that night, and certain parts of the story don't make sense to me. I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: 1) When was that dough made? 2) When was that dough baked? We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for the trip. I find it difficult to imagine that the flour and water were not mixed until the last 17 minutes before morning. Another problem: Given that they DID take unbaked dough out of Mitzrayim, what happened when they finally decided to bake it? Obviously, if they were able to bake it, it must be that they were not hurrying out of Egypt any more. So why didn't they just wait a little longer, and allow the dough to rise? (Someone might suggest that it was only in Egypt that "it did not become chametz", and that they did let it rise after getting out, but the pasuk disproves that, by telling us that "they baked it into matzah", i.e. that the dough never rose at all, at any point.) There are other questions that could ask, in addition to those, but I'll stop here for now. advTHANKSance Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Tue May 15 05:11:46 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:11:46 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Meat in the Midbar and Korbon Shelamim Message-ID: R' Issac Balbin wrote: " suggest looking at the Sefer Hamitzvos of the Rambam, Mitzvah Lamed Daled where he describes that though the Mitzvah of was on the Cohanim to carry the Aron on their shoulders (Naso 7), the command was fulfilled by the Leviim, because there weren't enough Cohanim, however, in the future it would only be done by Cohanim." There is a fundamental difference between carrying the aron and the avoda in the mishkan. The Rambam writes explicitly there in the sefer hamitzvos that the mitzva of carrying the aron, was given to the leviim in the midbar "v'af al pi shezeh hatzivuy ba laleviim baet hahe". We do not find any such commandment in the Torah regarding avoda in the mishkan. The Torah ONLY commands/allows Aharon and his sons to do Avoda in the mishkan. Therefore there is no room to say that leviim did avoda in the mishkan in the midbar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at yahoo.com Tue May 15 09:53:47 2018 From: gershonseif at yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 16:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know.TIA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 12:31:10 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:31:10 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yom HaMeyuchas In-Reply-To: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1578533566.1500545.1526403227602@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20180515193110.GB20847@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 04:53:47PM +0000, Gershon Seif via Avodah wrote: : Does anyone here know who coined this phrase Yom HaMeyuchas? I asked : many b'nei Torah and nobody seems to know. The oldest usage Bar Ilan and I could find was the one I had initially thought of -- the AhS. In OC 494:7, RYME gives 3 reasons for not fasting on that day. #2: And more: On that day, Moshe told them to becom qadosh. Uregilin liqroso "Yom haMyuchas" because of this. Which makes me think the AhS was saying it's just mimetic. Otherwise, I would have expected "uregilin le-" to have been replaced by a source. More than that, his vanilla "uregilin" is more typical of his description of accepted Litvisher practice. He tends to report others' practices by saying whom, even if it's a recent import to Litta. For example, se'if 3 mentions that the Chassidim haQadmonim were up all night on Shavuos, as per the Zohar, "vegam agah harbeih osin kein" and in the morning they go to miqvah, all as a zeikher leMatan Torah. Staying up all night gets a "they", not a "we", and is labeled as lower-case-c chassidic / Zoharic custom. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 15 12:39:06 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 15:39:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bamidbar Message-ID: <24722D2C-AAFF-48C2-A4B0-144A6165528A@cox.net> THEY DID; SO DID THEY DO According to the Sages, not a single letter is superfluous in the Torah. Anything repeated is repeated for a definite reason and with additional meaning. We may not always comprehend the reason or meaning but that doesn't detract from its significance. Also, there may be various interpretations and reasons given by commentators but that is what makes the Torah so profound. This Shabbos we begin the fourth Book of the Torah, Bamidbar. This portion is read the Shabbat before Shavuot, with rare exception. This year it is read immediately before Shavuot. The reason it usually is read the Shabbat prior to Shavuot is because there is a connection between the subject matter of this portion and the theme of Shavuot. There is a verse in Bamidbar in which appears a seeming redundancy. I grappled with it for a while and came up with an interesting chiddush. The verse states (1:54) "The Children of Israel did everything that God commanded Moses, so did they do." The first part of the verse already says "they did everything," etc. Then at the end it again says: "so did they do." Why is it repeated? First, the Children of Israel did "everything that God commanded Moses" because that was what God commanded and they did it as it was a mitzvah. But then, when it states at the end of the pasuk "so did they do," it already had become part of them. In other words, the initial motivation for performing a mitzvah is because God has commanded it, but then after doing it, one does it automatically and out of love and joy (as opposed to being mandatory). It becomes part of the person -- ("so did they do)." Similarly, when the Jewish people accepted the Torah they said "Naaseh v'nishma" (Exodus 24:7) which means "We will DO and (then) we will understand." In other words, we first will do out of duty and obligation since we are accepting the commandments of the Almighty, and afterwards, we will be doing (observing the mitzvot) out of love and joy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 15 15:45:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 18:45:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos Message-ID: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> R' Mordechai Torczyner (CC-ed) gave 3 shiurim (chaburos?) on koseiv and mocheiq this past march. Including #2, available here . He raises an interesting (to me, at least) question: Catan, formerly The Settlers of Catan, is a game with a board that changes with each play. The board is tiled from hexagons (and played on the edges and corners between them), where each hexagon has a picture on it denoting a kind of terrain, and by implication the reasources one can get from that terrain. This honeycomb is then held in place by a hexagonal frame, which is assembled from 6 pieces, each of which has jigsaw-puzzle-like edges at the join to hold the whole thing together. See RMT cited in shiur SSJ 16:23 (source #5 on the resource page attached to the YUTorah recording). He says you can play a game with letters or pictures IFF one is placing letters or pieces of letters or pictures or their pieces next to eachother. But not if they are made qeva or put in a frame. And only if they do not attach or stick to one another. So, here is RMT's question... Catan's hexagons do not combine to make one picture, but they do combine to make one "message" -- a usable game board. Is assembling a Catan board mutar on Shabbos? And if not, I wish to add: What if the game is played on a pillow, making it hard to keep the pieces interlocked, and the players agree to end the game before Shabbos? If the assembly is neither made to last nor is there intent for it to last, would it then be mutar? Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Today is the 45th day, which is micha at aishdas.org 6 weeks and 3 days in/toward the omer. http://www.aishdas.org Tifferes sheb'Malchus: What is the beauty of Fax: (270) 514-1507 unity (on all levels of relationship)? From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:11:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:11:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Settling Catan on Shabbos In-Reply-To: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> References: <20180515224556.GF20847@aishdas.org> Message-ID: The frame that comes with the newer editions of Settlers is quite flimsy so I don't believe it can be regarded as "fixing" the hexes together in a way that could even raise this shayla. But leravcha demilsa one can simply lay out the board without the frame, as one does with the older editions (my set is close to 20 years old and therefore doesn't have this problem. From zev at sero.name Thu May 17 00:30:27 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 03:30:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Further to your question, we've discussed the time of yetzias mitzrayim before, and some have asserted that it was early in the morning, but the Torah says "be'etzem hayom", and Rashi explicitly says this means high noon. At the time of the discussion I couldn't find this Rashi, but it's in Devarim 32:48. So not only did they have all night to prepare food for the journey, they also had all morning. And yet we're to believe they didn't get around to it until just before noon. However, leaving aside the improbability of this timing, my understanding of the actual event is that they started making dough to bake bread, and would have left it to rise but immediately they got the announcement that they were leaving, so they shoved it straight into the oven and baked it there and then, as matzos. Alternatively, given that they had already been commanded not to bake chametz, we can say that because of this commandment they always intended to bake it immediately, but as it happened the command became irrelevant because the announcement came just as they finished kneading it and were about to put it in the oven, so even had they *not* been commanded they would still have had to bake it as matzos. Which of course is why the commandment was given in the first place. Either way, though, my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the perspective of before it was baked. From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 05:55:56 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 12:55:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Is one permitted to drink a beverage that had been left uncovered and unattended? A. The Gemara (Avoda Zara 30a) discusses the laws of giluy (beverages left uncovered). Chazal forbade drinking certain beverages that were left uncovered, due to concerns that venomous creatures, such as snakes or scorpions, might drink from the beverage and leave behind some of their venom. Tosfos (Avoda Zara 35a: Chada) writes that in the countries where we live, this concern does not exist, and beverages left uncovered may be drunk. Ordinarily, once Chazal issue a gezeira (decree), the gezeira remains in force even if the reasoning no longer applies. This case is different since the original gezeira was only enacted for places where snakes were common. Accordingly, Shulchan Aruch (YD 116:1) rules that one may drink a beverage that was left uncovered. However, the Pischei Teshuva (116:1) writes that the position of the Vilna Gaon and the Shelah Hakadosh is not to leave drinks unattended. The commentaries to the Maaseh Rav explain that the Vilna Gaon held that there are secondary reasons for Rabbinic decrees that apply even when the primary reason is no longer relevant. Common practice is to follow the position of the Shulchan Aruch, though some adhere to the more stringent opinion -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:26:24 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:26:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me - perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 17 06:27:40 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 13:27:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Designer Babies? Message-ID: Assume that gene editing technology reaches the point that "designer babies" are possible to an extent. Assume that "intellectual acuity" genes can be identified and screened for. Would a Desslerian philosophy allow (require?) mass screening and eventual genetic tinkering to provide a gadol hador material baby? What if there was a clear tradeoff that this gene also resulted in a materially shorter life expectancy? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Thu May 17 08:29:01 2018 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (M Cohen) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 11:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Generators on Shabbos in Israel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <09af01d3edf3$c8a0bed0$59e23c70$@com> I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul Shabbos. With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the potential Chillul Shabbos? Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before Shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on Shabbos. ..at least 2 major differences between the two. A. the electricity you use is generated in real time, as you demand it (by turning on the switch) B. but the water you use was made and treated in the past, and now simply stored in water towers until you demand it (by opening your tap) (as the water is used, new water is pumped into the tower at intervals. only a gramma). No melacha is done when you use your water C. electricity production in EY typically involves d'orisa issurim of burning fossil fuels, boiling water to create steam etc D. but water production may only be an rabbinic prohibition (electric pumps and filters, adding chemicals, etc) ======= Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found. (Email Guard: 9.1.0.2894, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.22240) http://free.pctools.com/ ======= From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Thu May 17 09:00:40 2018 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:00:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] minhagim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: RMB wrote: 'So, nothing from Tzefat -- eg no Qabbalas Shabbos? They didn't wear yarmulkas? I am missing something here.' I think the point was there was a tendency not to value or keep minhagim, not an absolute rule. And they possibly gave different status to minhagim which clearly originated with gedolim not un-named masses, eg kabalas shabbos. As for the yamulka example, that's got a makor in shas and is mentioned by rishonim, no? Perhaps another example would be Shir hamaalos before bentching which was innovated by the Chida I think. You'd need a whole range of example and a list of who kept what in order to be more certain, I haven't read the rest of Dr Brown's book to know if he does that. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 17 12:48:18 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 19:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? Message-ID: The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of externalities at all. YL Unfortunately, the term "chasid," meaning a pious person, has become misunderstood because of misconceptions foisted upon us from without. A "chasid" is a person who totally gives himself in love, does not look out for himself but relinquishes his own claims on the world in order to live only for others, through acts of loving kindness. Far from retiring from the world, he lives in it, with it and for it. For himself, the chasid wants nothing; but for the world around him, everything. Thus we find the term applied to David, a man who, from his earliest youth, labored ceaselessly for the spiritual and material welfare of his people and left the shaping of his own destiny, including redress of the wrong done to him by Sha'ul, entirely to God. No doubt you are familiar with the saying shelach shelach v'sheli shelach - -"He who says 'That which is yours is yours and that which is mine also is yours' is called a chasid." Again, a life of seclusion, of only meditation and prayer, is not Judaism. Torah and Avodah (study and worship) are but pathways meant to lead to deeds. Our Sages say, Talmud Torah gadol she'mavi l'y'day maaseh- "Great is study, for it leads to action" - the practical fulfillment of the precepts. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com Thu May 17 13:03:16 2018 From: gershonseif at mail.yahoo.com (Gershon Seif) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 20:03:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <306356533.2453717.1526587396833@mail.yahoo.com> On Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:48 PM, Professor L. Levine wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters I note that > there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of dress, > speaking a particular language, etc. Indeed, there is no mention of > externalities at all. YL Indeed! See Hirsch's commentary to Beraishis 5:24 where he writes very strong words about this. He says that Chanoch lived a life of seclusion after giving up on his generation. Hashem removed him from the earth because "what use is he here" (or something to that effect). From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu May 17 20:24:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 05:24:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. At one time calling a child a girl did not mean that you were assuming the child's gender? (girl meant a young person of either sex). Ben On 5/17/2018 9:48 PM, Professor L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The following is from Letter 15 of RSRH's Nineteen Letters? I note > that there is no mention of a chasid wearing a particular kind of > dress,? speaking a particular language,? etc.? Indeed,? there is no > mention of externalities at all. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu May 17 20:51:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 23:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros Message-ID: . I had cited Shemos 12:39: > They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves > of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were > driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare > any provisions for themselves. R' Zev Sero suggested: > ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked > dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. > I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it > has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the > perspective of before it was baked. It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words to have that meaning, that's okay. But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, > their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Fri May 18 14:41:25 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:41:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: See Malbim, who suggests that according to R Yose Haglili, who says that the issur chometz that year was only for one day, that one day was the 14th, not the 15th, but since with kodshim the night follows the day it was from the morning of the 14th till the morning of the 15th. Therefore they started baking bread at daybreak, intending to let it rise, but they were immediately ordered to leave and had no time. Alternatively, since most meforshim understand the one day to be the 15th, he suggests that they mixed the dough intending to bake matzos, but they didn't even have time to do that and had to take the unbaked dough, which would naturally have become chometz during their journey, but miraculously it did not rise and when they got where they were going they baked it as matzos (or, according to pseudo-Yonasan, the sun baked it, which presents halachic problems of its own, since sun-baked bread doesn't have the status of bread). On 17 May 2018 at 23:51, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > . > I had cited Shemos 12:39: > >> They baked the dough that they took out of Egypt into loaves >> of matzah, because it did not become chametz, for they were >> driven out of Egypt and could not delay. Nor did they prepare >> any provisions for themselves. > > R' Zev Sero suggested: > >> ... my understanding is that they did not leave with unbaked >> dough but with dough that had been swiftly baked into matzos. >> I am positing that one may still call dough "dough" after it >> has been turned into bread, if one is speaking from the >> perspective of before it was baked. > > It is my opinion that this totally ignores the plain meaning of the > pasuk. But that's just my opinion. If RZS wants to force those words > to have that meaning, that's okay. > > But there's another pasuk we need to deal with, and that is Shemos 12:34 - > >> They picked up their dough before it would become chametz, >> their leftovers wrapped in their garments on their shoulders. > > This pasuk is not reminiscing about "the dough that they took out of > Egypt". The narrative is being told in real time. This pasuk is > unequivocal: Whenever it was that they packed up to leave, the stuff > they picked up was unbaked dough. Furthermore, the pasuk tells us that > the dough was not yet chametz, yet still had the potential for it. > > Hence my question: If they didn't leave until morning (and I thank RZS > for reminding me that this might mean "not until noon"), then why > didn't it become chametz? I really don't understand. > > The only answer I can think of is that all night long, they did not > make any dough, for whatever reason. (And if they left at noon, then > they didn't make any dough in the morning either.) But then, just > before they left, at some point between 1 and 17 minutes prior to > departure, THAT'S when they decided to mix the flour and water > together. ... Ummmm, no, I don't think so. > > Akiva Miller > _______________________________________________ > Avodah mailing list > Avodah at lists.aishdas.org > http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org -- Zev Sero zev at sero.name From doniels at gmail.com Mon May 21 03:55:24 2018 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 13:55:24 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=8B_Generators_on_Shabbos_in_Israel?= Message-ID: R' Ben Rothke wrote: > I know there are those that use generators on Shabbos in Israel, > AIUI, so as not to be ne'neh from chilul shabbos. Also, apparently, as a form of protest. > With that, in modern electricity plants, there is so much that is > automated, it's almost on auto-pilot. So what exactly is the > potential chillul shabbos? R' Israel Meir Morgenstern put out an entire Sefer on this - http://www.virtualgeula.com/Stock/Books/Show/11160 - and regular updates as booklets. According to him, it's not nearly as automated as they pretend. IIRC he did on-site research, not relying on what the Electric Company wants people to believe. > Based on that, shouldn't these people also draw their water before > shabbos? As water treatment plants also have workers there on shabbos. There are those who do that too. Check the roofs in Charedi neighborhoods - those with huge black reservoirs are doing just that. That said, I asked his father, R' D. A. Morgenstern shlita about getting one of those water reservoirs and he said it wasn't necessary. (I didn't ask him about electricity.) - Danny From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun May 20 14:10:28 2018 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 00:10:28 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance Message-ID: <> What effect does this have on shabbat -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon May 21 23:19:20 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 02:19:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 17/05/18 09:26, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on a table) > one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking their Yahrzeit? > What is the source of this practice? (Me ? perhaps the original practice > of only one person saying Kaddish). I assume you mean in a shul where most of the kadeishim are said by multiple people. If so, I have never seen or heard of such a practise until you described it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 03:52:26 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:52:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Please see Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part I at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FCT8ohf&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=CAO%2FIULzGszY4Io1E7bD7BDzBnrECxpPQX6SlNtHF%2BU%3D&reserved=0 and Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Part II at https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2FKVjQ16&data=02%7C01%7C%7C312d9d0d9d5843a86c7108d5bf9e095b%7C8d1a69ec03b54345ae21dad112f5fb4f%7C0%7C0%7C636625607839879930&sdata=RY%2FzL7M3vLMiFdh1MlJcdiMfMVPVPkRXx%2FtVGOhRiWk%3D&reserved=0 If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 05:04:49 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 08:04:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Yahrtzeit Kaddish? Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > How widespread is the practice of reserving (through a bang on > a table) one kaddish at the end of davening for someone marking > their Yahrzeit? What is the source of this practice? (Me ? > perhaps the original practice of only one person saying Kaddish). In all the shuls in Elizabeth NJ, the practice is as follows: If no one has yahrzeit, then there are no restrictions on Kaddish. If someone does have a yahrzeit that day, then the Kaddish after Aleinu is said only by him/them (including anyone still in shloshim). As RJR guessed, this is in deference to the original minhag (still practiced in German shuls) that no Kaddish is ever said by more than one person. [A gabbai usually calls out "Yahrzeit!" in addition to the table-banging.] In Shacharis, the other kaddishes (such as after Shir Shel Yom) are said by all kaddish-sayers. After mincha, an additional Tehillim (usually #24) is recited, so that the other kaddish-sayers will have the opportunity to say kaddish. This is done at maariv too, except for situations (such as in Elul) when there's another Tehillim anyway. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:12:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:12:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 06:52:26AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly : going there and seeing the falls is not nothing. But it could still not be worth the learning missed. There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more "nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger We are what we repeatedly do. micha at aishdas.org Thus excellence is not an event, http://www.aishdas.org but a habit. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aristotle From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 04:01:35 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:01:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Birkat Kohanim Message-ID: 1) The Priestly Threefold Benediction had the following: The first blessing has three words, the second five, the third seven. They remind us of the foundation for all blessings: The tree Patriarchs, the five books of the Torah, and the seven Heavens. Bachya 2) Israel said to God: "Why do you tell the priests to bless us? We desire Your blessing alone!" Said the Holy One: "Although I have told the priests to bless you, I shall stand in their company to give effect to the benediction." Therefore, at the end of the section it states explicitly (verse 27): "I will bless them." Midrash Numbers R. (11:2, 8, end). 3) Why do we ask God first to bless us and then keep or guard us? Because, if He does give us material blessings, we need to be protected from the evil results such prosperity may bring. The Hasidic Anthology P.359 quoting the Tzechiver Rebbe. 4) There is an interesting connection between Parshat Naso, which is the longest parsha in the Torah, comprising 176 verses, and the 119th Psalm (of Tehillim), which also contains 176 verses and is the longest in the book of Psalms. This psalm carries the distinct title, "Torah, the Way of Life." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Tue May 22 03:57:58 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 06:57:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Who Sings In This World Will Sing Also In The Next." Joshua b. Levi, Sanhedrin, 91b Message-ID: <37067FE1-055D-4504-A143-8FB433E508DE@cox.net> LA'AVOD AVODAT AVODA VA'AVODAT MASA 4:47... Note the four words in a row with the same root. (Probably the only place in the Torah with four words in a row with the same root). Rashi says the Avodat Avoda (kind of a strange phrase) refers to playing musical instruments. As far as Avodat Masa (Work of burden) is concerned ? the Gemara in Chulin comments that only when there is heavy manual labor involved, then there is an age limit for the Leviyim (as with the others). And it seems that the age limit of 50 was only for the carrying. In other words, a Levi was able to continue serving in the Mishkan after 50, but only for SHIRA and SH'MIRA. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue May 22 04:29:51 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 07:29:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor Message-ID: We are told that Hashem spoke the words Shamor and Zachor together, and I have presumed that we heard them together as well. But the Ramban (Devarim 5:12) suggests that "He (Moshe) is the one who heard Zachor, and they (heard) Shamor." The ArtScroll Chumash (page 969) quotes Rav Gedalya Shorr as explaining: <<< At the highest spiritual level - the one occupied by Moses - the awesome holiness of the Sabbath is such a totally positive phenomenon that one who understands its significance could not desecrate it. Thus, the positive remembrance of the Sabbath contains within itself the impossibility of violating it, just as one who loves another person need not be warned not to harm that person. This was the commandment that Moses "heard." Lesser people, however, do not grasp this exalted nature of the Sabbath. They had to be told that it is forbidden to desecrate the sacred day; when they absorbed the Ten Commandments, they "heard" primarily the negative commandment *safeguard*. >>> Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue May 22 08:19:05 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 11:19:05 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On 22/05/18 06:52, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > If one is to make a bracha on seeing Niagara Falls then clearly going > there and seeing the falls is not nothing. Not at all. One says a bracha on many things that one would much rather *not* see, and that one would certainly not go out of ones way to see. Also consider the rainbow. If one happens to see it one says a bracha, and quite a positive one, but one still should not tell others to go outside and see it. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:27:43 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:27:43 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote: : RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet : he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. But AGAIN, no one obligated RAMiller to hold like RSRH. Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim around, etc... : R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or : taken a plane and learned on the plane. : Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the : world as it is, namely, mostly gray. But this isn't about how RAMiller lived now about life in general. It's advice to a school, an institution dedicated to learning. What I am actually taken by is the importance RAM is giving girls' education. Contrast that to the number of seminaries today that are so exclusively focused on inspiring that textual education is limited. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When we are no longer able to change a situation micha at aishdas.org -- just think of an incurable disease such as http://www.aishdas.org inoperable cancer -- we are challenged to change Fax: (270) 514-1507 ourselves. - Victor Frankl (MSfM) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 06:54:52 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:54:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shamor v'Zachor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522135452.GC14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 07:29:51AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : Just last week, I would have wondered how the same voice of Hashem could be : understood so very differently by the different groups. Maybe it's not so : supernatural after all. If you have not yet heard about "Laurel and Yanni", : I suggest checking it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanny_or_Laurel Except that the Rambam believes the Qol had nothing to do with accoustics or physical sound to begin with. That the term is just being used as a metaphor to help those of us who never experienced such things. (Moreh 2:48) Tir'u baTov! -Micha From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 06:52:57 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:52:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:12 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >But it could still not be worth the learning missed. > >There is something counterintuitive here, as there are numerous examples >of R' Avigdor Miller calling on his audience to utilize their wonder at >the amazingness of the beri'ah as a tool to building emunah and bitachon. >And yet Niagra Falls... This is why I am guessing that he meant more >"nothing compared to the cost", and not zero in an absolute sense. RSRH certainly was involved in learning to a great extent, and yet he took the time to go to Switzerland to see, I presume, the Alps. I know that Rav Schwab also went to Switzerland. Many gedolim in Europe went in the summer to vacation resorts, and there are pictures of Mir students at summer camp. See http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rkimble/Mirweb/YeshivaStudents2.html R. Miller could have learned in the car ride to Niagara Falls or taken a plane and learned on the plane. Yiddishkeit is IMO based on balance, which requires seeing the world as it is, namely, mostly gray. I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:08:39 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:08:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What is a Chasid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522140839.GD14915@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 05:24:24AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : The nature of language is that meanings of words change over time. ... With that in mind as a caveat, let's look at Chazal's chassidim harishonim. Aside from famously spending 9 hours a day (12 on days when Mussaf is said?) on tefillah, Our sages repeated [in a beraisa]: The early Chassidim would hide their thorns and broken pieces of glass in the middle of their fields 3 tefachim [roughly one foot] deep, so that it would not [even] stop the plowing. Rav Sheishes would put them to the fire, Ravan would place them in the Tigres [the large river alongside which his home city of Pumbedisa was built]. Rav Yehudah said: The person who wants to be a chassid [he should take care] to follow the words of [the tractates on] damages. Ravina said: The words of [Pirqei] Avos. Others say in response [that Ravina said]: the words of [the tractate] Berakhos [blessings]. - Bava Qama 30a "Amrei leih" as the end is most ocnsistent with what we normally discuss about them. However, notice everyone else assumes a BALC definition of chassidus. They come up in Seifer Hakabiim I as among the bravest of warriors, and among the last to accept the permissibility of fighting on Shabbos. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 07:22:35 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 10:22:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The night of Makas Bechoros In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522142235.GE14915@aishdas.org> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 07:05:47AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : I have distilled my problem down to two simple and direct questions about : the dough mentioned in the above pasuk: : 1) When was that dough made? : 2) When was that dough baked? We are talking about 600,000 or so homes. I assume there are a range of answers. And when the Torah says they didn't have time for it to become chameitz, it means that in many or most of those homes... enough that the haste came to characterize how we left. Just trying to aid the imagination by three-dimensionalizing the peopl involved. : We were forbidden to leave our homes until morning, and it is totally : irrelevant to me whether you prefer to define "morning" as Alos or as : Hanetz. Either way, there way plenty of time from when Par'oh and the : Mitzrim went shouting in the streets, "Get out!" until we were able to : leave our homes. I estimate that we had several hours to prepare food for : the trip... Already in this discussion it was raised that in Shemos we're told we left "be'etzem hayom". And yet, in yesterday's leining, we're told "hotziakha H' E-lokekha loylah" (Devarim 16:1) Rashi ad loc (based on Sifrei Devarim 128:5, Barakhos 9a) says that we got permission from Par'oh at night (Shemos 12:31). So there was, as you write, PLENTY of warning. But they also had get their neighbors' valutables, pack, get the animals in hand, find Yanky's favorite bottle, figure out who was getting custody of those kids wandering around that neighborhood that choshekh obliterated... So, little things like what to pack for lunch was rushed, and in most cases, that meant they were left with matzah. (Despite likely promising themselves that if they ever got out of Egypt, they would never eat lechem oni again!) Your 1 mil assumption, BTW, might come from the matzah of the seder they were commanded to make, and that this matzah was not necessarily KLP. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue May 22 11:02:42 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:02:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls In-Reply-To: <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> References: <9F.58.27933.327F30B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180522131209.GB14915@aishdas.org> <20180522142743.GF14915@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <24.27.04381.9FB540B5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:27 AM 5/22/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Although here there is no contradiction. A class trip to Niagra Falls >will reduce learning. A gadol's trip the alps does not necessarily. >It's not like schoolkids will be learning on the bus, shift their sedarim >around, etc... The question was asked about girls' high schools, not yeshiva boys! Do you really think he was concerned about the reduction in learning for the girls! I think not! He held that Niagara is "nothing" something that makes no sense to me in light of the fact the Falls are one of Hashem's wonders. [Email #2.] Here is what R. Miller actually said in response to a question about going to Niagara Falls. the question was asked about high schools taking girls to the Falls. As you can see, his statement about Niagara Falls being "nothing " had nothing to do with bitul Torah. I find his response baffling to say the least. YL Rav Avigdor Miller on Niagara Falls Q: What is your opinion of the importance of a high school taking their students on a trip to Niagara Falls? A: My opinion is that it's nothing at all. You have to travel so far, and spend so much money to see Niagara Falls?! Let's say, here's a frum girls' school. So they have the day off, or the week off, whatever it is. And where do they go? To Niagara Falls. What's in Niagara Falls?! A lot of water falling off a cliff. Nothing at all. Nothing at all! It's the yetzer harah. The yetzer harah makes everyone dissatisfied. People who are really happy with what they have are almost impossible to find. They may say, "We're happy," but they're not. And therefore, they're always seeking something else. And so, they travel to Niagara Falls. You might say differently, but I'm telling you, that's the reason why people travel to Niagara Falls. It's the yetzer harah that is making you dissatisfied. So you have to go to see water falling off a cliff. But really it's nothing at all. Of course, you yield a little bit to the yetzer harah in order that more girls should come to your school. You have an outing every year to get new talmidos, new students. But really it's nothing at all. TAPE # E-193 (June 1999) From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:41:12 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Shiurim -- They're Smaller Than You Think In-Reply-To: References: <20180514191914.GE7492@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180522184112.GC16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 03:28:24PM -0400, Saul Guberman via Avodah wrote: : I would say there would be a change. It seems to me that everyone wants to : be empirically correct on this calculation. The big problems are trying to : area measurement(etzbah), or weight measurements (diram) to equal volume : measurements (kzayis). It would seem that none were precise, unless they : were using a particular persons' thumb and forearm. >From what I posted in the past from the AhS (OC 373:34), is seems the definitions themselves were not constants. A person is supposed to be using their own thumb, fist or forearm when the din is only about them. And standardized numbers are only invoked for things like eiruv where one has to serve many people and "ameru chakhamim denimdod lechumerah" -- use an ammah that covers a very high percentile of the people relying on it. And I tried to discuss what this would mean for shiurim like kezayis, where a person isn't using his own body or something he could only own one of, as a measure. But the discussion went in its own direction. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I have great faith in optimism as a philosophy, micha at aishdas.org if only because it offers us the opportunity of http://www.aishdas.org self-fulfilling prophecy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Arthur C. Clarke From micha at aishdas.org Tue May 22 11:33:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:33:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:10:28AM +0300, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: : > By 2025, 10,000 satellites will provide constant Israeli video : > surveillance of the Middle East sufficient to carry out targeted killings ... : What effect does this have on shabbat How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space that has security camteras? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Tue May 22 16:41:12 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 19:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sattelite surveillance In-Reply-To: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> References: <20180522183320.GB16489@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, May 22, 2018, 2:33 PM Micha Berger wrote: > How is this materially different than the problem of walking into a space > that has security camteras? No major difference except that some people still avoid security cameras. As they become more common it will be harder to do. It is already difficult to go to many hotels over shabbat. As these devices appear everywhere some argue that poskim will be forced to accept some minority opinions or else we all stay home From llevine at stevens.edu Wed May 23 07:53:38 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 14:53:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: From today's Hakhel email bulletin. THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg From micha at aishdas.org Wed May 23 10:12:19 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:12:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:53:38PM +0000, Professor L. Levine forwarded (from Hakhel, who were forwarding as well): :> THE BENEFITS OF VASIKIN! The following important information is posted :> at a Vasikin Minyan in Los Angeles, California. :> http://www.hakhel.info/archivesPublicService/MaalosDaveningNeitz.jpg It's very al-menas-leqabel-peras collecting a list of havtachos and segulos.. There is the stretch from the Rambam onward talking about how davening haneitz is better, or how one should daven as soon after as possible. (Which implies kevasiqin is superior, but not actually saying that.) But the general tenor of the list is about mystical rewards; even the references to the gemara. I didn't think it would be your speed. Also, Hakhel pushed my button on a pet peeve. Whomever at Hakhel writes titles knows diqduq better than whomever sent in about the poster. (Compare the subject line of this thread'S "K'Vosikin" with the quoted text's "VASIKIN".) "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. The words are "kevasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. No "the" there to remove; omitting the "ha-" is just wrong. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The meaning of life is to find your gift. micha at aishdas.org The purpose of life http://www.aishdas.org is to give it away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Pablo Picasso From zev at sero.name Wed May 23 10:21:31 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:21:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <2f7061f4-8f98-52f7-67af-3204e6dd8b76@sero.name> On 23/05/18 13:12, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > And davening neitz is AZ, a form of zoolatry. That would be davening *laneitz*. I'm not sure what "davening neitz" might mean, but whatever it is, it's not AZ. I wonder about those who, on a plane going directly to or from EY, daven out the side windows. Are they davening to the Great Penguin Spirit at the South Pole? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Wed May 23 10:23:14 2018 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 17:23:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Making a bracha on Niagara Falls Message-ID: <0A36D278-B7B9-4326-9245-B993DE48CB97@tenzerlunin.com> ?I knew R. Miller very well, and he saw the world in only black and white. IMO opinion he lived a life of extremes. He even "resented" having to go the Chasana of a grandchild in Cleveland. I do not know of any other grandfather who would have felt that way, do you?? I am certainly no chassid if Rav Miller. But criticizing anyone, and certainty not criticizing a Talmid chacham, for personal feelings about a family matter, seems to me to be in poor taste. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed May 23 12:42:02 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:42:02 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin References: Message-ID: At 01:12 PM 5/23/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >The words are "KEvasiqin", as a person needn't be vasiq to participate, >and haneitz, with a qamatz under the hei, hif'il -- causing to twinkle. I use the terminology K'Vosikin, but Hakhel used Vasikin so I left it. I have often quipped that the only people who know Dikduk are maskilim! >:-} (Note the wicked grin.) Regrading segulos, I found the following of interest. From a footnote to letter 15 of the 19 Letters of RSRH "Segulah" denotes a property belonging permanently to an owner, to which no one else has any right or claim (cf. Bava Kamma 87b). YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 05:59:56 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 12:59:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? Message-ID: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 24 06:01:44 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 13:01:44 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life by a community. Do you agree? It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit and then no more rain falls. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu May 24 10:39:09 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 17:39:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?Does_Ru=92ach_Ra=92ah_=28negative_spiri?= =?windows-1252?q?ts=29_still_exist_today=3F?= Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru?ach Ra?ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra?ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra?ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye. Scientists have revealed the presence of numerous invisible forces in the universe, such as gravity and electromagnetic waves. In fact, scientists today theorize that dark matter, which no one has ever seen, accounts for 80% of the matter in the universe. Just as G-d created indiscernible physical forces in the universe which physicists have shown to exist, Chazal identified invisible spiritual forces that potentially impact negatively on both the body and soul (see Teshuvos Vihanhogos 1:8). The Gemara (Shabbos 109a) states that when awakening in the morning, a person must wash his or her hands (three times) to remove Ru?ach Ra?ah. Until one does so, one must be careful not to touch the mouth, nose, eyes or ears so as not to allow the Ru?ach Ra?ah to enter into the body. Also, one may not touch food, since the Ru?ach Ra?ah will spread to the food. Although the Maharshal (Chulin 8:12) questions whether any form of Ru?ach Ra?ah still exists today, the consensus of most poskim is that this is still a concern. The Halachos of removing Ru?ach Ra?ah from one?s hands are codified in Shulchan Aruch (OC 4:2-5). If one touched food before washing in the morning, the Mishnah Berurah (4:14) writes that bedieved (after the fact) the food may be eaten, but if possible the food should be rinsed three times. The Gemara warns us about other forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah (damaging spirits). However, the Magen Avrohom (173:1) writes that there are some forms of Ru?ach Ra?ah that no longer pose a danger. For example, the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru?ach Ra?ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru?ach ra?ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one?s hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon.montagu at gmail.com Fri May 25 00:10:22 2018 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:10:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> References: <30180523171219.GC31715@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > "Vasikin" describes my grandfather a"h's minyan at the kotel. They were > all vasiqin; the youngest regular was over 80. And davening neitz is AZ, > a form of zoolatry. Wikipedia tells me they worshipped hawks in Etype > (in the form of Horus), Hawaii, Fiji and North Borneo. > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and I cringe every time I go past. But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 04:51:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 07:51:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 03:10 AM 5/25/2018, Simon Montagu wrote: >This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards >went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing >towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", and >I cringe every time I go past. > >But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" >from the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun >"netz" from the root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There >certainly is such a word meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 >in the sar hamashkim's description of his dream and in Hazal. Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not found in TANACH, so why not this one? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 06:49:29 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 09:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 07:51:45AM EDT, Prof. Levine wrote: : Isn't modern Hebrew filled with all sorts of new words that are not : found in TANACH, so why not this one? Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different topic. People are trying to "do halakhah" without understanding the language the categories they're trying to implements are labeled in. Without understanding the language of Chazal, we are missing a lot of subtlety about what they meant. With bigger problems (if less about din) if you don't know the workings of the language of Tefillah, Tehillim or Chumash. Judaism without diqduq is a paler, less nuanced, thing. I expect you have a LOT from RSRH in your cut-n-paste library on this. Earlier, at 10:10:22AM IDT, Simon Montagu wrote the post that Prof Levine was replying to: : But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. There is a noun "ketz" from : the root KTZTZ meaning "end", why shouldn't there be a noun "netz" from the : root "NTZTZ" meaning "shining" or "sunrise"? There certainly is such a word : meaning "bud", it occurs in Bereishit 40:10 in the sar hamashkim's : description of his dream and in Hazal. Nitzotz. Yeshaiah 1:31 uses it to refer to a spark, as it's something that starts a fire. Comes up a number of times in Chazal. Most famously to people who daven Ashkenaz, Shabbos 3:6: nosenin keli sachas haneir leqabeil nitzotzos. There is a beis hanitzotz in the BHMQ. Libun requires nitzotzos coming out of the keli. "Nitzotzos ein bahen mamash". (Shabbos 47b) BUT... getting back to that nuance theme... Haneitz is when there is enough light to make things like that sparkle. It's before alos, which is when the first spark of the sun is visible. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Our greatest fear is not that we're inadequate, micha at aishdas.org Our greatest fear is that we're powerful http://www.aishdas.org beyond measure Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anonymous From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 07:38:32 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:38:32 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 09:49 AM 5/25/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >Because this isn't Modern Hebrew (Abazi"t as RSMandel calls it). This >is halachic jargon that is also being used in Judeo-English and Yiddish. >There is something sad about the widening gap between Leshon haQodesh >and Abazit, as the latter adopts more terms, ideas and biases from >English and other Western languages. But that's an entirely different >topic. Sadly, with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and texting, the English language is, IMO, going down the drain. People do not spell properly, write things that are not words, etc. This is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 08:22:41 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:22:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <5969e7ba87a746d9b371d04c05f6c0bb@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525152241.GC9702@aishdas.org> This isn't an MO issue, even if the subject line mentions the affiliation of the mechaneikh. For many people in yeshivish minyanim I attend, davening with a tzibbur is something one does between gaps in looking at a seifer. And among the yeshivish-lite (Shababnikim?), minyan is an excuse to get together for the qiddush. We really don't know how to daven. And all the time we spend teaching how to learn contributes to that. Defining religious inspiration in terms of learning, new knowledge, makes it hard to find what the point is in saying the same words yet again. When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. We define it those terms, tefillah won't get anywhere. On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:01:44PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Interesting insight from a MO mechaneich-The generation that did not have : the gap year in Israel was more likely to be able to move to a community : and be inspired later in life by a community Rabbi. The generation that : did have the gap year experience but returned home to be close to their : prior levels of engagement are less likely to be inspired later in life : by a community. Do you agree? I think so, because gap year subtlely teaches the message that true spirituality is incompatible with "reeal life". And that's why they need to go to a 1 year religious experience, with no job, no secular studies, no other concerns, not even the usual setting, in order to get inspiration that is supposed to last year the rest of your life. I believe it's an underdiscussed factor (among the many others) as to why so many MO youth go yeshivish during gap year or upon return. That implied message is not fully compatible with TuM or TiDE. That said... There are other factors. Telecom means you can hear from a famous rosh yeshiva regularly, and don't need to "settle" for someone local as a role model. Never mind that you can regularly connect with the LOR, so that he is actually in a position to better model the role. Also, the whole universal post-HS yeshiva thing feeds the RY-centric view (outside of chassidishe admorim) of religious leadership now prevalent, rather than the rabbinate. The shift from Agudas haRabbanim to the Agudah's (or in Israel, Degel's) Mo'etzes haRabbanim. Secondary effects: There is less tie and sense of belonging to a particular qehillah. More and more people daven in a handful of places, because this one is more convenient Fri night, another Shabbos morning, a third for Shabbos afternoon, Sunday, weekdays... Qehillah could be a source of positive peer pressure when inspiration is running low. But only if you feel attached to one. (An LOR mentioned to me this effect as a factor in OTD rates...) As per the famous machgich line: It's chazaras hasha"tz, not chazaras haSha"s! : It reminded me of the simple agricultural pshat as to why we immediately : go to def con 5 fasting if a little rain falls, the crops sprout a bit : and then no more rain falls. Although it's less that no more rain falls as much as the crops no longer accept irrigation water. Okay, the metaphor doesn't really work. A good rav who one can interact with regularly may be more useful :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals micha at aishdas.org is not as important as http://www.aishdas.org what you become by achieving your goals. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Henry David Thoreau From llevine at stevens.edu Fri May 25 08:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos Message-ID: Halacha L'kovod Shabbos - "Tanning/Sun-bathing on Shabbos" According to some Poskim it is prohibited to intentionally tan in the sun on Shabbos. Nevertheless it is permitted to walk or sit outdoors on a sunny day even if there is the probability of becoming tanned (even if one would be pleased that this happened - so long as one is not intentionally tanning) because the tanning is not intentional. One may also apply a thin and pourable suntan lotion for protection against sunburn when walking or sitting outdoors. However, one may not use a cream. S'U Minchas Yitzchok 5:32, Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchasa 18:70, Sefer 39 Melochos YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Fri May 25 08:56:20 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:56:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Questions on Theologically Motivated Message-ID: <3CB5DF8F-56E4-482D-BA72-9328800F007E@cox.net> From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. 1) What is the difference between ?The religious person? and ?the truly religious person?? 2) What exactly do you mean by "cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:11:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:11:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: <3E.21.26088.199F70B5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180525134929.GB32450@aishdas.org> Message-ID: In this case, the problem pre-dated the smart? (or cell) phone. On 5/25/2018 4:38 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Sadly,? with almost everyone (except me) using smart phone and > texting,? the English language is, IMO,? going down the drain.? People > do not spell properly,? write things that are not words,? etc.? This > is the way things are and Hebrew will be spared either. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Fri May 25 10:05:52 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:05:52 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular Message-ID: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Ever wonder what is the nafka mina of deciding if secular people are tinok sh'nishba or not? Here is a biggy. There is (apparently) a machloket between Rav Kanyevski and Rav Edelstein if it is permitted to donate a kidney if it may end up in someone secular. RK believes it shouldn't be done because he paskens like Rav Elyashiv that no one today has the din of tinok sh'nishba and therefore they shouldn't get this type of help from the religious. RE paskens like the classic Chazon Ish psak that today's secular people do have the tinok din? and therefore it is permitted to donate a kidney to a secular person. See the article (Hebrew) for more details. http://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/558795 From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 09:31:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:31:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated ? In-Reply-To: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <0b2e3b21b378488caf02df4735e3666f@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525163124.GF9702@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:59:56PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious : person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are : theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic : inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral : creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a : Supreme Law?" : Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would : be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a : judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? I think it's self-evident. If the gov't is "of the people and by the people" (regardless of "for the people", appologies Pres Lincoln), then the only way to really seperate church and state would be to separate church and people. And "church" here includes not only all religion, but all religious stances. Including atheism, agnosticism, apathy and Sherleyism. A person's vote should be informed by their values. And a person's values by their religious stance -- whether religious, "truly religious", or an atheist. After all, an atheist cannot phrase abortion or end-of-life issues in terms of souls and therefore their etheism will inform their vote when Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice is a key issue. (Looking at you, Ireland!) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man micha at aishdas.org is how he treats someone http://www.aishdas.org who can do him absolutely no good. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Samuel Johnson From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:11:20 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:11:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Professor L. Levine" T >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? A. In many places, the Gemara discusses Ruach Ra'ah, ayin horah, sheidim and other negative spiritual forces. Though the Rambam interpreted many of these references in Torah literature in a homiletical manner, most Rishonim understood them in a literal sense, and the Shulchan Oruch and other halachic codifiers discuss practical implications of Ruach Ra'ah and other negative forces. Though people might view such matters as unscientific and mere superstition, it should be noted that much of reality is not visible to the naked eye....? .....the Gemara (Yoma 77b) writes that during the course of the day, one must wash their hands before feeding bread to a young child; otherwise a Ru'ach Ra'ah will affect the bread. The Tur (OC 613) writes that this form of ru'ach ra'ah no longer exists (though it is still present when waking in the morning). As such there is no longer a requirement to wash one's hands before touching bread that one will feed to a child. YL ? >>>>> ? It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children.? ? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 10:05:24 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 13:05:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] theologically motivated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16398431932-c8d-935e@webjas-vaa194.srv.aolmail.net> From: "Rich, Joel" >From "Scalia Speaks" - "The religious person - the truly religious person - cannot divide all his policy preferences into those that are theologically motivated and those that proceed from purely naturalistic inclinations. Can any of us say whether he would be the sort of moral creature he is without a belief in a supreme Lawgiver, and hence in a Supreme Law?" ? Me- how would you answer this question? How would an atheist? What would be an acceptable answer for a religious person to give if asked at a judicial confirmation hearing in the US? In Israel? KT Joel Rich ? ? >>>>> ? There is no constitutional requirement, no legal requirement, no ethical requirement and no logical requirement for each individual to erect a wall of separation between church and state in his own heart and mind.? ? --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:52:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:52:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> >>>>> It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their children. --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ============= IIRC R? A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri May 25 12:26:01 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 15:26:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> <32d8e9df82c143e3bcdf750840538eb7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180525192601.GC25353@aishdas.org> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 05:52:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : IIRC R' A Soloveitchik explained sheidim this way. It was ruach ra'ah, as per our discussion. Thus, neigl vasr. I think RAS's understanding was that Chazal were using evidence-based reasoning. People were getting sick, and since bad vapors were believed to be the cause of disease, Chazal presumed there was a ru'ach ra'ah. Which means that given that we today attibute disease to microbes, we would transvalue ruach ra'ah to refer to germs. I don't think too many others understand ru'ach ra'ah as a physical threat. Rashi (Taanis 22b "mipenei ruach ra'ah") understands ru'ach ra'ah to be a sheid entering the person -- "mipenei ruach ra'ah: shenichnas bo ruach sheidah..." and then he might drown or fall and die. Perhaps psychiatric illness? In which case, there is no clear transvaluation to today's science, as minds kind of straddle the physica - metaphysical fence. Sheidim /are/ intellects; so how do we map sheidim talk to rationalist psychology talk? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything. micha at aishdas.org If you want time, you must make it. http://www.aishdas.org - Charles Buxton Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri May 25 09:30:34 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:30:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2 Message-ID: It is often confusing when trying to determine whether an item is subject to bishul akum or not. This article should help. YL Click here to download "Bishul Akum - Specific Products Part 2" From JRich at sibson.com Fri May 25 10:50:45 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:50:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Donating a kidney if the recipient may be secular In-Reply-To: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> References: <41883547-fa18-fff3-ad8c-f0dc9b51e277@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <8849942693d54a55aab7bd43e07dddc7@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/901388/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/from-the-rabbis-desk-choosing-a-recipient,-diverting-tzedakah/ Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz-From The Rabbi's Desk - Choosing a Recipient, Diverting Tzedakah Listen to the 1st part-lots to discuss KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sat May 26 12:17:24 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:17:24 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Ben On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Toby Katz via Avodah wrote: > >>>>> > > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be bacteria.? > So parents should definitely wash their hands before feeding their > children. From t613k at aol.com Fri May 25 14:07:40 2018 From: t613k at aol.com (Toby Katz) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 17:07:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? Message-ID: <1639920e25b-c96-3738@webjas-vaa110.srv.aolmail.net> From:?"Prof. Levine" Date:?Wed, 22 Aug 2012 Subject:?Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol? One may download this article that appeared in Tradition at http://www.mesora.org/mezuza-gordon.pdf Towards the end of this article the author writes To claim, then, that the Divine inscription, which directs the attention of the Jew to God, is possessed of its own potency, generating protective benefits, perverts a spiritual instrumentality into a cultic charm.... YL >>>> ? I hope I will be forgiven for resurrecting an old, old thread -- from 2012.? But I recently came across something when I was preparing for my Pirkei Avos shiur, and it made me think of this old thread. ? This is from _Ethics From Sinai_?by Irving Bunim.? On Pirkei Avos 5:22 he talks about the difference between the disciples of Avraham and the disciples of Bilaam.? The former have a sense of security; the latter have no sense of security in the world.?? ? ---quote-- Today we have all sorts of insurance policies: fire insurance, flood insurance, life insurance. On one level they represent a wise precaution [but mainly] the man of piety places his trust in the Almighty. When he closes his place of business at night, he knows there is a mezuzah on the door, to betoken His protection. At bedtime he recites the Shema, to invoke His protection. This is his basic insurance policy.... . The Sages tell of Artaban IV, the last King of Parthia, who sent his friend Rav a priceless jewel, with the message, << Send me something equally precious>>; and Rav sent him a mezuzah.? The king replied, <> Answered Rav < >> --end quote-- ? In a footnote, Bunim explains that that last sentence is a pasuk, Mishlei 6:22, and it applies to the mezuzah. This doesn't make the mezuzah an but does say that the mezuzah is protective. . (I am using << and >> instead of quotation marks in the hope of minimizing the number of random question marks AOL strews in my path.? If anyone can help me solve this problem please let me know.) . --Toby Katz t613k at aol.com ? ============= ? ______________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri May 25 13:29:34 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 16:29:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin Message-ID: . R' Simon Montagu wrote: > This is one of the things that really grinds my gears too. Placards > went up recently on the street corners in my neighbourhood pointing > towards one of the local shuls and advertising "tefilla banetz", > and I cringe every time I go past. > > But I try to be melamed zechut on Am Yisrael. ... I used to cringe too. But then I thought of a different limud zechus, and it's not just an excuse. I really believe this: They are not speaking the language that you'd like to think they are speaking. We are in the process of developing a new dialect, or creole, ... I don't know or care what the technical term might be, but consider the following phrases: making kiddush will be davening had paskened was mekadesh Technically speaking, I do concede that "davening k'vasikin" is meaningful, while "davening vasikin" is bizarre. But the truth, whether you like it or not, is that when someone says "davening vasikin", EVERYONE knows what the speaker meant. In this new language, there's nothing wrong with saying "davening vasikin". It is (I think) EXACTLY like the phrase "Good Shabbos", when the first word is pronounced "good" (and not "goot") and the second word is pronounced "SHABbos" (and not "shabBOS"). What language is that???? It's not Hebrew. It's not Yiddish. It's not English. It's something new. (Where "new" can have values of 50 to 100 years. Maybe more.) I am reminded of going to the bakery when I was twelve years old, and the sign by the brownies said that the price was: .10? each (If your computer messed that up, it is a decimal point, followed by a one, and a zero, and a "cents" sign. You know, a "c" with a line through it.) Twelve-year old me looked at the decimal point, and noted that the sign had a cents sign, and not a dollar sign. So I concluded that the price for the brownies was one-tenth of a cent each. I tried to buy ten of them for a penny. It didn't work. And I was pretty upset about it too. I knew I was right. Plenty of people tried to console me, but no one could explain my error. I was right, and everyone seemed to agree. It took about 40 years, but I finally figured out the lesson of that incident: What people SAY is not nearly as important as what they MEAN. Focus on the ikar, not the tafel. Akiva Miller From zev at sero.name Sat May 26 19:46:16 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 22:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Benefits of Davening K'Vosikin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <68109a23-b784-405e-60d5-b1c30853273a@sero.name> Think of saying "netz" instead of "honetz" the same way you do about saying "bus" instead of "autobus", "phone" instead of "telephone", or "flu" instead of "influenza". I recently saw "'bus" written with an apostrophe, but that's very unusual. Most people have no idea that these are abbreviations of longer words. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Sun May 27 05:00:54 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 12:00:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What is the meaning of Cholov Yisroel? Message-ID: Please see the video at https://goo.gl/S5mPTn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat May 26 18:36:57 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 21:36:57 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Behaaloscha YOU CAN'T WIN 'EM ALL Message-ID: <89C443B9-BCD6-4E3D-A485-59F3CF2C7515@cox.net> Both dedications, the dedication of the Mishkan by the Nesiim and the dedication of the Menorah by Aharon were required. The Midrash mentions that Aharon was depressed that neither he nor his tribe was included in the dedication of the Mishkan. This brings to mind the time when I gave a student of mine a part in the family service that he considered inferior and unimportant. Convinced I had the perfect answer, I confindently and proudly informed him about the dedications of the Mishkan and of the Menorah and how God comforted Aharon by saying that his part of the dedication ceremony was the greatest of all, in that he was charged with the kindling of the Menora. I was sure that would make my pupil feel much better but without batting an eyelash, my student immediately retorted: "Yeah, but you're not God!" I ended up being more depressed than Aharon! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:25:32 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:25:32 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? Message-ID: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and Reuvain claims insolvency. Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an ongoing business for Pesach? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu May 31 06:27:43 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 13:27:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? Message-ID: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose. (The gemara in b"b is worth looking at-what exactly is the halachic force of "people don't sell their homes"). Two items: 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? 2. What if the other fundraising fails-would the community sell the Beit Knesset? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu May 31 11:22:30 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:22:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns > beer over pesach), one source quoted is S?A C?M 99:7, which deals with a > case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows > money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din > is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and > Reuvain claims insolvency. > Do you think it?s a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an > ongoing business for Pesach? Not at all, for two separate reasons. First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. So in this case where the Jew sold not the chametz but the entire business, there's nothing to indicate that the sale was anything but serious and effective. Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to "pierce" it in the name of equity. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 1 03:28:46 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 06:28:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra Message-ID: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> With discussed "Higher" Bible Criticism before, we've discussed the IE on the topic before, RGS went the next step -- the Ramban on the IE on Bible Criticism. I am includng the comment, and I would have written something similar. :-)BBii! -Micha Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student R. Avraham Ibn Ezra has long been a controversial figure. R. Shlomo Luria (Yam Shel Shlomo, intro to Bava Kamma) respectfully but strongly rejects his entire approach to Torah commentary. What does the Ramban, one of the classical commentaries whose work serves as a foundation for modern Jewish thought, think of his predecessor, Ibn Ezra? He certainly disagrees often with Ibn Ezra, sometimes sharply. But there may be a more fundamental reason for opposition. At the end of Ramban's commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim, he writes that anyone who says that Ezra the scribe added to the Torah -- such as Gen. 13:6 or Deut. 3:11 -- is a heretic (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 p. 548). Ibn Ezra famously suggests that four verses imply post-Mosaic interpolations -- Gen. 12:6, 22:14, Deut. 3:11, 31:22. Ramban, who shows clear expertise in Ibn Ezra's Torah commentaryn quotes two of these four verses in describing the heretic! Coincidence? R. Betzalel Naor, in his annotated edition of Rashba's Ma'amar Al Yishma'el (Orot: Spring Valley, NY, 2008, pp. 25-27) finds this correspondence convincing. The author of the commentary on Shir Ha-Shirim must have been condemning Ibn Ezra as a heretic. Even though some supercommentaries and scholars dispute the claim that Ibn Ezra ever intended anything other than that Moshe wrote those verses prophetically, many believe he made the more radical claim.[1] If so, this passage from the Shir Ha-Shirim commentary condemns him as a heretic. However, R. Naor points out that Ramban did not write that commentary. R. Chaim Dov Chavel argues cogently in his introduction to that work that it was written by the earlier, kabbalist R. Ezra of Gerona (Kisvei Ha-Ramban, vol. 2 pp. 473-475). If so, we can ask whether Ramban agreed with R. Ezra's evaluation. R. Naor (ibid., pp. 136-143) makes the following points and suggestions: 1- Even in his introduction to his Torah commentary, Ramban expresses his mixed attitude toward Ibn Ezra, which he calls "a public rebuke and private affection." This might be used to describe a commentary that is both brilliant but occasionally sacrilegious. However, Ramban calls him "Rabbi" Ezra, a term of respect. 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him about Ibn Ezra. 3- Ramban unquestionably rejected any post-Mosaic interpolations into the Torah, as seen in his general introduction to his commentary. While hiss attitude toward the level of prophecy of the Torah varies (commentary to Num. 16:5), that is nowhere near the claim that any verse postdates Moshe. 4- Rabbeinu Tam wrote a poem in praise of Ibn Ezra. Perhaps this influenced Ramban to judge him favorably as an inadvertent heretic, which was a status that, according to the Ra'avad (Hilkhos Teshuvah 3:7), even great scholars fell into. 5- The Chida (Shem Ha-Gedolim, part 1, alef 89) quotes R. Binyamin Spinoza, a late eighteenth century rabbi, who deduces from Ramban's failure to argue against Ibn Ezra's radical suggestions that those comments must be late forgeries (interpolations?). Had Ramban seen them, he would surely have objected. In the end, once we determine that the commentary to Shir Ha-Shirim is misattributed, we can only speculate about Ramban's attitude toward Ibn Ezra. Maybe he agreed with R. Ezra of Gerona's condemnation or maybe he felt the belief was wrong but not heretical. Or maybe, as R. Naor suggested, he rejected the belief as heretical but not the person. (Republished from May '13) [1] On this disagreement, see R. Yonatan Kolatch, Masters of the Word, vol. 2 pp. 310-318. ------------------ J. C. Salomon May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late addition to the text. I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 1 08:03:13 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:03:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <70c7cc6f-c870-c610-b592-25a81940172f@sero.name> I find the entire idea that RABE's "secret of twelve" was a secret heresy to be without foundation, and think it more likely that this is wishful thinking by heretics who would like to find "a great tree" on which to hang their heresy. We don't know what the secret was, because it was a secret, but his comment on Vayishlach makes it unlikely to be what the "bible critics" claim it is. On Bereshis 12:6, he simply says: "If it is not so, then there is a secret here, and the intelligent person should be silent". On Bereshis 22:14, and Devarim 3:11 and 31:22 he makes no comment at all, and indeed there's nothing unusual to hint at, no reason to even suppose these pesukim might not have been written at the same time as what surrounds them. The "secret of the twelve" is in Devarim 1:1, on the words "Eleven days out of Chorev", which makes me think whatever this secret is relates to that, and perhaps to a mystical "twelfth day". It's there that he cryptically mentions these four pesukim, with no context or explanation; the theory that he was hinting at a deep secret heresy in his heart is therefore pure speculation and should be rejected. The Ramban's (or whoever wrote it) comment in Shir Hashirim only means that there existed such heretics in his day; there is not even the hint of a hint that RABE might have been among them. These are the same heretics who claimed him; there's no reason to suppose the Ramban agreed with that claim. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Sat Jun 2 20:49:06 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2018 23:49:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich Message-ID: >From R'Micha (Avodah V36n64): > When the majority of men who learn daf don't chazer the gemara they learned until it comes around again another 7 yrs 5 mo later, who can find patience for saying the same words numerous times a week? > We need to know how to teach davening, whether in school or adult education. Take a page from qumzitz and experiential religion, rather than modes that look at sitting with a siddur in contrast to other books. < If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; and "vaya'as kein Aharon." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 00:42:20 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 10:42:20 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua Message-ID: In last weeks parsha we have the Torah stating that Moshe's nevua was unique that Hashem spoke to him directly (see Rambam Yesodei Torah for the list of differences). However, I was bothered by the following question. A number of times the Torah writes Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe v'Aharon leimor where certain halachos are given over to both Moshe and Aharon. The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? In Behaalosecha it is clear that Aharon and Miriam dd not know that Moshe's nevua was different then theirs, yet, if Aharon heard these like a regular nevua as a vision not clearly then how did he not realize that Moshe got a clearer nevua then he did? The first thing Moshe did after getting halachos from Hashem was go over them with Aharon and his sons. Also, the pasuk says that Hashem called out to all 3, Moshe Aharon and Miriam to go out, and Rashi comments that it was one dibur something that a person cannot do. If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Jun 3 01:54:52 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 11:54:52 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? Message-ID: At the beginning of Bamidbar the Meshech Chochma asks the following question. A Baal keri is prohibited from being in the machane leviya, if so how could the Leviim ever live with their wives (in the machane leviya) and become a baal keri? Ayen sham his answer. Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A Baal keri is prohibited from going there. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Mon Jun 4 11:24:18 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:24:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Consistency in8 Workarounds? In-Reply-To: <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> References: <7d82d8522af04c1995ba7b9ed0290931@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> <2b075695-882c-66f0-d8ac-4071982b7ba8@sero.name> Message-ID: On 31/05/18 09:25, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: >> In the discussion of the beer brouhaha (distributor is Jewish and owns >> beer over pesach), one source quoted is S'A C"M 99:7, which deals with a >> case where Reuvain signs over his assets to a third party, borrows >> money, but continues his business as if nothing happened. The Beit Din >> is to look through the sign over if the lender comes to collect and >> Reuvain claims insolvency. >> Do you think it's a slam dunk that one could parallel this to selling an >> ongoing business for Pesach? [Zev Sero:] > Not at all, for two separate reasons. > First, there is no parallel at all between giving away all of ones > property, in which case why would one still be using it, and selling a > going concern, where obviously one does and is expected to stay and > continue working for the business, and the business does and is expected > to continue as usual, with no difference perceptible to the customers. AIUI there was no change in the business other than the 'titular" ownership > Second, that entire siman is about bet din not allowing people to get > away with fraud, by rolling back transactions that were transparently > made in order to defraud someone. In this se'if, the entire purpose of > the "gift" was to defraud subsequent lenders, who were not to know that > the "donor" no longer had any assets, and lent on the assumption that he > still owned what he was publicly known to own. So in the name of equity > the BD treats the transaction as never having happened. See the > Mechaber's opinion at the end of se'if 2, where it's very clear that > he's concerned about what's fair, not what's technically correct. So > none of this has any relevance to Hilchos Pesach, where "equity" is not > an issue; Hashem is not being "cheated". He commanded us not to own > chametz, and He gave us a choshen mishpat to determine who owns what, > and He certainly knows about all our transactions, so if we follow that > CM and dispose of our chametz there's no "fraud" and no need for a BD to > "pierce" it in the name of equity. https://headlinesbook.podbean.com/mf/download/reyy6b/headlines_6-2-18.mp3 6/2/18 Owning Businesses in Halacha and Hashkafa: People who are making a difference- Freddy Friedman, Elchonon Schwartz, Rabbi Yosef Kushner, Nesanel Davis, Shimon Webster, Mr. Sol Werdiger The first half deals with a similar type of arrangement for nursing homes-so aiui you're saying it's up to the Rabbis to evaluate the "need" in each case to determine if haaramah is allowable? KT Joel Rich From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 13:46:25 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:46:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Ramban on the Ibn Ezra In-Reply-To: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> References: <20180601102846.GA12780@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180604204625.GA25546@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:28:46AM -0400, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: : : Ramban on Ibn Ezra's Heresy Posted by: Gil Student ... : 2- It could be that Ramban interpreted Ibn Ezra conservatively, : as some supercommentators and scholars have. If so, he could : agree with R. Ezra of Gerona generally but disagree with him : about Ibn Ezra. ... : J. C. Salomon : May 31, 18 at 6:49 pm : Ibn Ezra to Gen. 36:31 strongly rejects and condemns the notion that : the verse "And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, : before there reigned any king over the children of Israel" is a late : addition to the text. : I might add a sixth possibility to the list: that Ibn Ezra held that : certain verses were added by Yehoshua; and that while Ramban might : have disagreed with this view, he'd have seen it as a legitimate : extension of the similar Talmudic view regarding the last eight : verses in the Torah and therefore not heretical. Except that the tell-tale idiom is "sod ha-12", not 8. From Devarim 1:1: ... And if you understand sod hasheneim asar... Pit stop: the standard text doesn't even say that, it says "(hasarim) [tz"l hashneim] asar". So there is a slight chance it doesn't even say 12. Back to the IE: ... also "Vayikhtov Moshe" (31:22), "VehaKenaani as Ba'aretz" (Bereishis 12:6), "Har H' Yeira'eh" (Bereishis 22:14), and also "arso eres barzel (Devarim 3:11), you will regonize the truth. If it does refer to the last 12 pesuqim (from Moshe going up Har Nevo), then there are 5 quotes in discussion. 4 refer to the future, likely quotes for someone to say were actually written later. But Og's iron bed? And besides, it's the last 8 pesuqim that amoraim argue how and if Moshe could have written them. Now, if Moshe couldn't write "and Moshe died", then it makes sense to argue that he couldn't write "and Moshe went up Har Nevo" if he never came back. But that is more conjecture, that this "12" is "12 pesuqim", and the last 12 pesuqim at that, and that it is related to chazal's discussion of last 8 pesuqim, and all this despite one of the quotes not having this "problem" of not being true when Moshe left us. And for all we know, the secret could be about prophecy. Even if all 5 were about the future, who knows what secret the IE posited to explain them? One of the parts of the Torah that is NOT in this list is the list of kings of Edom "lifnei melokh melekh liVnei Yisrael", Bereishis 36:31. On which the IE qrites: Some say that this parashah was written bederekh nevu'ah. And Yitzchaqi says in his book that this parashah was written in the days of Yehoshafat, and he explains the generations as he wished. This is why his name was called Yitzchaq -- kol hashomeia yitzachaq li. .. Vechalillah chalilah that the matter is as he said about the days of Yehoshafat. His book is worth burning... And he explains that the kings ran in rapid succession, this being warrior tribes of Edom. And the melekh Yisrael in the pasuq was Moshe, "vayhi bishurun Melekh. A lot of work if the IE was okay with later interpolations of narrative snippets of 12 pesuqim or less. In 2002, RGStudent reposed something from Cardozo at . See fn 50: Most enlightening is Spinoza's observation that some texts of the Torah, such as the ones in Genesis 12:6; 22:14, and Deuteronomy 1:2, must have been written many years after Moshe's death, since they reveal information that refers to latter days. Spinoza relies here on the famous Jewish commentator Ibn Ezra (1088-1167), who wrote that these verses were "mysteries" about "which the wise should be silent" (on Deuteronomy 1:2). The traditional understanding of Ibn Ezra, as also confirmed by the modern Jewish scholar Samuel David Luzzatto (ShaDaL) (1800-1865), is that these passages must be understood as prophetic and anticipating the future. .... However, in RGS's own essay on that web site writes: Also, phrases and even verses were added to the texts that perhaps even these prophets could not have written. For example, Ramban explains (Genesis 8:21) "G-d said in His heart" as meaning that this was only revealed to Moshe at the time of the writing of the Torah. See also Ralbag there and Moreh Nevuchim 1:29. Another case is Genesis 32:33, "Therefore the Children of Israel are not to eat the gid hanasheh." According to the Mishna and Gemara in Chullin 101b, as explained by Rashi, this verse was a later insertion by Moshe. See the Radak's commentary to this verse. It is possible that Ibn Ezra, in his "secrecy", believed that many more verses fall into this category and were inserted into pre-existing narrative by G-d to Moshe. His thesis there is that the Torah was redacted from pre-existing scrolls during the Exodus; that it was this redaction that was dictated to Moshe in Sinai. Since such megillos are named in a few places, it's a pretty hard thesis to totally dismiss. The only question is how much was already given in writing in texts like Seifer Milkhamos Hashem (cf Bamidbar 21:13). Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 14:21:04 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 17:21:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 11:49:06PM -0400, Michael Poppers via Avodah wrote: : If from nothing else, one should learn the importance of constancy from two : recent Torah readings: the *chanukas-hamizbeiach* offerings of the N'si'im; : and "vaya'as kein Aharon." But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. Y-mi Nedarim 9:4 (violna ed. 30b) has the famous machloqes between R' Aqiva and Ben Azai about whether the kelal gadol baTorah is "ve'havta lerei'akha" or "zeh seifer toledos adam". In the version in the introduction to the Ein Yaaqov, he quotes Ben Zoma, attributes Rav Akiva's opinion to Ben Nanas, and then adds a new opinion: Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi says: We have found a more inclusive verse than that, and it is, "The first lamb you shall sacrifice in the morning and the second lamb you shall sacrifice in the evening." Rabbi Ploni stood up and said: The halachah is like Ben Pazi as it is written, "As all that I show you, the structure of the Mishkan and all its vessels: so shall you do." That makes constancy kind of important. FWIW, here is how my discussion (ch 2. sec. 3) of that quote goes: There are two interesting implications to Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi's and Rabbi Ploni's words. First, Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi could be making the point that Rabbi Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov found in Ben Azzai's position -- the role of personal development. After all, there are a number of verses that discuss this offering; Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi chose a verse that discusses its constant and regular nature. In his opinion, this is the most important verse in the Torah -- even in his or our day, after the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash and there are no korbanos. Perhaps the point here is consistency in avodas Hashem in-and-of-itself, not limited to this one mitzvah. Just as service in the Mishkan has its schedule and routine, so too our observance must be a discipline with well-defined structure and consistency. Second, the anonymous rabbi endorses this view by quoting a verse about the Mishkan and its vessels' structure, their composition, not their service. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi statement is about something done in the Beis HaMikdash as part of its daily service, but the proof is about its structure. This rabbi is relating "so shall you do" not only to following the description of that structure Hashem gave us when building it but also to the discipline of the ritual within it. The discipline in avodas Hashem of the previous implication is a taken as fundamental part of what the building is. At least homiletically, we can say this is true of both microcosms -- not only the Mishkan, but also the human soul, as Rav Shimon ben Pazi is giving importance to structure and consistency even in our era, without a Mishkan or Beis HaMikdash. Discipline in avodas Hashem is not only part of the structure of what the Mishkan is, but also our own soul's structure. This homily would be consistent with Rav Shimon's statement ... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search micha at aishdas.org of a spiritual experience. You are a http://www.aishdas.org spiritual being immersed in a human Fax: (270) 514-1507 experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 4 15:06:16 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 18:06:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does Ru'ach Ra'ah (negative spirits) still exist today? In-Reply-To: References: <16398488909-c90-94a0@webjas-vab016.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180604220616.GC25546@aishdas.org> On 5/25/2018 7:11 PM, Rn Toby Katz Avodah wrote: > It is possible that one manifestation of ruach raah may be > bacteria. So parents should definitely wash their hands before > feeding their children. According the Tosafos (Yuma 77b) and the Yam Shel Shelomo (Chulin 8:31) there isn't any ru'ach ra'ah anymore. Unsurprizingly, the Rambam (Rotzeiach 12:5) doesn't mention ru'ach ra'ah when he discusses not putting food under your bed, his reason is "shema yipol bo davar hamaziq". If it is a modern and mundane issue, I would think ru'ach ra'ah is depression, not a physical illness. The day after Shaul learns he lost his throne, "vatilach ruach E-lokim ra'ah el Sha'ul". (Shemu'el I 18:9) On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 09:17:24PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : True but washing one's hands is not netilat ya'diim. It is soap and water. Actually, you need to do both for neigl vasr, as you need to get rid of chatzitzos. AhS 161:1, MB s"q 7,10. So the question might be... What's the problem with chatzitzos? Can someone make an argument that it's about places where disease can hide? Then why haqpadah? I really don't know what to do with RASoloveitchik's suggestion that ru'ach ra'ah can be things like germs. If it's a saqanas nefashos thing, then pesaqim should indeed be more maqpidim about things like soap than about using a cup, koach gavra, etc... BUT... this is RAS. I am assuming he did indeed have an explanation. Keeping the discussion alive (and CC-ing R Harry Maryles) to see if we can get down to one. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water micha at aishdas.org that softens the potato, hardens the egg. http://www.aishdas.org It's not about the circumstance, Fax: (270) 514-1507 but rather what you are made of. From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Tue Jun 5 19:06:11 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 22:06:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] insight from a MO mechaneich In-Reply-To: References: <20180604212104.GB25546@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > But knowing as an idea that constancy is a value is different than being relate to constancy in one's practice. < Agreed, and both examples I mentioned are examples of doing, not knowing. The point is that not just "v'halachta bidrachav" but also that "v'halachta" in the path of the noted examples, that one should imitate paragons of *derech H'*. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 05:07:43 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah Message-ID: The article below gives many halachas that are applicable to situations where gentile workers are employed in one's home. IMO it is worth reading carefully. YL Click here to download "Non-Jewish Cleaning Help in Halachah" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 6 10:49:54 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:49:54 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Why I support the private kashrut initiative of Tzohar rabbis Message-ID: <628e074c-450f-a464-ed95-2eca5d3ed825@zahav.net.il> Placing this article in Avodah because Rav Melamed uses the model of the 70 elders to show how differences in community leadership should be handled. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22250 A few critical paragraphs: But when groups and institutions try to impose their opinion on members of another circle, and abolish the status of their rabbis (and to boycott them from becoming rabbinical judges and rabbis) we are no longer speaking of a situation where the rabbis of Tzohar should also establish a kashrut organization, but rather a situation in which it is almost obligatory for them to establish one, just like other accepted rabbinic organizations, in order to give halachic and Torah expression to their part in the Torah. If they do not, then they are similar to a prophet who suppresses his prophecy, or as our Sages said: ? Yea, all her slain are a mighty host? ? this refers to a disciple who has attained the qualification to decide questions of law, and does not decide them? (Sotah 22a). How Does a Difficult Dispute Develop? At first, there is an argument over a focused halakhic issue. However, when an agreement is not reached, instead of agreeing to disagree and continuing to respect each other, one side thinks that the other has no authority to retain his position, because, essentially, his position is inferior, since he belongs to a liberal circle, or his position differs from that of most rabbis. Then, that same party departs from the particular halakhic issue they have debated, and moves on to a more acute arena, in which the main argument is that the rabbi against whom he is arguing with is not authorized to express a halachic position, for in any case, who appointed him to be a rabbi who can express a position at all? Since this argument is not convincing enough, and the rabbi who is being attacked remains in his position, consequently we are now moving over to a dispute of a different magnitude ? since we are no longer dealing with a person who rules on a matter without authority, but with a person who undermines the foundations of authority as a whole, and thus, it is compulsory to wage an all-out war against him? From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 6 11:31:07 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 18:31:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: Please see the article at Eretz Yisroel, Zionism,and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH This article is from The Jewish Observer Vol. 23 No. 6 September 1990/Adar 5751 and is available at https://goo.gl/LNRpZZ YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 7 01:06:59 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 08:06:59 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra Message-ID: The letter below appears on pages 113 - 114 of this week's Flatbush Jewish Journal. It is not clear to me that all FJJ readers appreciate the gadlus of Rabbi Shamshon Raphael Hirsch when it came to Torah. Indeed, last week MW (whomever this may be) referred to RSRH as "Reb Shamshon Refoel Hirsch" rather than as Rabbi or Rav or even Rabbiner. Therefore, I feel that I should refer FJJ readers to Rav Yaakov Perlow's article Rav S. R. Hirsch - The Gaon in Talmud and Mikra that appears in The World of Hirschian Teachings, An Anthology on the Hirsch Chumash and the Hashkafa of Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, Published for the Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer Foundation, Feldheim, 2008. Reading this article will give one a true understanding of how great a Torah scholar RSRH was. Moreover, the following is from page 102 of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, Architect of Torah Judaism for the Modern World by Rabbi Eliyahu Meir Klugman. We also have the assessment of the K?sav Sofer, Rabbi Avrohom Shmuel Binyamin Sofer, Rabbi of Pressburg and leader of Hungarian Jewry. The K'sav Sofer first met Rabbi Hirsch in Vienna, not long after the latter assumed his post in Nikolsburg. On the first Shabbos after his return to Pressburg, a large crowd came to his home for Shalosh Seudos in order to hear his observations about the new Chief Rabbi. Their curiosity was understandable, since, as followers of the Chasam Sofer, the K'sav Sofer's father, they harbored deep suspicions of anyone versed in secular studies, which they considered a potent danger to the Jewish people. The K?sav Sofer described his meeting with Rabbi Hirsch in the following terms: ?We spoke at length on Torah subjects with the new ?Rosh Medinah? and whatever topic we discussed, his reply showed that he had Shas and poskim on his fingertips. We, the rabbonim of Hungary, have to consider ourselves very fortunate that he holds us to be his superiors as scholars, for if he were only aware of the extent of his own scholarship, we would have no rest from him.? Finally, a talmud muvhak of Rav Yitzchok Hutner, ZT"L, told me that Rav Hunter once told him that anything that Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch wrote is Kodesh Kedoshim. Based on this It should be clear to all that what RSRH wrote about one going to see the wonders of nature is to be taken very seriously. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 7 06:02:35 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 13:02:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? Message-ID: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, how else might the desired result be accomplished? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 7 07:48:30 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 10:48:30 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: [VBM] Chassidic Service of God (continued) Message-ID: <20180607144830.GA19716@aishdas.org> This is where our compartmentalization into camps holds us back. The Piaseczner Rebbe (the "Aish Qodesh", R' Kalonymous Kalman Shapiro zt"l Hy"d) is largely reinventing Mussar. Admittedly his goals are different; the elements of the ideal Jew that are emphasized in Chassidus and Mussar differ. But he procedes to build and advocate from scratch a toolset for somthing that another tenu'ah invested the lion's share of their effort on -- self-awareness. To quote RYGB's loose translation of REEDessler (MmE vol 5 pp 35-39), cut-n-pasted from : In our times: The qualities of "Emet" that personified the Ba'alei Mussar [Mussar Masters] are already extinct. We no longer find individuals whose hearts are full with profound truth, with a strong and true sense of Cheshbon HaNefesh [complete and rigorous reckoning of one's spiritual status and progress]... Contemporary Chassidus lacks the component that was once at its core: Avodas Hashem with dveykus... For today's era, there remain only one alternative: To take up everything and anything that can be of aid to Yahadus; the wisdom of both Mussar and Chassidus together. Perhaps together they can inspire us to great understandings and illuminations. Perhaps together they might open within us reverence and appreciation of our holy Torah. Perhaps the arousal of Mussar can bring us to a little Chassidic hislahavus. And perhaps the hislahavus will somewhat fortify one for a Cheshbon HaNefesh. Perhaps through all these means together we may merit to ascend in spirituality and strengthen our position as Bnei Torah [adherents of a Torah centered lifestyle] with an intensified Judaism. May G-d assist us to attain all this! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight, micha at aishdas.org and he wants to sleep well that night too." http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok Fax: (270) 514-1507 Yeshivat Har Etzion PHILOSOPHY > Great Thinkers > The Piaseczner Rebbe > Shiur #24: Chassidic Service of God (continued) Dr. Ron Wacks Ways of Achieving Hitragshut (continued) The Importance of Self-Awareness One of the primary keys for entering the gates of inner service is self-awareness. Remarkably, although a person is generally concerned for his own wellbeing, he is not always aware of what is happening in his own inner world. His psyche is in constant movement, expressing its will and its aspirations, but even though the person may sense something going on, he is not equipped to interpret it and to take the appropriate steps: The hiddenness and imperceptibility of what is happening inside him distances a person greatly from himself. He is unfamiliar with himself and ignorant of what goes on inside him. Even the psyche of the simplest person never ceases its restlessness and writhing, crying out in supplication over its lowliness, and over all the blows and trials and tribulations that he causes it through his foolish actions, speech, and thoughts. The fact that he senses none of this is because he gives no thought to listening to this tempestuous wretch.[1] A person naturally tends to occupy himself with matters external to himself; he is not attentive to his own inner workings. It is easier to engage with the outside world, with its affairs of greater and lesser importance, than it is to listen inwardly. Even when he detects inner movement, he is unable to decode and make sense of it: For that is the way of man: he always strive for that which is extraneous to himself, the affairs of the world, both those that are vital and those that are not. He interests himself in what happens at the end of the world, but he pays no heed to his own psyche, and does not listen and give attention to the business that is within him. Or he may sense it, but since even at the moment that he senses it his desire, his attention, and his thought are turned to the lowly muck of this world, he hears the moaning and its voice only weakly. This may be compared to a person who is asleep and a mosquito bites him on his forehead. If he is a merchant, he dreams that a bag of his merchandise has fallen on his forehead and struck him; if he is a tailor, he dreams that his needle has pricked his forehead, etc. Each individual perceives his inner workings in the guise of his own dreams.[2] The psyche expresses its longings in different forms, but often a person is unable to decode any of these spiritual needs, such as a desire for teshuva and the fear of God. Sometimes, when he feels something oppressive inside him, he goes to the refrigerator and takes out a bottle of sweet drink and some cake, or he tries to distract himself by joking with his friends. Often, a person makes the mistake of thinking that it is his body that is suffering physical hunger, and he believes that he can satiate it by filling his stomach - while in fact it is his psyche that is starved and crying out in distress: Sometimes the psyche of a Jew is animated by regret, teshuva, submission, fear of God, and so on, and the person feels some sort of movement and restlessness within himself, but he has no idea what the problem is. He thinks he may be hungry, or thirsty, or in need of some wine and wafers, or he may think that he has fallen into melancholy, and in order to lift his spirits he chatters playfully with the members of his household, or goes over to a friend to joke and engage in lashon ha-ra, gossip, foolishness, etc.[3] R. Kalonymus's grandfather, author of Maor Va-Shemesh, also addresses the connection between an unhappy psyche and stuffing oneself with food. Attention should be paid to the chain of wrongdoing: Bnei Yisrael complain, convincing themselves of how bad things are for them. This leads them to melancholy, which gives rise to the craving for meat and the punishment that follows: "And when the people complained, it displeased the Lord" - This means that they fell into melancholy... and the Lord's fire burned amongst them, for black bile is detestable and abhorrent, for it is a tinge of idolatry... and for this reason they were punished. And Moshe prayed, and the fire subsided, but it continued through their melancholy, for they felt a lusting and they said, "Who will feed us meat?" For as we explained, the lust for food is drawn from black bile... Therefore, one has to distance oneself far from melancholy, for it brings a person to all sorts of sins. And despondence begins with a growing desire to eat, as we see when a person is mired in black bile, heaven forfend, he eats with lust, ravenously, and very quickly.[4] When a person tries to "quiet" his inner distress with sweets and snacks, not only has his psyche not received what it really wanted, but it is greatly pained by his failure to understand its true needs. Sometimes, after a person continually ignores and steamrolls his inner voice, it simply grows silent: Sometimes, after all of these actions which he has done, he still feels inner discomfort, since with these worthless medicines not only has he not cured the sores of his psyche, nor given it relief from the blows that he has administered to it, but he has in fact added further injury and assault. But sometimes it happens that after these misguided actions he actually feels better, and his spirit is quieted within him, because the blows and injuries and sores that he has added through his actions have rendered his psyche unconscious, or he has piled mounds of dirt and refuse over it to the point that it is completely hidden. Then he will no longer hear even the slightest peep out of it - and he can relax.[5] The psyche also transmits signals of joy, not only distress. A person often misses these signals too, failing to give them expression. For example, when a person fulfills a mitzva or rejoices in his prayer, and his psyche awakens with joy and hitragshut, he will fail to notice this - both because of his general insensitivity to his inner world and because his attention is oriented elsewhere. R. Kalonymus argues that the way to achieve hitragshut and hitlahavut is not by "importing" new feelings from outside of oneself; they are already to be found inside him. However, they must be given more powerful expression and allowed to effect a greater influence on his consciousness: It is not new excitements that you need to seek, nor a heavenly-initiated awakening. First and foremost, the work is required of you yourself, for everything exists within you. You are capable of hitragshut, and you are a person who is able to attain fervor; you simply need to try to get to know yourself and what is going on inside. Your psyche is full of signals, shouts, and supplications, and all you need to do is to provide space within yourself within which it can be revealed and strengthened. Then you will come to know and feel your natural hitragshut, with no need to garb yourself and your needs.[6] R. Kalonymus not only demands self-awareness, but also explains how to attain it. A person has to learn to listen to his own inner world and ask himself questions: Is my psyche happy, and if so, about what? Is my psyche sad, and if so, why? What are the inner feelings that accompany me in this situation, and how did they come about? At first, this work will involve only the major movements of the psyche. It is not advisable to start with weaker movements, since, owing to their delicate nature, their meaning is not always clear. Attention should therefore be paid to the stronger signals, and when one notices them, he should "provide space" and allow them expression. This is facilitated through paying attention to them, strengthening them, and allowing them to reveal themselves through our power of imagination. We will now elaborate on each of these tools individually. (To be continued) Translated by Kaeren Fish _______________________ [1] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 29. [2] Ibid., p. 40. [3] Ibid. [4] R. Kalman Kalonymus Epstein Ha-Levi, Maor Va-Shemesh (Jerusalem, 5748), Parashat Beha'alotekha. [5] Ibid., p. 29. [6] Hakhsharat Ha-Avrekhim, p. 30. Copyright ? 1997-2017 by Yeshivat Har Etzion From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 7 21:17:05 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 06:17:05 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <950f4b82-36d2-0f57-abef-73c113119730@zahav.net.il> RSH's third objection to Rav Kalisher is the key one (RSH couldn't imagine that non-religious Jews could be the vehicle for redemption). Once you say that "I can't imagine. . . " than everything else has to fit into that paradigm that you just set up for yourself. The author's conclusions are also strange. To mention all the benefits and great things that have come from the state but to still look at it as if it is a treif piece of meat boggles my mind. I would also add that if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - he should move here. Like I always tell my Reform Jewish friends - If you move here, you get a vote which is 10,000 times (at least) more important than Facebook posts. Ben From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 07:09:28 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 10:09:28 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi Sacks on 'The Great Partnership' Message-ID: <20180608140928.GA11777@aishdas.org> R/L J Sacks on Science and Religion. In short: It's Gould's notion of non-overlapping magesteria -- they can't contradict, the discuss different topics. But RJS says it so well, giving the idea emotional "punch". And sometimes even maaminim need a reminder that the point of religion isn't to fill in the gaps in our scientific knowledge. (I know I do.) Our rishonim offer answers to the question of why an Omnicient and Omnipotent G-d would create a universe that requires His intervention once in a while. His Wisdom inheres more in the things science CAN explain than in the miracles that even in principle can't be studied scientifically. (Pace the Ralbag, whose actual position on nissim is a longer discussion.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LltoUg_WL2k That said, I think this is overstatement, as they do overlap when it comes to discussion of origins. I would instead posit "barely overlapping magesteria" -- they only overlap at the fringes, where no open question can threaten my trust in either. Yahadus explains the "why?" of life to well to question, and many scientific theories do too well at the "how?" I have a question about where they seem to contradict? Nu nu. Scientists believe that quantum gravity has an answer, and don't expect either QM or Relativity to be overturned just because we have a question where their fringes overlap. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 09:19:36 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 12:19:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? Message-ID: From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the mitzvah of V?kidashto (honoring a Kohen) apply only to male Kohanim, or does it also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V?kidashto applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K?Hilchaso 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash. This description applies only to men and not to women. Although the daughters of Kohanim are entitled to eat Teruma and may eat from certain Korbanos that are designated only for Kohanim, they are not eligible to serve in the Beis Hamikdash. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:48:09 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:48:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? Message-ID: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> I wanted to talk this out here, as this se'if in the AhS appears to use the kind of reasoning that is exactly what I argued for decades with C rabbis (and more recently with one or two of the more innovative OO rabbis) isn't how halakhah should be done. AhS CM 89:2 discusses the reason for a taqanah that if a sakhir and the BhB disagree about whether the sakhir had been paid, the sakhir can make a shevu'ah binqitas cheifetz, and the employer would have to pay. Normally, f two sides make conflicting unsupported claims, the rule would be that the defendent (the nitba) would make a shevu'as heises (which is a less demanding shevu'ah than the shevu'ah BNC) and not pay. A taqanah beyond the usual hamotzi meichaveiro alav hara'ayah to disuade liars. The stated reason for treating the sakhir as a special case is that many times the employer has many workers, and it's more likely he wouldn't remember the details of who he paid what than the employee not remembering the details of getting paid. However, the AhS continues, this doesn't explain why chazal worried more about employers than salespeople. Someone who has a lot of customers is prone to the same parallel likelihood of confusion. So, he explains that the iqar haataqanah is because employees have a lot riding on getting paid, "nosei es nafsho lehachayos nafesho venefesh benei beiso, chasu chaza"l alav..." And therefore even if it's a boss who has only one employee, and he isn't overhwlmed keeping track of vay, lo chilqu chakhamim. Doesn't this sound bad? Chazal really had some social end in mind, so they invented some pro forma excuse to justify their conclusion. I guess that in dinei mamunus, Chazal can do whatever they want -- hefqer BD hefqer -- and therefore on /that/ ground they can force payment of a worker for the sake of social justice. But that's not what the AhS invokes. Thoughts? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Problems are not stop signs, micha at aishdas.org they are guidelines. http://www.aishdas.org - Robert H. Schuller Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 12:15:35 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:15:35 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din but a takanah. By definition, takanos are ends-driven; they're made not because this is what we believe Hashem ordered, nor to avoid some issur, but in order to achieve some desirable goal. The same applies to the usual shvuas hesses that Chazal instituted; it's to achieve the two desirable goals of creating a disincentive for defendants to lie, and of assuring the plaintiff that the courts are not biased against him. So I see no problem with Chazal making a special takana for the benefit of employees, since the Torah itself gives their needs priority, and gives the reason that employees often risk their lives for their livelihood. And just as the Torah does not distinguish between those employees who actually do risk their lives and those who sit on comfortable chairs in air-conditions offices and risk nothing more serious than a paper-cut or RSI, Chazal saw no need to distinguish between a lone employee and one among many. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 12:53:18 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:53:18 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:35PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: : I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din : but a takanah... Not just a taqanah, a taqanah that needs an justification for why they're not following the din deOraisa. And so simply saying "it's a taqanah" doesn't really satisfy me. DeOraisa, the employer would have the right to not pay the money. The usual taqanah for conflicting claims would require he make a shevu'as heises first. Here, we're putting the power to extract the employer's money despite the deOraisa. Had the taqanah not violated the deOraisa, but went "beyond" it, I wouldn't have asked. And as I said, had the AhS invokved hefqer BD hefqer, we would need no excuse for how Chazal can move money despite the deOraisa. But he doesn't. Instead, he says they came up with a justication that isn't real. That opens a whole pandora's box of ascribing hidden "social justice" reasons for legislation that has an explicit explanation already given. And it makes it sound like legal mechanism can indeed be nothing more than a hopp to jump through, rather than justification in-and-of itself. So my question isn't "how did they make this taqanah", but "how can you claim that they wanted to ignore a deOraisa because they thought they had a 'more moral' alternative, and then just found some way to legally justify it?" :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the micha at aishdas.org second time and as if you had acted the first http://www.aishdas.org time as wrongly as you are about to act now! Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 8 12:15:09 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 15:15:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:52 PM 6/8/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's >OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: >: A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto >: applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso >: 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he >: offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... > >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to be "honored" like all other Kohanim? I recall that there was a Kohein when I lived in Elizabeth who had a deformed hand. However, I think that he still got the first aliya. However, I do not think that he duchened. He left the shul right before duchening. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 11:52:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:52:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 12:19:36PM -0400, Prof. Levine quoted today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis: : A. It is clear from all the sources that the mitzvah of V'kidashto : applies only to male Kohanim (Sefer Kedushas HaKohanim K'Hilchaso : 2:1). The Torah states that one should sanctify the Kohen since he : offers the Korbanos (sacrifices) in the Beis Hamikdash... Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. :-)BBii! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 8 13:21:23 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:21:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:09PM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : >Interesting. It would seem to imply that qedushas hakohein is tied to : >role, and not anything inherent about the souls of kohanim. : : If so, is one to deduce that a Kohein who has a physical disability : that disqualifies him from serving in the Bais Ha Mikdash is not to : be "honored" like all other Kohanim? ... I think aliyah laTorah is different than duchaning because it's not about the kohein as a kohein, but mishum tiqun olam. So, we divy out the kavod according to strict rules, so that society runs smoother. Not based on qedushah. Maybe it's even kavod vs qedushah. Tangents: BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not a kofer. There is also a separate discussion is someone who is wheelchair bound can get an aliyah at all, or if the chiyuv for an oleh to stand is me'aqiev. From the pasuq "amod imadi". The accepted pesaq really only permits calling someone who can't stand if their reason for not being able to stand is obvious or known to the tzibbur. IOW, oneis Rachamanah patrei for his non-standing, but the kavod haTorah is an issue if it looks bad to the tzibbur. I didn't spend the same time researching this tangent, as you can tell by the lack of a single source. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe micha at aishdas.org you can be certain of improving, http://www.aishdas.org and that's your own self. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Aldous Huxley From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:41:12 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:41:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan? In-Reply-To: <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608184809.GA6418@aishdas.org> <8d335c79-cecf-dc6b-0c85-e6e66d85f4ae@sero.name> <20180608195318.GC15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <9e545852-4e47-2e1a-0f1b-f6fe418d3daa@sero.name> I don't think it's accurate to say that mid'oraisa he doesn't have to pay. If he really does owe the money then mid'oraisa he has to pay, and has an *additional* obligation to pay this debt over all other debts, because of "lo solin". The only question is whether he really owes the money or not. Normally, the way the Torah left things, we can't be sure he owes it, so we can't *force* him to pay; we have to leave it up to his own conscience. But his obligation (or lack thereof) is unchanged. Now Chazal come along and meddle with that setup, for social reasons. In order to discourage defendants from falsely denying their liability, and in order to give plaintiffs a sense that justice has been done, they instituted the sh'vuas hesses. If you don't swear we'll make you pay, despite the Torah saying we can't. According to you, how could they do that? Here Chazal went a bit further: We can't make the defendant swear, because he may honestly have forgotten or got confused, so we tell the plaintiff that if he's willing to swear, not just hesses but binkitas chefetz, then we'll believe him, and once we do believe him the *Torah* says the defendant must pay. Comes the Aruch Hashulchan and asks, what about the exceptional case where the defendant is not confused and unlikely to have forgotten? And what about other defendants who may be confused or have forgotten? And he answers "lo plug" because there's a deeper reason for the takana here. It's not just that we're worried about the defendant inadvertently making a false oath; if he's really worried about that let him pay up, but if he's not worried we won't be. The deeper reason why we've given the plaintiff a slight edge here is that we're emulating the Torah itself, which made the "takana" of "lo solin" for the explicit reason that employees *in general* risk their lives and so deserve extra protection. And just as it did not distinguish between employees, so we won't either. I have a bigger question, though: This takana seems to be biased *against* the employee whose employer is a yerei shamayim. Without the takana the employer would decline to swear because he can't be sure he's right, and he'd have to pay. Now we say no, you don't have to pay until we test the employee, more rigorously than we were going to test you. So mah ho'ilu chachamim betakanasam? It seems as if our real concern here is not for the employee's welfare but to protect honest employers from employee fraud! That's surely a worthy goal, but opposite to the one the AhS posits. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 9 20:19:14 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2018 23:19:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Korach "There's Good Even In The Worst Of Us" Message-ID: The rabbis saw a hint that while the Korah rebellion ended so tragically, it had the seeds of redemption. In the Shabbos Maariv we recite Psalm 92: Tzaddik katamar yifrach, the righteous will blossom like the palm tree (v. 13). The last letters of those 3 Hebrew words (kuf, reish, chet) spell Korah. Although blinded by anger and envy, Korah's egalitarian vision will indeed be established. Then the "righteous will blossom like the palm tree, and grow mighty like a cedar in Lebanon, planted in the house of the Lord." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Jun 8 13:47:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Does the mitzvah of V'kidashto (honoring a Kohen) also apply to daughters of Kohanim or the wives of Kohanim? In-Reply-To: <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> References: <20180608185208.GA13278@aishdas.org> <98.F2.25646.3A6DA1B5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> <20180608202123.GE15201@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <36fd05b2-e021-0e98-cdcc-6e84353eb84b@sero.name> On 08/06/18 16:21, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > > BTW, the nearest Bar Ilan found for me was Igeros Moshah OC 2:50-51. > Rav Moshe holds that a kohein married to a gerushah should not get the > first aliyah (#50), but (#51) a mumar letei'avon may, because he's not > a kofer. This is not just RMF, it's the plain halacha. A kohen who eats treif and breaks shabbos can even duchen, let alone get the first aliyah. Even if he's living with a nochris he can still duchen. But the moment she converts and marries him he can no longer duchen. And if he can't duchen then of course he can't get the first aliya either. (The baal mum is different. The only reason he can't duchen is because the deformity is in his hand; if it were anywhere else he could duchen. And even so he still has a *chiyuv* to duchen, which is why he has to leave before retzei in order to avoid it. A cohen married to a grusha doesn't have to leave, since he is a temporary chalal and thus has no chiyuv.) It seems to me that "vekidashto" *does* apply to the wives of cohanim, because for purposes of kavod the general rule is ishto kegufo, and a wife who marries up gets her husband's social status. As for his unmarried daughters, it seems to me that they too are included in their father's status for this purpose, since they are called by his name. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 11 08:07:53 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:07:53 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. There are two Yisroelim in Shul on a Monday or Thursday who have chiyuvim for an aliyah. Should the Kohanim be asked to leave the shul during Kriyas HaTorah, so that both Yisroelim will receive aliyos? A. The Mishnah Berurah (135:9) writes that a Kohen may not give up his aliyah because we are obligated to honor a Kohen. This is the case not only on Shabbos or Yom Tov when the Shuls are crowded and it will be noticeable, but even on a Monday or Thursday when it is less obvious. However, many poskim, including Igros Moshe (OC 3:20), write that if there is a pressing need on a Monday or Thursday, a Kohen may be mochel (forgo) his kovod and give up his right to the first aliyah. In such a situation, the Kohen exits the Shul before the Torah reading so as not to cast any doubts on his lineage. In contrast, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt?l held that it is not proper for a Kohen to relinquish his aliyah. Aside from the issue of the Kohen being mochel (forgoing) the honor of receiving the first aliyah, there will also be a deficiency in the Kriyas HaTorah itself. The Gemara (Megilla 21b) states that the three aliyos on Monday and Thursday and on Shabbos Mincha were instituted to correspond to the three categories of Jews: Kohanim, Levi?im and Yisroelim. If a Kohen is not called up for an aliyah, the Kriyas HaTorah is lacking this kiyum (fulfillment) of reflecting the three categories of Jews. Therefore, one should not ask a Kohen to forgo his aliyah, since this would diminish the fulfillment of the mitzvah. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From meirabi at gmail.com Mon Jun 11 19:53:36 2018 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:23:36 +0930 Subject: [Avodah] Kashrus - Wooden Sticks and Feathers Message-ID: If a wooden stick is used to stir a hot pot of non-K meat, it becomes non-K. It will in turn, render a pot of hot Kosher food non-K, if it is used, whilst fresh, to stir that pot. But, wood is not a food. May one eat the shavings of that wooden stick? Probably yes. Hog hair is not a food and it cannot be deemed to be non-K. Therefore one may sprinkle hog hair on ones food, or cook it in ones soup. Does it get worse if the hog hair is first cooked in a pot of non-K meat? Probably yes. This is an issue faced today by Kashrus agencies regarding food ingredients/additives that are extracted from non-foods, like bird feathers. In order to facilitate plucking, the dead, non-Shechted birds have been plunged into a tank of boiling water. Thus the feathers have absorbed the non-K taste of the birds. Although the feathers are dissolved in acids in order to extract what will be used as food additives, this consideration is not accepted regarding gelatine since gelatine is a 'food' at the conclusion of its processing, and it is similarly not accepted by the Kashrus agencies for feathers. Some suggest that there is a difference between the two. Gelatine is worse because it is extracted from the non-K item itself i.e. the skin and bones, whereas the non-K absorbed in the feathers, is not the source of the extracted food/additive which are derived exclusively from the feathers that are a non-food. Therefore, even though skin and bones do become inedible during their processing, this is just a temporary state, generated by acids and alkali, which are removed from the finished product and the finished product is essentially still the same skin and bones. Whereas the product extracted from feathers is entirely disassociated with the absorbed non-K flavour and is therefore K. Nevertheless, a well known Rav argues that in any case where the chemical is removed, the product returns to its non-K status, even in the case of feathers. It will permitted only if the chemical remains but is camouflaged by other additives. Therefore, feathers and what is derived from them remain prohibited because whatever chemicals are used to process and extract the foods/additives, are removed. Is it possible that the foods/additives extracted from the feathers are permitted because all, or almost all of the absorbed non-K flavour is removed - in other words, just as we can Kasher our wooden stick, so too we can deem the feathers to have been Kashered? Now if we were to actually Kasher the feathers or the wooden stick, we require 60 times the volume of the stick. For example, a 500g stick requires 30 litres [500gX60=30,000g] and 3 tonnes of feathers would require [3,000litresX60=500,000 litres] which we obviously dont have in the normal processing. Now the only reason we cannot Kasher in less than 60 is ChaNaN [ChaTiCha NaAsis Neveilah] This means, Kashering is not a process of dilution of the prohibited component that is absorbed until it is less that 1:60, in which case we could immerse the non-K spoon or feathers in 100 small pots of boiling water and each dip would further dilute the concentration of the absorbed Issur Kasheing is rather a process that MUST revoke the prohibited status. If it is not revoked - i.e. it is immersed in a pot that does not have more than 60, then EVERYTHING becomes non-K and the spoon is just as non-K as it was before it was immersed. In other words ChaNaN applies to Kelim. And yet the Kosher agencies permit the additives extracted from non-K feathers because the feathers are not food but a Keli, and are therefore not limited by ChaNaN. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Jun 11 11:09:45 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:09:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 01:19 PM 6/11/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >I would also add that >if someone really believes that "We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >he should move here. Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who come here collecting for all sorts of things? What would they do if there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious community of Jews in the US? Indeed, how many religious Jews living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things. Is this not a huge mitzva? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 11 20:48:41 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 05:48:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <43.0F.27933.5DBBE1B5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <4a055873-1dcb-8b0f-2b31-69cec4cbdb81@zahav.net.il> 1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. 2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - what does that mean? Ben On 6/11/2018 8:09 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > > Don't realize that those who remain in Golus do a great deal for the > frum community in EY by giving Tzadakah to the multitude of people who > come here collecting for all sorts of things?? What would they do if > there was not a strong, vibrant, financially successful religious > community of Jews in the US?? (1) Indeed, how many religious Jews > living in EY depend on these donations for all sorts of things.? Is > this not a huge mitzva? (2) > > YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 12 05:36:49 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah Message-ID: Please see the article at Torah Im Derech Eretz: Torah Proper or Hora's Sha'ah by Dr. Leo Levi This article appeared in the December 1988 issue of the Jewish Observer which is available at https://goo.gl/9JUkt4 YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 11:25:42 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:25:42 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] sell the Beit Knesset? In-Reply-To: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <6acb67431f0e4141942ca7b7a4b94f65@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <10180612182542.GA32068@aishdas.org> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 01:27:43PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The Rambam (matnot aniyim 8:11), based on Bava Batra 3b, states that a : Beit Knesset(Synagogue) is not sold for pidyon shvuyim(redeeming captives) : but rather new funds must be collected for that purpose... However, when fundraising, pidyon shevuyim comes first, even after the funds were raised and the building materials bought for the not-yet-existent shul. SA YD 252:1. And the Tur says this is the only mitzvah we may sell those building supplies for. : 1. This seems to imply a complex interaction between tzedakah priorities : and other halachot (perhaps respect for Beit Knesset or people's intent : in donations) or it might be that tzedaka priorities are multivariate? Is this distinction more than semantic? You are asking whether the "other priorities" are outside the label "tzedaqah" and therefore "other halakhot", or within the label, and therefore tzedaqah's priorities would be "multivariate". But the word "tzedaqah" has multiple usages. For example, in the sense we have been using it, we've been including pidyon shevuyim and binyan bhk"n. But it could be used to refer to supplying the poor with their needs exclusively. Or to mean their needs and dei machsero. Etc... Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. micha at aishdas.org I awoke and found that life was duty. http://www.aishdas.org I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:31:50 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 10:42:20AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : The question is how did that work. Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like : Moshe? If not, then what was the point and what does it mean that Hashem : spoke to both? ... : If it was 1 dibur that they all heard it would : seem that they all heard the same thing in the same way which would imply : they all heard it as clearly as Moshe. Like "shamor vezakhor bedibur echad"? There is no proof they all heard the same thing, never mind in the same way. But that's not where I wanted to go. If we take the Rambam's approach to the uniqueness of Moshe's nevu'ah, then the difference isn't in the "Dibbur" (which didn't actually involve heard words, leshitaso). It's in the shomeia'. Moshe's seikhel was able to accept the nevu'ah unmediated. Others, the same message could only be received via koach hadimyon so that it reaches the navi's conscious mind cloaked in visions and metaphoric sensations. So, if Hashem did make one dibbur to both, Moshe would still receive it Peh-el-peh and Aharon would experience the revelation as a prophetic vision. OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then we are left with two possibilities: - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, and passing Torah down the generations, etc... - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording the kelal, there could be others. There are other potential exceptions, most enigmatically Bil'am (Yalqut Shim'oni 966) on the very pasuq that describes Moshe's nevu'ah as being "Panim al panim" -- "velo qam navi od beYisrael keMoshe", but among the other nations, there was Bil'am. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The greatest discovery of all time is that micha at aishdas.org a person can change their future http://www.aishdas.org by merely changing their attitude. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Oprah Winfrey From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 12 13:39:37 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:39:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Realizing a Vision? In-Reply-To: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> References: <05f8e20f029a4a059fba68b66024fbaa@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Message-ID: <20180612203937.GB20060@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 01:02:35PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Assume community leadership believes morning prayer should last 45 : minutes, and posts appropriate starting and midpoint times. The majority : of the community comes well after the official starting time so as to : reach Yishtabach "on time" by praying more quickly. Does this accomplish : the true desired result or does it establish "unofficial" norms? If not, : how else might the desired result be accomplished? Through unofficial norms. It wasn't all that long ago (at most a couple of decades) when speed was left to the chazan watching the rav (or the chazan himself, if the rav is at another minyan), and the norms of the minyan set the chazan's pace without a watch and often without conscious thought. But then, even in those days people were coming late. I think you're dealing with a misdiagnosis. To my mind, the only real way to get people to come on time and to stay for davening and not spend the time learning with breaks for prayer is to offer programming that helps people relate to davening. If you don't cure the problem of boredum, people will come late regardless of the scheduling system, and find excuses to step out, whether physically or mentally. I would suggest the minyan in question explore in that direction, rather than worry about how Yishtabach time is determined. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are where your thoughts are. micha at aishdas.org - Ramban, Igeres haQodesh, Ch. 5 http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 12 14:24:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 17:24:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> References: <20180612203150.GA20060@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <233e14ea-9b86-d3dc-f8fc-2d8bb4c8c50c@sero.name> On 12/06/18 16:31, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > OTOH, who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah. If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah opines that these 8 pesuqim are a necessary part > of the Seifer Torah, like the atzei chaim, but the words are not Torah > itself. Rather, it teaches the centrality of lilmod al menas lelameid, > and passing Torah down the generations, etc... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. And if there is one rare exception that did force rewording > the kelal, there could be others. Other possibilities: * Moshe told Yehoshua what he should write the next day. * The Rambam says that after a navi's vision a mal'ach explains it to him. I see no reason why the mal'ach in Yehoshua's vision could not have told him exactly what he should write. -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From cantorwolberg at cox.net Wed Jun 13 06:07:13 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:07:13 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW SHOULD COME FROM THE LETTER Message-ID: <9D3675F5-16E2-4542-A632-D76A033B1BCE@cox.net> There?s the story of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi who, when studying Torah, heard the crying of his infant grandson. The elder rebbe rose from his studying and soothed the baby to sleep. Meanwhile, his son, the boy?s father, was too involved in his study to hear the baby cry. When R. Zalman noticed his son?s lack of involvement, he proclaimed: ?If someone is studying Torah and fails to hear the cry of a baby, there is something very wrong with his learning. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Wed Jun 13 12:29:17 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 21:29:17 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Perhaps there are several aspects of nevuah. One is the hearing, which Moshe did better. Another is the experience itself.? Here, it doesn't matter if Moshe's experience was "better" than Aaron's and in fact the word better doesn't apply. Aaron experienced this totality called nevuah and he did it his way. After doing that, he isn't the same person, or the same cohen. The same would apply to the hundreds of thousands of people who experienced nevuah but didn't have anything recorded. They became different people, and their avodat Hashem was completely upgraded as a result of the experience. Ben On 6/3/2018 9:42 AM, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: > Did Aharon hear the nevua clearly like Moshe? If not, then what was > the point and what does it mean that Hashem spoke to both? From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 13 12:51:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:51:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah Message-ID: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> >From your friendly neighborhood clipping service. Taken from , with transliteration added for Avodah digest purposes. R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" of "Torah lishmah" means. I intend to reply, once I have time to collect a mar'eh maqom or two. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Tvunah in English Beit Midrash for Birurei Halachah Binyan Zion Under the Leadership of Maran HaRav Asher Weiss Shlita Learning Torah L'Shma Introductory Note Our Sages[1] have greatly commended one who learns Torah Lishmo -- literally, for its own sake.[2] Many times in the Talmud [Pesachim 50b, Nazir 23b, Horiyos 10b, Sotah 22b, Sotah 47a, Sanhedrin 105b, Erchin 16b] they have stated that one should always learn Torah, even if it not Lishmo, for through this one will eventually reach Lishmo. The goal, though, is total Lishmo. Two questions have to be dealt with: Firstly, is there anything negative or positive if one enjoys one's learning? Secondly, what precisely is Torah Lishmoh? Position One -- Enjoyment Is Not Ideal The Agrah D'Kallah[3] states that the disciples of the Ba'al Shem Tov asked their master if there is a problem if one enjoys learning Torah. He answered that since this is the very nature of Torah, as is written in Tehillim[4], "the statutes of Hashem are straight, [they] gladden the heart," Hashem will not act unfairly towards a person[5] and punish him for having had such enjoyment. This statement seems clear that the ultimate aim would be not to derive any enjoyment from one's learning. A similar sentiment seems to have been echoed by Rav Chaim Volozhiner. He seems to writes[6] that one who enjoys his learning does not commit a sin.[7] On the other hand, the Eglei Tal[8] writes that he has heard some people make a grave mistake, thinking that the ideal is for one to learn without enjoyment. He argues vehemently that one must love and enjoy one's learning. The one whom the Eglei Tal was arguing with was the Yismach Yisrael. He writes[9] that the true learning of Torah is only when one learns with no intention of any enjoyment at all. My feeling is that there is room for both the position of the Eglei Tal and that of the Yismach Yisrael to be correct. On one hand, Hashem wants us to enjoy His Torah, and, as we shall discuss in length soon, it is the proper way for one to study Torah. However, there are many instances where one does not enjoy learning, either because one has had a bad day, or because it is a piece of material which really does not grab his interest. In such a case, one needs to recall the words of the Yismach Yisroel that one needs to study Torah even if one does not have any enjoyment. Position Two -- Enjoyment Is Ideal In my opinion, it seems clear from many Rishonim that enjoyment and pleasure in one's learning is an integral part of the process of Torah study. Firstly, the Mishnah in Avos[10] states that when one studies Torah one needs to know in front of Whom one toils. Rabbeinu Yonah[11] explains that just as the Torah was the plaything of Hashem[12], so to speak, before the creation of the world, so too one's Torah should be one's own plaything. This seems to state clearly that deriving pleasure for Torah study is an ideal. Secondly, the general rule regarding commandments is that they were not given for pleasure[13], and therefore the pleasure of having fulfilled a commandment is not Halachikally considered pleasure. For example, if one took a vow not to derive pleasure from one's fellow, one's fellow may still blow the Shofar on his behalf, since the mere fact that one's fellow is enabling the fulfilment of one's commandment is not considered pleasure.[14] However, regarding the commandment of Torah study, Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar writes[15] that the essence of the commandment is to enjoy one's learning. Therefore, says Rabbeinu Avraham, if one forbade one's fellow from using one's Torah scroll, one's fellow may not use it. Again, this is a clear statement that enjoying one's learning is ideal. [A note of explanation is in order. It is difficult to understand how Rabbeinu Avraham can state that enjoyment is the essence of learning Torah. It is understandable how it is an integral part -- but to be the essence? I think his intent is as follows. The Shulchan Oruch HaRav[16] argues that there are two separate commandments of learning Torah. One is to study the Torah, and the other is to know the Torah. In my opinion this particular formulation is difficult, since we do not find that the Rishonim count the commandment of Torah study as two separate commandments.[17] Rather, it seems that these two categories make up the commandment. The commandment is to learn, while the essence and purpose of this learning is in order to know the Torah. The proof to this understanding of the commandment is that the commandment of Torah study is the verse veshinantam levanekha -- "And you shall teach your children,"[18] and our Sages explain[19] that the word veshinantam is to be expounded from the root shinen -- sharp. The words of Torah should be totally clear to oneself, to the extent that if one is asked about a given Torah matter one should be able to answer immediately, without babbling. This teaches us that the essence of the study is to achieve clear knowledge. Since the clarity of Torah knowledge is the essence of the commandment of Torah study, and this clarity of knowledge brings one great pleasure, Rabbeinu Avraham writes that the essence of the commandment of Torah study is to have pleasure from it.] A third proof: If deriving pleasure from the study of Torah is not the ideal state, how could it be that our Sages instituted the words, "veha'arev na es divrei Sorasekha befinu" in the morning blessing on the Torah? However, it could be that this is not a proof. The Avudraham[20] cites two verses to explain the word ????? in this context. The first is from Malachi[21] -- Ve'orvah Lashem minchas Yehudah viYrushalayim kiymei olam ukhshanim qadmonios -- "And the flour-offering of Yehudah and Yerushalayim will be pleasing to Hashem as the days of old and the years past." However, his second verse is from Tehillim[22] -- arov avdekha letov, which the Ibn Ezra[23] explains is the same root as an areiv -- a guarantor -- "Guarantee Your servant for good". Accordingly, the blessing is to be understood as a request from Hashem that He should act as a guarantor that our children should know the Torah, and does not refer to a request for having pleasure from the Torah. On the other hand, Rashi[24] explains that this blessing is a request that the study of Torah be with the tremendous pleasure of loving, feeling loved by, and being close to, Hashem. His interpretation is also cited by the Avudraham.[25] According to this interpretation, there is strong proof that pleasure is an ideal part of the study of Torah. Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind on this thought. 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must learn Torah in order to fulfil it. Support for these Positions All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the Rishonim. 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov. 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Uniting the Opinions However, in my opinion, it seems that these are really three sides to one coin. Before I demonstrate this, I would like to show some indications in this direction: 1. Although Rashi in Brachos[38] writes that Lishmo means in order to find out what to do, however in his commentary to Ta'anis he writes[39] that Lishmo means to fulfil Hashems will. 2. Although the Ba'al Shem Tov seems to be of the opinion that Lishmo means in order to fulfil the will of Hashem, however two of his main disciples[40] write that one must learn in order to act. Therefore it seems to me that all these three interpretations are really three parts of one whole. The first step is that one has to learn in order to fulfil the will of Hashem. However, what is His will? It is that one should learn and know clearly His Torah. What is the purpose of us knowing his Torah? In order that one should know what to do. In light of this, it would seem that we can understand that which we quoted from Rav Chaim Volozhiner in the beginning of the Shiur[41], even though at face value his statement that "there is no sin," seems to contradict that which we quoted later in the Shiur from him.[42] According to my understanding of Lishmo it is not a contradiction. The earlier quote is directed at one for whom part of his motivation to learn is because of his enjoyment. The motivation, ideally, should be purely because Hashem said so. But one should most definitely enjoy one's learning when one is learning. [1] For example, Mishnah Avos 6:1 and Sanhedrin 99b [2] We shall later discuss another manner to translate this word. [3] Agrah D'Kallah Parshas Chayei Sarah d"h BeMidrash BeParsha Zu Kad Damich Rebbe Avahu [4] Tehillim 19:9 [5] Avodah Zarah 3a [6] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [7] We shall return to this statement in the end of the Shiur [8] Hakdamah to Eglei Tal [9] Yismach Yisrael Parshas Bechukosai [10] Mishnah Avos 2:14 [11] Rabbeinu Yonah ibid d"h VeDah Lifnei Mi [12] Mishlei 8:30 [13] Rosh HaShannah 28a [14] Ibid, as explained by Rashi d"h Mutar Litkoah Lo [15] Peirush Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar Nedarim 48a d"h Sefarim [16] [Blank on web. -mb] [17] See, for instance, Rambam Sefer HaMitzvos Mitzvah 11 [18] Devarim 6:7 [19] Kiddushin 30a [20] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [21] Malachi 3:4 [22] Tehillim 119:122 [23] Ibn Ezra ibid [24] Rashi Brachos 11b d"h Ha'arev [25] Avudraham Seder HaShkamas HaBoker, Birkas HaTorah [26] Degel Machane Efraim Parshas Vayishlach d"h Ba Na El Shifchasi [27] Yosher Divrei Emes Os 7 [disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch, who was a major disciple of the Ba'al Shem Tov]; Ma'or VeShemesh Parshas Vayetzei d"h Vayomer Eilav Lavan [disciple of the Noam Elimelech, who was a major disciple of the Maggid of Mezeritch] [28] Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 2 and 3 [29] Chiddushei Chasam Sofer Nedarim 81a d"h Shelo Borchu [30] Reishis Chochmah, Hakdamah [31] Shnei Luchos HaBris, Chelek 1, Ba'asarah Ma'amaros, Ma'amar 6, Os 187 [32] Yerushalmi Brachos 1:2 [33] Peirush HaRosh Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen [34] Mefaresh (Rashi) Nedarim 62a d"h Vedaber Bahen. [There is doubt whether the commentary printed as Rashi on Nedarim is actually from Rashi, hence this commentary is commonly referred to as "the Mefaresh (commentator)"] [35] Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah 10:5 [36] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [37] Tosfos Pesachim 50b d"h Vekan [38] Rashi Brachos 17a d"h Ha'Oseh Shelo [39] Rashi Ta'anis 7a d"h Lishmo [40] Likutei Amarim of the Maggid of Mezeritch (otherwise known as Maggid Devarav LeYa'akov) Siman??, Sod Yachin U'Boaz Perek 2 [41] Ruach Chaim to Avos 3:9, d"h Kol Shema'asav Merubin Mechachmoso [42] [Ed. Note] According to the later quote, as is clear from the end of Nefesh HaChaim Sha'ar 4 Perek 4, learning for the love of the pure understanding of Torah is Lishmoh. From marty.bluke at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 04:22:44 2018 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 14:22:44 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] How to pour nesachim, major differences between the first and the second beis hamikdash Message-ID: Yesterdays daf (Zevachim 61b) says that the mizbeach in the first beis hamikdash was 28x28 amos and in the second beis hamikdash was 32x32 amos. Rabin explains the difference as follows: In the first Mikdash, Nesachim would flow into Shisim (a pit south-west of the Mizbe'ach) down the wall of the mizbeach. In the second Beis Hamikdash they enlarged the Mizbe'ach in order that the Shisim would be within (under) the Mizbe'ach and they made the corners of teh mizbeach hollow so that they could pour nesachim in the mizbeach. At first (during the first Beis Hmikdash), they learned from the words "Mizbe'ach Adamah" that the mizbeach has to be completely solid. In the second beis Hamikdash they thought that drinking ('consumption' of libations) should be like eating (Korbanos that are burned, i.e. within the boundaries of the Mizbe'ach) and therefore made the holes to pour the Nesachim as part of the mizbeach. Therefore, they understood that Mizbe'ach Adamah" teaches that the Mizbe'ach cannot be built over domes or tunnels (that are not needed for the Mizbe'ach). According to the Rambam in Hilchos Mamrim, this is perfectly standard practice. Any Beis Din can come and darshen the pesukim differently then a previous beis din. However, according to others this is not so simple. For those who hold that there is one halachic truth, this would seem to be very difficult, in either the first or second beis hamikdash they did the avoda of the nesachim wrong. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Jun 14 05:50:21 2018 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (H Lampel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 08:50:21 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The uniqueness of Moshe's nevua In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40a627c0-37a1-a74d-6f72-165b6d6d9469@gmail.com> On 6/14/2018 8:17 AM, avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org wrote: > Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:31:50 -0400 From: Micha Berger > ...who wrote the last 8 pesuqim of the Torah? If it was Yehoshua, then > we are left with two possibilities: > > - The Meshekh Chokhmah ... > > - A potential resolution is that the 8 pesuqim are Torah, dictated by HQBH. > Which would imply that once in his life Yehoshua recieved Moshe-style > nevu'ah. ... Another possibility: Hashem dictated the last pesukim about Moshe's death to Moshe beforehand, even before Moshe ascended the mountain, and Moshe dictated them to Yehoshua, who did not write them down until after Moshe's death. Thus, all the Torah, to the last letter, was revealed to Moshe, but it was Yehoshua who put the last pesukim in writing. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Jun 14 06:47:54 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:47:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: At 08:17 AM 6/14/2018, Ben Waxman wrote: >1) Maybe giving them money is helping them do something which you >regularly complain about - chareidim not being able to support themselves. >2)? There are all sorts of huge mitzvot that people in chul do. That >isn't the point.? The point is ""We must do whatever is possible to >further Mitzvot observance and prevent desecration of the Holy Land" - >what does that mean? I am going to give you an answer that I know you will not like and will dismiss out of hand, but IMO, it is the truth. Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to Eretz Yisroel. After all, I said, Orthodox Jews are interested in doing mitzvahs, and one can certainly do more mitzvahs in Israel. He responded by pointing out that the additional mitzvahs that one can do in Israel are only of rabbinical origin at this time. Furthermore, he went on, one has to keep in mind the following. The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the right spiritual level before you go." While reciting the Shema twice a day we say, ?Beware lest your heart be seduced and you turn astray And you will swiftly be banished from the goodly land which G-d gives you.? Thus it is clear to me that one must be on the appropriate spiritual level to live in Eretz Yisroel. Encouraging those who are not on this level to settle in Eretz Yisroel was and is perhaps a mistake. This is a radical statement, and many will react strongly to it. However, is it possible that part of the reason for what is going on in Israel today is a result of the fact that the vast majority of Jews living in Israel are not properly observant, and the statement quoted in Shema is being, G-d forbid, fulfilled? I am not the one to judge anyone else, but each person should look in the mirror and ask themselves if they are sure that they are spiritually elevated enough to live in Eretz Yisroel. As Reb Dovid said, "You just don't go to Israel." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:19:19 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:19:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? Message-ID: We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping that stringency. Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? KT Joel Rich From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 06:18:14 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:18:14 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? Message-ID: The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases (each iteration away from the primary source can cloud fine points, or Godel's incompleteness theorem at play?). I also see much more of the implicit sociological assumptions made over time (and wonder how we define the community [e.g., town, city, continent...] and time [every decade, exile...] that we measure). Two examples: 1) S"A O"C 153:12 (MB:76) discusses an individual who had a stipulation with a community to build a Beit Knesset (synagogue), it stays with him and his family but it's not transferable. Why not? "Mistavra" (it's logical) that that's what the community had in mind unless specifically stipulated differently at origination (me -- who measured? How?) 2) S"A O"C 153:18 (MB:95) concerning a private object (e.g., Menorah) used by the synagogue. Originally, the assumption was they became kodesh once used, however, "now" it's assumed that they remain totally private (as if this were the original stipulation). So how, when, and where did this change? Were the first people who acted this way sinners, but enough sinners makes it OK? KT Joel Rich From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:35:00 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:35:00 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17593052-ba12-6371-5050-960187b566d0@zahav.net.il> Yes we have heard this answer before, several times. Putting aside its multiple problems, it is basically rejecting the paper you linked, given that the paper's author supports the state albeit with several large reservations. You can't say that the aliya of the vast majority of people to Israel is a mistake and support the state at the same time. Ben On 6/14/2018 3:47 PM, Prof. Levine wrote: > The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if > one does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the > exact same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D > forbid, in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong > deed here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be > on the right spiritual level before you go. From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 11:36:49 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:36:49 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. ?Ben On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > > Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? > From micha at aishdas.org Thu Jun 14 15:07:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:07:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's nice to be smart, micha at aishdas.org but it's smarter to be nice. http://www.aishdas.org - R' Lazer Brody Fax: (270) 514-1507 From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 14 14:18:33 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 21:18:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: , <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. > Ben ?1?/??? Which raises a question I?ve been thinking about lately. When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From zev at sero.name Thu Jun 14 15:39:03 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:39:03 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <76b76294-55ee-c10b-66b4-858544078685@sero.name> On 14/06/18 18:07, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the > : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to > : Eretz Yisroel... > > : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one > : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact > : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, > : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed > : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the > : right spiritual level before you go." > > This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It's much earlier than that. It's a Tosfos (Rabbenu Chaim, quoted in Tosfos, Kesubos 110b, sv Hu Omer). -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Thu Jun 14 22:37:23 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 07:37:23 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> <51120C64-1668-4F38-A2BA-06A6C988CC85@sibson.com> Message-ID: <1d515cf4-41e6-53ed-9246-feaee76b81cd@zahav.net.il> I'd guess the latter - the Gemara is telling us you have to decide for yourself and that while the Gemara will give values and weight, it? leaves the final choice up to you. On 6/14/2018 11:18 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > When the Gemara uses anything but assur, mutar (maybe tov)or chayav, what is it trying to tell us by the analogy used? Is it relative weight or just a ancillary teaching for a teachable moment? From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Jun 15 01:27:44 2018 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 04:27:44 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH In-Reply-To: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> References: <20180614220715.GA24353@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 06:07 PM 6/14/2018, Micha Berger wrote: >On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: >: Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the >: Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to >: Eretz Yisroel... > >: The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one >: does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact >: same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, >: in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed >: here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the >: right spiritual level before you go." > >This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. If so, then why are there Satmar Chassodim living in Israel? Are they all on a high spiritual level? And could it be that the Satmar Rebbe left Israel, for this reason? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmeisner at mail.gmail.com Fri Jun 15 05:27:58 2018 From: jmeisner at mail.gmail.com (Joshua Meisner) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 08:27:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> References: <1b9fd726-5f4d-f7b1-6b47-aaf153ac2a7a@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a > stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that > if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping > that stringency. > Question -- is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency > greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? On Jun 14, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Ben Waxman wrote: > I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a > bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah. The implication of this sugya is that given that one has made a neder, it is better not to keep it than to keep it. Clearly, it is not suggesting that one violate the neder but rather that one be matir it before a chacham. The meforshim provide different reasons why this is the case -- e.g., because the neder was made out of anger that would hopefully subside or because the neder is characteristic of ga'avah -- but a chumra taken on because a person perceives a need for a s'yag or similar reasons (or, for that matter, a neder bish'as tzarah) may not be what the gemara is referring to. Going back to RJR's question, to provide a few data points, while on the one hand offering a korban without making a neder is assur, one tanna used to be makdish his korban only after he brought it to the mikdash to avoid the possibility of stumbling. Not sure if these cases can be translated into nidrei issur. Josh From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 15 12:02:36 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 15:02:36 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Referring to "the holy month of Ramadan" In-Reply-To: References: <163fc9b81f2-c8f-124c4@webjas-vaa038.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <20180615190235.GA17319@aishdas.org> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:18am EDT, Prof. Levine wrote on Areivim: : What about referring to the "holy month of Ramadan"? Aren't their : restrictions regarding what a Jew is allowed to do when it comes to : non-Jewish holidays? Interesting question... Yes, if Moslems are aku"m. But Islam is monotheistic. In fact, they're more pedantic about it than the Torah requires. E.g. Many Moslems believe that the Torah's use of "Yad Hashem" et al even acknowledging they are meant as metaphors shows Shaitan's alleged corruption of the text. So, it's not yom eideihem in the normal sense. For that matter, one might even argue that many versions of Ramadan observance are actually qadosh (in our sense of the word). They fast to learn self-discipline and empathy for those who are less fortunate, they give sadaqah to the poor (I'm bet you can guess that Arabic) and there is a point of having a nightly meal, iftar, in fellowship with the broader community, not alone or as a nuclear family. All values the Beris Noach would want them to be fostering. So, the previous intentionally provocative paragraph aside, is there really a problem talking about Ramadan or referring to it as they do, as "the holy month of"? :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger The trick is learning to be passionate in one's micha at aishdas.org ideals, but compassionate to one's peers. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 12:09:48 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:09:48 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? Message-ID: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with whom did the PC disagree? Ben From hanktopas at gmail.com Sun Jun 17 18:49:29 2018 From: hanktopas at gmail.com (Henry Topas) Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch Message-ID: Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in a din Torah pls? Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. Thank you and kol tuv, HT Sent from my iPhone From zev at sero.name Sun Jun 17 21:42:54 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:42:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pri Chadash - Cherem? In-Reply-To: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> References: <61dad679-fc44-057a-03c7-ee541ab9dd7f@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: On 17/06/18 15:09, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > I am reading a booklet by Rav Yitzhaq Yosef on the rules of giving psak. > In one section he briefly mentioned that Chachmei Mitzrayim considered > putting the Pri Chadash in cherem because he disagreed with the Rishonim > on some issue. Can anyone flesh this out? What was the issue and with > whom did the PC disagree? The issue was the way he wrote about gedolei haposkim, especially the Bet Yosef. http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1640&pgnum=250 -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Sun Jun 17 23:10:19 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 08:10:19 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] machloquet - good or bad Message-ID: <5c275a89-82ba-3763-db85-3c8663f1b5a9@zahav.net.il> Summary of a talk given on Shabbat and then my commentary: According to the Rambam, machloquet is a fashla, something we don't want. It started when students didn't properly learn from their teachers. Had they done so, Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai would not have had so many disagreements. Rav Kook and Rebbe Nachman had a much more positive approach to machloquet. According to RK, when say that talmidei chachamim bring peace to the world, it is because they know how to argue with someone yet respect him and his opinion. A talmid chacham knows how to be inclusive, how to allow for and even want other opinions. According to RN, machloquet is a reenactment of Creation. God created the world through tzimmzum, allowing space for others. When there is one opinion only, that opinion fills the entire space so to speak. When someone else comes up with a different opinion, the first person has to contract to allow room for the new idea. This in turn allows for even more opinions. Ad kan the class. Today we don't do machloquet very well or at least we struggle with it. We try and either destroy the other side or we say that the other position doesn't really exist. This week a rav made a statement about Rav Lichtenstein tz'l and his position regarding (a very minor) women's issue. The easiest thing to do if one wanted to know RL's opinion about something is to pick up the phone and ask his sons, his daughter, an extremely close talmid. Instead the rav simply heard something and made a conclusion. When he was shown that his conclusion was incorrect, he pontificated that RL really didn't accept the more liberal position, he simply gave in to pressure. Occam's razor says that if RL said something and did something, it is because RL believed that to be the right thing to do. There is no need to come up with any explanation. Simply accept that there is a machloquet in the matter. Similarly, there is a mechina whose rosh yeshiva said things about women's role in society which people in the left wing MO world don't accept. No one says that anyone needs to send their kid there, but to try and work to shut down the mechina? You can't accept that someone, who BTW probably agrees with the LW on a whole bunch of other subjects, differs with you? You want to shut them down? Come on people, get a grip. From yherczeg at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:15:11 2018 From: yherczeg at gmail.com (Yisrael Herczeg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 14:15:11 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Subject: Re: Eretz Yisroel, Zionism, and Medinas Yisroel in the Philosophy of RSRH Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:47:54AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: : Many years ago I asked Rabbi Dovid Kronglass, ZT"L, who was the : Mashgiach of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel for many years, about moving to : Eretz Yisroel... : The land of Israel has a special Kedushah (holiness). Therefore, if one : does a mitzvah there, one gets more reward than if one does the exact : same mitzvah here. However, if one does something wrong, G-D forbid, : in Israel, it is much worse than if one commits the same wrong deed : here. "You just don't go to Israel," he told me. "You have to be on the : right spiritual level before you go." ::This idea is also in Vayo'el Moshe. It is also in the Tashbetz Kattan. Yisrael Herczeg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:53:11 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:53:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is One Required To Live In Israel? (Bava Batra 91a) Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/NKZ2eR by Raphael Grunfeld. (Note: Raphael Grunfeld is a son of Dayan Dr. Grunfeld who translated the Horeb and other works by RSRH from German into English.) First, it is not universally accepted that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel. Rashi?s commentary on the Torah as understood by the Ramban implies that there is no obligation to live in Israel. Rabbeinu Chaim, one of the Tosafists of the twelfth century, states clearly that following the destruction of the Second Temple and the exile from Israel, there is no longer any requirement to live in Israel. The Rambam agrees with Rabbeinu Chaim and accordingly did not include living in Israel in his list of the positive commandments. In more contemporary times, the Rebbe of Munkatch, in his responsa Minchat Eliezer, endorses Rabbeinu Chaim?s position. The Rebbe of Satmar, Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, points out that the Shulchan Aruch does not include the mitzvah of living in Israel in its code of law. The majority opinion prevailing in the halacha, however, follows the Ramban and maintains that there is a biblical obligation to live in Israel today. Although it is preferable to live in Israel, there is no obligation to go. However, once you live in Israel, there is an obligation not to leave. In fact, the language used by the Ramban in his supplement to Sefer Hamitzvot is that ?anyone who leaves Israel? ? ?kol hayotze mimenah? ? is like an idol worshiper. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Jun 18 04:56:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:56:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In just a few weeks, we will observe Rosh Chodesh Menachem Av. This particular Rosh Chodesh is always only one day long, and this year it happens to fall on Erev Shabbos. This means that when Shabbos occurs, Rosh Chodesh will be over. I want to discuss the ramifications of a person who begins Shabbos early in this situation. Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal. (I know that there are poskim who advise one to eat a kezayis of bread after tzeis, but they don't require it.) In my experience, mealtime goes much quicker when there are fewer people at the table. This past Friday, for example, I went to a very nice minyan, beginning Kabalas Shabbos and Maariv shortly after Plag, I took a leisurely stroll home, and despite our best efforts at taking our time through the meal, my wife and I were still ready for Birkas Hamazon a full five minutes before shkiah. In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? I don't recall ever learning about this particular situation. There is an analogous but very different situation that I *have* seen discussed, namely that of a Seuda Shlishit that begins on Shabbos Erev Rosh Chodesh, and continues into Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos. In that case, the poskim give a wide variety of answers, but (among the poskim who *don't* pasken to say both) it is not always clear whether their rule is to base oneself on the beginning of the meal, or the end of the meal, or the holier of the two days. Further, some of them make a distinction, paskening differently for one who is merely benching after tzeis but didn't actually eat after tzeis, as opposed to one who actually ate [food in general or perhaps bread specifically] after tzeis. All that is a good starting point for my situation, but it is only a starting point. A tremendous difference between the two cases is that in the more common case, the calendar day DID change during the meal, to some extent or another. But in the case that I'm asking about, the calendar day did not actually change, only that the people involved are doing the mitzvah of Tosefes Shabbos. To be more explicit: Imagine a couple that goes to an early minyan on Erev Shabbos Rosh Chodesh Av. They daven Maariv, make Kiddush, and say Birkas Hamazon, all before shkiah. Then, after benching but still before shkiah, imagine that the wife gives birth to a boy. This boy will have his bris milah a week later on *Erev* Shabbos, and his bar mitzvah will be on Rosh Chodesh. Is it possible that his parents should have omitted Yaaleh V'Yavo from Birkas Hamazon? Of course, I understand that the answer may depend on details like whether or not the meal continued after shika, or even past tzeis. But I am most curious about the simple case, where benching was before shkiah. And the other cases will perhaps flow from that one. Any and all sources are appreciated. Thanks in advance. (Disclosure: I have other questions about the calendar and a person who begins Shabbos early, but I'm starting with this one, and perhaps I'll open new threads later about the others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 18 06:10:57 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:10:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What to do with old pots Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I found an old set of pots in my parents' basement. They have not been used in many years. No one remembers if they were milchig or fleishig. I would like to use them for milchig. May they be kashered and used for milchig? A. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Commentary on Nidah 27a) writes the pots may be designated for meat or dairy without kashering. The pots have not been used in more than 24 hours. After 24 hours any taste that was absorbed in the pot becomes foul, and on a Torah level the pot can be used for meat or dairy without kashering. Nevertheless, there remains a Rabbinic obligation to kasher pots even after 24 hours have elapsed. However, in this case, we may apply the principal of ?safek d?rabbanan l?kula? (in cases of doubt that pertain to a Rabbinic prohibition one may be lenient). Additionally, Igros Moshe (Y.D. II:46) writes that if a utensil is not used for more than a year, there is an opinion that holds that it does not need kashering. Although we don?t follow this opinion, it can act as an additional mitigating factor. However, since one can avoid the doubt by kashering the pot, it is proper to do so. Although the Magen Avrohom (OC 509:11) writes that the custom is not to permit kashering a fleishig pot to use it for milchig, in this case kashering is acceptable since it is only a chumra (extra stringency). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 04:30:24 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:30:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder Message-ID: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don?t know the exact reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That?s only known by HQBH. However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah that you?ve taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 07:50:20 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:50:20 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Learning, Spirituality, and Neo-Chassidus In-Reply-To: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> References: <2a2a9b8a-57d5-4421-a133-200fd7a29a61@sero.name> Message-ID: <20180618145018.GE28907@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 1:14pm, R Aryeh Stein wrote on Areivim: > Rabbi Shafran's letter to Mishpacha included the following paragraph: >> It's easy to say that a person has a relationship with Hashem wherever >> he is, regardless of what he is doing, but it's not true. Many of us break >> that connection through destructive habits and the like, and sugarcoating >> them doesn't make them any less destructive. "Feeling spiritual" may >> be better than feeling bad about yourself, as quoted in the article, >> but are we to be content with feeling spiritual? I think the real problem with R' Avi Shafran's article was picked up in the replies. It's not an either-or. Rather, people whose core learning is the regular gefe"s or shas-and-posqim aren't getting inspired by intellectual pursuit *alone* and are looking for a better connection to the emotional and experiential aspects of Yahadus. Addition, not replacement. The question is more: Are we content with thinking the right thoughts while being parched spiritually? > Rabbi Moshe Weinberger was very disturbed by this paragraph in which > Rabbi Shafran seems to state that one's relationship with God can be > severed if one engages in destructive behavior. > He didn't discuss this specific point in his response to Rabbi Shafran > that was printed in Mishpacha, but he dedicated two shiurim to > demonstrate that Hashem's love for every Jew is eternal and > unconditional (see links to shiurim below) At 03:59:40PM -0400, Zev Sero via Areivim wrote: : To Hashem's love may be unconditional, but the direct connection a : person has with Him can certainly be severed; that is what kares : means. See Igeres Hateshuvah ch 5-6: : https://tinyurl.com/y9hckn5t : https://tinyurl.com/y6wtghxf But on another level, I don't think a person or even an object can be fully severed from the Borei, because withough Or Ein Sof, there is no such thing as existing. This fits kareis as per the Rambam, that the onesh after misah is ceasing to exist. (Except that we would have to translate the Baal haTanya's "Or Ein Sof" language into the Rambam's chain of sikhliim.) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, micha at aishdas.org but the lighting of a fire. http://www.aishdas.org - W.B. Yeats Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:14:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:14:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toen in Shulchan Aruch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180618151454.GF28907@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 09:49:29PM -0400, Henry Topas via Avodah wrote: : Can someone point me to the proper source for the role of a toen in : a din Torah pls? : Also any source for when did the role of a toen become common practice. A to'ein is a plaintiff. Could you ever have a din Torah in CM without a to'ein and nit'an? Ah, just googled. I take it you mean a to'ein rabbani, a modern Israeli coinage in order to avoid calling someone an oreikh din, since the job was defined in a way so as to avoid violating "al ta'as atzmekha ke'orkhei hadayanim" (Avos 1:8). The Yerushalmi, Kesuvos 4:10 and BB 9:4 (same quote; both gemaros are short and it's easy to find the quote), says the issur in the mishnah is telling only one side the law when they're still trying to phrase their claim. See also Kesuvos 52b and the Ritva d"h "asinu". So, while I don't have a maqor for when it became normal to have to'anim rabbaniim, I would think the place to look is the earliest shu"t that explain how they're not orkhei din. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, micha at aishdas.org The end is near. http://www.aishdas.org - Rav Moshe Sherer Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:57:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:57:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms Message-ID: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> See "Hezekiahs Religious Reform -- In the Bible and Archaeology" on the Biblical Archeology Society web site at . Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to get rid of everything hidden in private homes. A large 9th-century horned altar was discovered [in Beersheba] -- already dismantled. Three of its four "horns" [rectangular projections on the four corners of the top of the altar] were found intact, embedded in a wall. Their secondary use indicates that the stones were no longer considered sacred. The horned altar was dismantled during Hezekiah's reign, which we know because some of its stones were reused in a public storehouse that was built when the Assyrians threatened Judah and was destroyed by the Assyrian army in 701.... Next we move to Lachish. The second most important city in Judah after Jerusalem, Lachish was a military and administrative center in the Judean hills.... In 2016, an 8th-century BCE cultic place at Lachish was uncovered next to the main city gate. Archaeologists have called this cultic place a "gate-shrine." In it were found two small horned altars, whose horns had been cut off and embedded in an adjacent wall. Further, a square toilet was found installed in the shrine but was never used. The toilet was more of a symbolic act of desecration (see 2Kings 10:27) -- part of Hezekiah's cultic reforms. The best candidate for the elimination [of these cultic sites and others] is King Hezekiah, who probably ordered the abolition of all official cultic sites. Only the Jerusalem Temple and small, household shrines were spared. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. micha at aishdas.org Life is about creating yourself. http://www.aishdas.org - George Bernard Shaw Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 08:48:48 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 11:48:48 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] B'li Neder In-Reply-To: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> References: <0A6AA86D-DCF3-4848-AE7A-D561F41E4CA4@cox.net> Message-ID: <20180618154848.GG28907@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 07:30:24AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote: : As I recall, somewhere in Pirkei Avos it says that we don't know the exact : reward or punishment for mitzvos or aveiros. That's only known by HQBH. : However, I also remember learning it is more praiseworthy to do a mitzvah : that you've taken on versus doing it optionally, though it seems counterintuitive. To do a mitzvah Hashem obligated you in, yes. But one you've taken on yourself? I don't know. As for untuitiveness, see my 9/8/2001 post at . But it ties together why Hashem would command men in something He didn't command women to that mitzvah likely being of more value to a man, to the greater reward. A line of reasoning that doesn't apply to volunteerism. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten micha at aishdas.org your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip, http://www.aishdas.org and it flies away. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Mon Jun 18 12:50:21 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:50:21 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? On 6/18/2018 5:57 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Here is Mosaic Magazine's teaser. I noted how similar this was to Chazal's > portrayal of Chizqiyahu haMelekh's success and failue, in that the > archeological evidence is of destroying the AZ in public, but failed to > get rid of everything hidden in private homes. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Mon Jun 18 12:13:52 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:13:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chukas Message-ID: <0955AA8C-8FE3-48BA-A965-3E9AA6A10782@cox.net> 1) Four Torah laws cannot be explained by human reason but, being divine, demand implicit obedience: a) to marry one's brother's widow (Deut. 25:5); b) not to mingle wool and linen in a garment (Deut. 22:11); c) to perform the rites of the scapegoat (Lev. 16:26, 34); and d) the red cow. Satan comes and criticizes these statutes as irrational. Know therefore that it was the Creator of the world, the One and Only, who instituted them. Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 19:8). 2) [Ch.19:1] "Hashem spoke to Moses and to Aaron saying:" Symbolically the cow came to atone for the sin of the Golden Calf, as if to say let the mother come and clean up the mess left by her child. If this be the case, this explains why the commandment was directed to Aaron, the one who made the calf. 3) [19:2] "Zot chukat ha-Torah...." This is the statute (also translated as "ritual law," or "decree") of the Torah......" This unusual expression occurs only once more in Bamidbar 31:21. The rabbis have commented that it should have said ?Zot chukat ha parah.? Why does it sound as if this chok is the whole Torah? There are several explanations such as only Jews can be ritually impure. A non-Jew cannot have tum?ah. Also, since a chok is incomprehensible, it is as if you have observed the whole Torah if you follow an irrational, illogical commandment. 4) The Midrash to this chapter focuses primarily on one paradox in the laws of the Red Cow: Its ashes purify people who had become contaminated; yet those who engage in its preparation become contaminated. I thought of a contemporary example of something that would appear just as paradoxical. Radiation treatment is used to treat many forms of cancer, and yet, the same radiation can cause cancer. For someone who has no knowledge of medicine, this would appear as irrational as the paradox of the Red Cow. In a similar vein, the Midrash notes a number of such paradoxical cases of righteous people who descended from wicked parents, such as Abraham from Terach, Hezekiah from Ahaz, and Josiah from Ammon. The Talmud adds the paradox that it is forbidden to drink blood, but an infant nurses from its mother, whose blood is transformed into milk to become the source of life (Niddah 9a). You won?t go broke if you follow the chok. But if you don?t keep trying, you?ll end up dying. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Jun 18 12:24:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:24:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chizkiyahu's Reforms In-Reply-To: <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> References: <20180618155754.GH28907@aishdas.org> <75a4ceb0-8068-3ab9-bf39-239df1da3262@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180618192417.GC12350@aishdas.org> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:50:21PM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : Makes me wonder why exactly was Hezqiyahu eligible to be Moshiach, : had he been able to sing Shira. His failure to bring about real : reform, the disaster that Ashur brought to Eretz Yisrael, his split : with Yeshiyahu - how does this add up to someone who should have : been Moshiach? Compared to these issues, his inability to sing Shira : in the face of disaster was the minor problem, no? I dunno. Look at David haMelekh. He had what to do teshuvah for as well. (Yeah, yeah, I know, kol ha'omer David chatah... But let's look at the navi's presentation of David, if not the historical figure.) However, he owned his mistakes, did teshuvah. And indeed, excelled at singing shirah. It seems there is a big difference between someone who errs, but stays connected to the Borei through it all well enough to be moved to song, and someone who doesn't. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger A person lives with himself for seventy years, micha at aishdas.org and after it is all over, he still does not http://www.aishdas.org know himself. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Rav Yisrael Salanter From ben1456 at zahav.net.il Tue Jun 19 00:15:18 2018 From: ben1456 at zahav.net.il (Ben Waxman) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:15:18 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive into a hostile Arab town? Ben From micha at aishdas.org Tue Jun 19 03:01:54 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 06:01:54 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> Message-ID: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive : into a hostile Arab town? I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, no? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Jun 19 06:42:33 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:42:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Used Metal Pots Bought From a Non-Jew In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Q. I bought a set of used metal pots from a non-Jew. Do I kasher them first or do I tovel them first? A. Shulchan Aruch (YD 121:2) writes that one should first kasher the pot and afterwards immerse it in a mikvah. If one toveled the pot first before kashering, it is a matter of dispute among Rishonim whether the tevila was effective. The Rashbam (cited in Beis Yosef YD 121) writes that toveling a pot before kosherization is like immersing in a mikvah while holding a sheretz (unclean item) and the tevila is ineffective. However, other Rishonim disagree and maintain that tevila is a separate mitzvah and is not connected with kashering. The Shach (YD 121:5) writes that if one was to tovel a pot before kashering, tevila should be repeated without a bracha because of the uncertainty. Nonetheless, the Dagul Merivava writes if the pot had not been used in the past 24 hours, one may tovel before kashering. After 24 hours, the non-kosher taste that had been absorbed in the pot is ruined. At that point the absorbed taste is no longer similar to a sheretz. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Jun 19 08:17:39 2018 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:17:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat In-Reply-To: <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> References: <7838512e-741a-7def-227a-acc6b5f4d6b3@zahav.net.il> <20180619100154.GC13348@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <3cd91821-d660-3a72-164e-c3abb8aaf807@sero.name> On 19/06/18 06:01, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 09:15:18AM +0200, Ben Waxman via Avodah wrote: > : There is a question as to whether or not it is permitted for someone > : to give driving directions on Shabbat to a Jew. According to the > : opinion that says it is assur, would it be permitted to do so if the > : driver was in YOSH and without accurate directions he could drive > : into a hostile Arab town? > > I don't see the question. Safeiq piquach nefesh open-and-shut mutar, > no? I don't know the answer, and wouldn't dare try to pasken it, but I do see a big question. The person is in no danger now. He will be in danger only if he chooses to drive on Shabbos. Is it permitted to help him do so safely? Does it make you an accomplice to his avera? Does hal'itehu larasha' perhaps apply here? -- Zev Sero A prosperous and healthy 2018 to all zev at sero.name Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper From ydamyb at mail.gmail.com Tue Jun 19 05:19:56 2018 From: ydamyb at mail.gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 15:19:56 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 6:17 PM Akiva Miller wrote: > Let's consider someone who begins Shabbos early, and arrives home and > begins his seudah before sunset. He will probably eat the bulk of his meal > before shkia or tzeis, perhaps even the *entire* meal... > In such a situation, what additions does one add to Birkas Hamazon? On a > regular Shabbos, of course one would include Retzeh. But when straddling > Rosh Chodesh and Shabbos, would one say Retzeh or Yaaleh V'yavo or both? Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Akiva Blum From JRich at sibson.com Tue Jun 19 09:44:50 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 16:44:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <10d8a9cc4d8f47e593bd2928a907b8fd@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. -------------------------- I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you can daven maariv after plag-would he say if you did that you don't say retzeih if you ate later? BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 05:11:06 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 08:11:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some degree or another. Would they pasken the same way if the Seuda Shlishis was earlier, and - for whatever reason - he had davened maariv and said birkas hamazon on Saturday afternoon after Plag Hamincha? I concede that it is a bizarre example, but the boundaries of halacha are defined by exactly this sort of situation. It's not done nowadays, but a person *IS* allowed to daven maariv on Shabbos afternoon after Plag. If someone did so, and did it during seudah shlishis, and then chose to say Birkas Hamazon while the sun was still above the horizon on Shabbos afternoon, perhaps he should indeed say Retzeh? Perhaps not, but I'd love to know what a posek might say. Summary: The question in this thread concerns someone who is benching on Friday afternoon which is Rosh Chodesh but he already said the non-RC maariv. This is VERY analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday afternoon which is Shabbos but he already said the non-Shabbos maariv. It is NOT so analogous to someone who is benching on Saturday night and he already said the non-Shabbos maariv, and the only argument in favor of saying Retzeh is that the meal began on Shabbos. I just thought of another difference between Friday Rosh Chodesh and the situation cited by RAB. If a person davened Maariv during seuda shelishit - and presumably included Ata Chonantanu - then he has verbally and explicitly declared Shabbos to be over, and it would be contradictory to reverse this by saying Retzeh in the benching (even if the sun is still shining on Saturday afternoon). BUT: When someone says maariv on Motzaei Rosh Chodesh he merely omits Yaaleh V'yavo, and there is no explicit declaration that RC has ended, so perhaps he could still include Yaaleh V'yavo on Friday afternoon. [There would still be a problem of including both Retzeh and Yaaleh V'yavo in the same benching, but some poskim do allow that in the Rosh Chodesh Motzaei Shabbos situation.] Akiva Miller From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Jun 20 13:47:08 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:47:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rabbi S. R. Hirsch Takes On The Rambam Message-ID: My grandson Daniel Levine who is studying in Yeshiva KBY and I are in the process of reading RSRH's Nineteen Letters with the notes written by Rabbi Joseph Elias. Today we read part of letter 18. While I knew that RSRH criticizes the RAMBAM, I was surprised at how strong this criticism is. Some of what is in letter 18 is posted at https://goo.gl/o3uXdg Below is a sampling. "Pressure of the times demanded more: the underlying ideas of the Tanach and the Talmud were recorded in the aggados, but again, in a veiled form, requiring of the student an active effort on his part in order to grasp the inner spirit, which really can be passed down only by word of mouth." "However, not everybody grasped the true spirit of Judaism. In non-Jewish schools Yisrael's youth trained their minds in independent philosophical inquiry. From Arab sources they drew the concepts of Greek philosophy and came to conceive their ultimate aim as perfecting themselves in the perception of truth. Hence rose conflict. Their quickening spirit put them at odds with Judaism, which they considered to be void of any spirit of its own; and their view of life was in contradiction with a view that stressed action, deeds, first and foremost, and considered recognition of the truth to only be a means toward such action." And so the times brought forth a man of spirit who, having been educated within an uncomprehended Judaism as well as Arab scholarship, was compelled to reconcile this dichotomy within himself. By giving voice to the way in which he did this, he became the guide for all who were engaged in the same struggle. It is to this great man alone that we owe the preservation of practical Judaism until the present day. By accomplishing this and yet, on the other hand merely reconciling Judaism with the ideas from without, rather than developing it creatively from within, and by the way in which he effected this reconciliation, he gave rise to all the good that followed- as well as all the bad. His trend of thought was Arab-Greek, as was his concept of life. Approaching Judaism from without, he brought to it views that he had gained elsewhere, and these he reconciled with Judaism. Thus to him too, the highest aim was self-perfection through recognition of the truth; and the practical, concrete deeds became subordinate to this end. Knowledge of God was considered an end in itself, not a means toward the end; and so he delved into speculations about the essence of God and considered the results of these speculative investigations to be fundamental axioms and principles of faith binding upon Judaism. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ydamyb at gmail.com Wed Jun 20 21:34:54 2018 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 07:34:54 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, 4:46 p.m. Akiva Miller via Avodah, < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > R' Akiva Blum wrote: > > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. It seems that the same > > should apply erev shabbos, after one has davened maariv, he > > can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. > > Your argument is logical, but not a proof. The acharonim and MB are > presumably speaking of a case where the individual davened maariv and > benched at a time on Saturday night when the sky was dark to some > degree or another. > > Please see the MB 424:2 where he quotes the MA specifically about where one davened maariv while still day that he can no longer say yaaleh veyovoh. I wonder about a case where one said kabolas shabbos, then ate and davened maariv later. I would think that too would be sufficient. Akiva -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Thu Jun 21 03:56:40 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 10:56:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Timeless Rav Hirsch Message-ID: >From https://goo.gl/ZEcnxP The writings of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (RSRH) deeply resonate with many people today, as they have since the time he penned them in the middle of the nineteenth century, using them to recreate a community of modern, Torah-faithful Jews in Frankfurt that had all but disappeared. Many find that, ironically, his words seem more suited for our times than when he composed them. He stands almost alone among commentators in dealing with many themes of modernity: cultural evolution; our relationships with non-Jews; the Jewish mission to the rest of civilization; freedom of the will versus determinism; autonomy and totalitarianism; understanding the impact of paganism on the ancient world. Of course, his treatment of symbolism. This web page contains links to commentaries on the parshios by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein based on the writings of RSRH. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 06:00:23 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 09:00:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Directions on Shabbat Message-ID: Perhaps the machmirim would say to respond, "It is Shabbat and it is assur to drive, so I cannot tell to how to go. BUT I will tell you this: Do not go on such-and-such a road, because it will take you through such-and-such a dangerous area." That would not be a problem by those who the OP refers to as machmirim, it seems to me. (Of course, personally, I would label Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as the machmir, and would use the response he suggests: "It pains me that you are driving on Shabbat, so to minimize the Chilul Shabbat, I will give you the very best directions...") Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Jun 21 21:02:14 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 00:02:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: . R' Akiva Blum wrote: > Please see the Mishna Berurah 188:32 where he quotes the > Acharonim that if during Seuda Shelishis someone davened > maariv, he can no longer say retzei. And R' Joel Rich asked: > I wonder if he meant maariv literally or if one had intent > and said atah chonentanu as havdalah - since in theory you > can daven maariv after plag - would he say if you did that > you don't say retzeih if you ate later? This situation is raised by Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen in "The Radiance of Shabbos" (ArtScroll). He writes (pg 95?), "If one interrupts a prolonged meal to daven Maariv or recite Havdalah, he does not say Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon afterwards. If one merely said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, he should still recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon. Rabbi Cohen cites MB 263:67 that if one said "Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol" during the meal, it is a "Tzorech Iyun" whether he can say Retzeh. Then he cites Eliya Rabba 299:1, Petach Hadvir there, Chayei Adam 47:24, Kaf Hachayim Palagi 31, and Rav Moshe Feinstein all as saying that one *can* still say Retzeh, but that Shulchan Aruch Harav 188:17 says not to. Personally, I am surprised that so many poskim distinguish between Maariv/Havdala on the one hand, vs. Omitting Shem Umalchus on the other hard. Here is a situation which will illustrate this point: Suppose someone had a long seuda shlishis, and after Tzeis he said Baruch Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L'chol, and then he actually did a melacha. Would those poskim still say that he should recite Retzeh in Bircas Hamazon? Akiva Miller From JRich at sibson.com Thu Jun 21 18:01:47 2018 From: JRich at sibson.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 01:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Individualism? Message-ID: <6b39dd928de144b0ba94b9a16c4318c5@VW2K8NYCEXMBX4.segal.segalco.com> Anecdotally, it seems to me I've seen an increase in "individualistic" practices across the orthodox spectrum [e.g., davening at one's own pace with less concern as to where the tzibbur is up to (shma, shmoneh esrai, chazarat hashatz . . .), being obvious about using a different nusach hatfila, wearing tfillin at mincha . . .] I'm curious as to whether others have seen this? If yes, any theories as to why? (e.g., outside world seeping in?) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Jun 22 13:51:26 2018 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:51:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] When Shabbos is Motzaei Rosh Chodesh Message-ID: In Avodah V36n72 (to which I'm humming "Chai, Chai, Chai/Am Yisrael Chai" :)), RJR asked: > BTW in theory, when we finish shalosh seudot after tzeit (maybe shkia?) shouldn't tadir vsheino tadir say we daven before we bentch? < Iff we're considering when one ended the meal; but then you're comparing unlike items (BhM vs. Ma'ariv), not to mention that BhM is a Torah-level *mitzva* while Ma'ariv is .... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 23 19:24:37 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 22:24:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] BALAK "JACOB'S TENTS, ISRAEL'S DWELLING PLACES, MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD" Message-ID: "How goodly are your tents, O Jacob; your dwelling places, O Israel." [Num. 24:5] Why the repetition? What does each of these terms [tents and dwelling places] represent? And furthermore, why is the first appellation used "Jacob" and the second one "Israel?" In addition to the sensitivity and modesty demonstrated by the arrangement of the tents and camps, the Sages (Sanhedrin 105b) expound that these terms refer to the habitats of Israel's spiritual heritage. Tents (Ohalecha), alludes to the study halls, and dwelling places (Mishk'nosecha), which is related to Shechinah, or God's presence, alludes to the synagogues and Temples (Sforno). Rav Kook has a novel interpretation. He says that the verse, which mentions tents first, reflects a lower level and hence, uses the name Jacob, the first and lesser name. However, the verse which mentions dwelling second, reflects a higher level. Thus, it uses the name Israel, Jacob's second and more elevated name. The reason Rav Kook considers "tents" to reflect a lower level and "dwelling places" a higher level is because the tent is inherently connected to the state of traveling. It corresponds to the aspiration for continual change and growth. The dwelling is also part of the journey, but is associated with the rests between travels. It is the soul's sense of calm, resting from the constant movement, for the sake of the overall mission (sort of a parallel to Shabbos). I delved into the gematria aspect of this and came up with some heavy, mystical stuff. The gematria for "Ohalecha Ya-akov" (your tents O Jacob) is 248. There are 248 positive mitzvot. The word 'Avraham' and 'bamidbar' (In the wilderness) is also 248, as is the phrase 'Kol Adonai Elohim' (the voice or sound of Hashem, God). The word 'romach' (spear) is also 248. Now to tie all this together-- Balaam had intended, in a manner of speaking, to use a 'spear' to harm the Jewish people and curse them 'in the wilderness.' However 'the voice of Hashem, God' caused Balaam to turn the negative to the positive, (symbolized by the 248 positive mitzvos). Thus when Balaam said "How goodly are your tents O Jacob," he was blessing the Jewish people completely right from 'Abraham.' The gematria for "Mishk'nosecha Yisrael" (Your dwelling places, O Israel) is 1,381. As Rav Kook said, this part of the verse was on a higher level. In Gen: verse 25 (last part) and verse 26 (first part) we have: "Vayar Elohim ki tov. Vayomer Elohim na-a-seh Adam b'tzalmeinue" ("And God saw that it was good. And God said: "Let us make man in Our image..."). The gematria for this is also 1,381 as is the word "Ha-ashtaroth" (the principal Phoenician goddess, the consort of their chief male deity, Baal). Though Balaam was steeped in idolatry ("Ha-ashtaroth"), when he pronounced the second part of the phrase, ("mishk'nosecha Yisroel") God 'saw that it was good.' And so, the "image of God" wins out! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Jun 25 07:17:25 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:17:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Waiting After Some Cheeses Before Eating Meat Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I know that we are supposed to wait after eating certain cheeses, before we can then eat meat. After which cheeses should one wait, and what is the basis for this practice? A. The Rama (Yoreh Deah 89:2) writes that the custom is not to eat meat after eating hard cheese. The waiting time for this is equivalent to the amount of time that one waits after eating meat, before then eating dairy foods. (See Taz ibid. 89:4, Aruch HaShulchan ibid. 89:11, Chochmas Adam 40:13.) There are two reasons that one needs to wait after meat before then partaking of milk; these two reasons apply as well to eating certain cheeses after meat. The first reason is that of basar she?bein ha-shinayim ? meat that gets stuck between the teeth ? which takes a considerable amount of time to dislodge or disintegrate, before which one may not consume milk. (Rambam, Hilchos Ma?achalos Asuros 9:28) The second reason for waiting after eating meat is meshichas ta?am ? an aftertaste left in the mouth, due to meat?s fattiness; only after a substantial lapse of time does this aftertaste dissipate, whereupon one may then consume milk. (Rashi in Chullin 105a s.v. ?Assur?) Poskim apply both of these reasons to cheese: Hard cheese, due to its firm and brittle texture, is like basar she?bein ha-shinayim, and is termed gevinah she?bein ha-shinayim ? cheese that gets stuck between the teeth. One therefore needs to wait a considerable amount of time for such cheese to dislodge or disintegrate before then consuming meat. (Sifsei Da?as Yoreh 89:2) Also, cheeses that are very pungent and leave a noticeable aftertaste are like meat that has meshichas ta?am; one must wait for the aftertaste to dissipate before then eating meat. (Taz Yoreh Deah 89:4) Although some classical poskim argue as to whether one or both of the above rationales for waiting apply to cheese, contemporary poskim rule that both apply. The next installment of Halacha Yomis will discuss further details. View OUKosher's list of Aged Cheeses. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at mail.gmail.com Sun Jun 24 23:26:22 2018 From: eliturkel at mail.gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:26:22 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] [Commentary] Rabbi Meir Soloveichik: Why Christians Are Reading the Rav In-Reply-To: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> References: <16433970f18-c8c-232a0@webjas-vab025.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: [RET emailed me this under a subject line that began "Too long for Avodah thought you might be interested..." But I thought his reluctance was missplaced. I just held on to the piece for its own digest. -micha] Jun 20, 2018 The nature of the dilemma can be stated in a three-word sentence. I am lonely. - Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik In 2015, I was invited to a conference held at a Catholic University in Spain, celebrating the first Spanish translation of *The Lonely Man of Faith*, the seminal philosophical essay of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik (my great uncle), reverently referred to by many Orthodox Jews as "the Rav." Published 50 years earlier, the essay contrasts two biblical accounts of the creation of man and teases out two personas, known as Adam the First and Adam the Second. In the first chapter of Genesis, humanity is created in the image of God and instructed by the Almighty to "fill the world and subdue it." Adam the First, Rabbi Soloveitchik suggests, is majestic; through his God-like creative capacities he seeks scientific breakthroughs, to cure disease, to build cities and countries, to advance the health and comfort of mankind. But then there is Adam the Second, who in Genesis 2 is created from the dust of the earth and remains in the sanctity of the garden of Eden, "to work and protect it." This represents the religious aspect of man, man who is ever aware of his finitude, who finds fulfillment not in majestic achievement but in an intimate relationship with a personal God. These two accounts are given, Rabbi Soloveitchik argued, because both are accurate; both Adam I and Adam II are divinely desired aspects of the human experience. One who is devoted to religious endeavors is reminded that "he is also wanted and needed in another community, the cosmic-majestic," and when one works on behalf of civilization, the Bible does not let him forget "that he is a covenantal being who will never find self-fulfillment outside of the covenant." The man of faith is not fully of the world, but neither can he reject the world. To join the two parts of the self may not be fully achievable, but it must nevertheless be our goal. In his letter of invitation to the conference, the president of the Spanish university reflected on how Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings spoke to his own vocation. As a leader of a Christian school, he said he grappled constantly with the challenge of being an *hombre de fe* in a Europe that, once the cradle of Christendom, was now suddenly secular: As Adam the First understandably and correctly busies himself with the temporal concerns of this world, we encourage our students to not lose sight, within their own hearts, of Adam the Second, the thirsting Adam that longs for a redemption that our technological advances cannot quench. We hope that our students, who come to our university seeking degree titles that will translate into jobs, will leave it also with awakened minds and hearts that fully recognize the deep aspirations that lie within their youthful spirits, and which *The Lonely Man of Faith* so eloquently describes. The letter reflected a fascinating phenomenon. As Orthodox Jews mark this year the 25th anniversary of Rabbi Soloveitchik's passing, more and more of his works are being studied, savored, appreciated, and applied to people's own lives -- by Christians. As interesting as this is, it should not be surprising. *The Lonely Man of Faith* actually originated, in part, in a talk to Catholic seminarians, and today it is Christians who are particularly shocked by the rapidity with which a culture that was once Christian has turned on them, so that now people of faith are quite lonely in the world at large. In his essay, Rabbi Soloveitchik notes that though the tension between Adam I and Adam II is always a source of angst, "the contemporary man of faith is, due to his peculiar position in secular society, lonely in a special way," as our age is "technically minded, self-centered, and self-loving, almost in a sickly narcissistic fashion, scoring honor upon honor, piling up victory upon victory, reaching for the distant galaxies, and seeing in the here-and-now sensible world the only manifestation of being." Now that the world of Adam I seems wholly divorced from that of Adam II, people of faith seek guidance in the art of bridging the two; and if, 70 years ago, Reinhold Niebhur was a theologian who spoke for a culture where Christianity was the norm, Rabbi Soloveitchik is a philosopher for Jews and Christians who are outsiders. The Catholic philosopher R.J. Snell, in a Christian reflection inspired by the Rav's writings, wrote that "like Joseph B. Soloveitchik in *The Lonely Man of Faith*, I am lonely," and he tells us why: In science, my faith is judged obscurantist; in ethics, mere animus; in practicality, irrelevant; in love, archaic. In the square, I am silenced; at school, mocked; in business, fined; at entertainment, derided; in the home, patronized; at work, muffled. My leaders are disrespected; my founder blasphemed by the new culture, new religion, and new philosophy which...suffers from an aversion to the fullness of questions, insisting that questions are meaningful only when limited to a scope much narrower than my catholic range of wonder. Yet Rabbi Soloveitchik's thesis remains that even when society rejects us, we cannot give up on society, but we also cannot amputate our religious identity from our very selves. Adam I and Adam II must be bridged. This will not be easy, but a theme throughout Rabbi Soloveitchik's writings is that all too often religion is seen as a blissful escape from life's crises, while in truth the opposite is the case. In the words of Reuven Ziegler, Rabbi Soloveitchik insisted that "religion does not offer an escape from reality, but rather provides the ultimate encounter with reality." Traditional Jews and Christians in the West face cultural challenges to their faith -- disdain, scorn, and even hate -- but if the challenge is faced with fortitude, sophistication, and honor, it will be a religious endeavor worthy of being remembered. And as both traditional Jews and Christians face this challenge, it will often be as compatriots, in a fellowship that we may not have foreseen 50 years ago. After attending the conference, I was emailed by another member of the administration, the rector of the university. He thanked me "for the pleasure of sharing that deep friendship which is a sign of the community inspired by the principles of the second Adam," and added, "[I] really enjoyed the time we passed together and the reading of the book of Rabbi Soloveitchik," which was, he reflected, "so stimulating for a better understanding of my own life and my faith." To be a person of faith is indeed to be lonely in this world. But more and more, lonely men and women of several faiths may be brought together by *The Lonely Man of Faith.* From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:42:34 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:42:34 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] changing paradigms? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627194234.GE22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:18:14PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : The more I learn Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Brurah the more I understand : the Maharshal's opposition to codification vs. relearning the basic : sources to obtain the clearest understanding possible of Chazal's : underlying theories for extrapolation to new cases... This is why the Maharal (Be'er 1, ch 19 or so) says that the Tur is only usable because of the BY, and SA, because it comes with the suite of nosei keilim. Speaking after years of learning AhS daily... There is a strong feel for the flow of the pesaq and how each area of halakhah is reasoned through by going to Tur, BY, SA, nosei keilim, AhS. It could be the Maharshal too would be more bothered by the Yad than by the other codes, IFF once studies the Tur or SA (or MB) with the other texts that explain how we got there. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger "The worst thing that can happen to a micha at aishdas.org person is to remain asleep and untamed." http://www.aishdas.org - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:36:55 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:36:55 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] How could Aharon and Miriam have been in the mishkan or chatzer when tamei? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627183655.GC22635@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 11:54:52AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote: : Based on this I was bothered by a similar question in last weeks parsha.At : the end of Behaloscha we have the famous story of Miriam and Aharon talking : against Moshe and then Hashem calls the 3 of them to go outside. Rashi : comments that Aharon and Miriam were both temeim b'derech eretz (e.g. tumas : keri) and tehrefore were screaming for water. If so we can ask the same : question, how could they be in the chatzer of the mishkan while tamei? A : Baal keri is prohibited from going there. Or to put it less obliquely... The pasuq there (Bamidbar 12:4) refers to their location as Ohel Mo'ed. But the idiom is not necessarily referring to the Mishkan. Moshe went to the Ohel Mo'ed to get nevu'ah *outside* the camp. (Shemos 33) It had a pillar of cloud at the door, not at a mizbeiach. In Bamidbar 11:16 we learn that the 70 zeqeinim, after getting ruach haqodesh at the Ohel Mo'eid, returned to the camp. The Sifrei Zutra where (Bamidbar 11) writes: And he set them round about the tent the tent for speaking which was outside the camp. They made two tents, a tent for service and a tent for speaking. The outer tent had the same dimensions as the inner one, and the Levites served in both with the wagons. Two ohel mo'eds, the mishkan, and the nevu'ah center. The Ohel Mo'eid in this story also has a cloud at the door. So, I would think it was Moshe's place of nevu'ah, not the Mishkan. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The Maharal of Prague created a golem, and micha at aishdas.org this was a great wonder. But it is much more http://www.aishdas.org wonderful to transform a corporeal person into a Fax: (270) 514-1507 "mensch"! -Rav Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 12:38:24 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:38:24 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] bli neder? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180627193824.GD22635@aishdas.org> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:19:19PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: : Question - is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency : greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder? It depends why gadol hametzuveh ve'oseh. The accepted theory is that it's because the YhR chimes up when a prohibition -- issur or bitul asei -- is involved (what pop-psych would describe as the attractiveness of "forbidden fruit"), so so one gets greater sekhar for winning the greater battle. Lefum tzaara agra. In which case, the YhR would work against keeping a neder, and so one should get more sekhar for fighting that battle. I argued that it's that someone we are obligated to do is indeed obligated because we need its effects more than someone who isn't. In which case, no one *needs* the chumerah for basic development; because if they did, it would have been obligatory. Then there would be no added value for keeping the chumerah in terms of the substance of what he's doing, but there is added value to keeping a neder. Meanwhile, it's subject to the Chullin 2a: "Tov shelo tidor mishetidor velo meshaleim." (Qoheles 5:4) Utanya: Tov mizeh umizeh, she'eino nodei kol iqar. -- Divrey R' Meir. R' Yehudah omer: Tov mizeh umizeh, nodeir umeshaleim. The gemara then continues by limiting R' Yehudah to nedarim of "harei zu" not shavu'os of "harei alai". Which would appar to include maintaining a chumerah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, micha at aishdas.org the goal is to create so mething that will. http://www.aishdas.org Fax: (270) 514-1507 From micha at aishdas.org Wed Jun 27 11:07:08 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:07:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R Asher Weis on Torah leShmah In-Reply-To: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> References: <20180613195117.GA13672@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20180627180708.GB22635@aishdas.org> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 03:51:17PM -0400, Micha Berger wrote: : ... : R' Asher Weiss give a nice survey of opinions about what the "lishmah" : of "Torah lishmah" means. ... :> Defining Lishmo -- Three Opinions :> :> We find throughout the generations what seem to be three differing :> opinions as to the definition of Lishmo. :> :> 1. The opinion of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as seems clear from the opinion :> of one of his major disciples[26] and from two disciples of subsequent :> generations[27] is that Lishmo means that one has intent purely to :> fulfil the will of Hashem. Due to this, the early Chassidic practice :> was to stop in the middle of learning in order to refocus one's mind :> on this thought. :> :> 2. Rav Chaim Volozhiner writes[28] that it is improper to be pausing :> in the middle of learning. Furthermore, we say lishmah, not lishmo :> [for "its" sake, not "for His sake"]. Rather, says Rav Chaim, :> one should have intent solely to understand the Torah which one is :> learning. This is also the understanding of the Chasam Sofer.[29] :> :> 3. The Reishis Chochmah[30] and the Shlah[31] writes that Lishmoh :> means for the sake of the mitzvos -- commandments. One needs to :> learn in order to know what to do. Accordingly, the word lishmah :> is to be understood as the feminine singular -- for her sake -- :> i.e. for the sake of the mitzvah -- commandment. This is similar :> with the requirement stated in the Yerushalmi[32] that one must :> learn Torah in order to fulfil it. :> :> Support for these Positions :> :> All three of these opinions seem to have a basis in the words of the :> Rishonim. :> :> 1. Rav Chaim Volozhiner quotes the Rosh[33] as his source. The Gemara :> in Nedarim states as follows: Asei dervarim lesheim pa'alan vedabeir :> bahen lishman, which the Rosh explains as follows: "Perform the :> commandments for the sake of Hashem, and learn Torah for its own sake, :> that is, to know and to understand and to increase one's knowledge." :> :> 2. The Mefaresh[34] had a different text in this Gemara, and his text :> reads, vedaveir bahen lesheim shamayim-- learn Torah for the sake :> of Heaven. This is also seems to have been the text of the Rambam, :> for he writes[35] that Lishmo is when one learns Torah purely out :> of love for Hashem. This would seem to indicate like the opinion of :> the Ba'al Shem Tov. :> :> 3. In support of the opinion of the Reishis Chochmah, both Rashi[36] :> and Tosfos[37] write that Lishmo means in order to act. Along the lines of #3, Yesushalmi Beraikha 1:1 (vilna 1a), Shabbos 1:2 (vilna 7b): One who learns but not in order to do, would have been pleasanter that his umbilical cord would have prolapsed in front of his face and he never came into the world. The Meshekh Chokhmah, Devarim 28:61, explains this in terms of the idea that the soul learns Torah with a mal'akh before birth. Someone who wants to learn as an end in itself would have been better off staying with that mal'akh! And (citing the intro to Qorban Aharon) a soul that was not born is a seikhel nivdal who grasped his Creator. All that is being given up by being born. But, if one is learning al menas laasos, which one can only do after birth, then their birth had value. The other opinion in the Y-mi is that someone who is lomei shelo al means lelameid is better off not existing. Again, the MC, notes, because the point of learning is to bring it into the world. The MC also gets this from Sanhedrin 99b, where the gemara concludes that "adam la'amal yulad" is for amal peh -- speaking Torah. While the gemara doesn't say al menas lelameid is a definiition of lishmah, the transitive property would lead me to conclude that's the implication. Al menas and lishmah... can they be distinguished? And if not 4. Al menas laasos. (I have discussed this MC before. He ends up showing that in terms of priorities, one who is going somewhere to teach doesn't have to stop to do mitzvos maasiyos; but someoen who is actually learning (and not teaching) has to stop even for a hakhsher mitzvah (maasis). This is one of my favorite shtiklach; worth a look! (There is a complete copy with a bad translation scattered among .) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The waste of time is the most extravagant micha at aishdas.org of all expense. http://www.aishdas.org -Theophrastus Fax: (270) 514-1507 From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Jun 29 11:07:36 2018 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Professor L. Levine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 18:07:36 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? Message-ID: >From OU Kosher Yomis Q. What type of kosher supervision is needed for hard cheese? A. Chazal, the Talmudic Sages, prohibited cheese that is not made under the special supervision of a Jew (Avodah Zarah 29b, 35a-b). Various reasons are advanced for this rabbinic prohibition, but the reason accepted by most halachic authorities is the concern for the use of rennet enzymes from the stomach flesh of neveilah/non-kosher animals. Unsupervised cheese is termed Gevinas Akum. Cheese is only permitted if it is Gevinas Yisroel ? Jewish-supervised cheese (Yoreh Deah 115:2). This rule is unrelated to the rules of Cholov Yisroel (Jewish-supervised milk) and Cholov Akum/Cholov Stam (milk not under Jewish supervision). Therefore, even if a person eats Cholov Stam dairy products, he may only eat Gevinas Yisroel cheese. According to the Rama (Yoreh Deah 115:2) and many other poskim, Gevinas Yisroel is obtained by the mashgiach visually supervising the incorporation of the enzymes into each vat of milk in the cheese-making process; this way, the mashgiach will verify that the enzymes are kosher. According to the Shach (ibid. 20) and many other poskim, the mashgiach must manually add the enzymes to each vat of milk in the cheese-making process. The Vilna Gaon (ibid. s. 14) provides the rationale for this: Gevinas Yisroel is similar to Pas Yisroel (bread with onsite Jewish involvement) ? just like Pas Yisroel means that a Jew actually participated in the baking process, so too does Gevinas Yisroel mean that a Jew actually participated in the cheese-making process. Contemporary poskim rule that the basic halacha follows the Rama, although kashrus agencies typically endeavor to fulfill the Shach?s requirement as well. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:00:56 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:00:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Game Theory and Bankruptcy Message-ID: <20180629190056.GA23432@aishdas.org> Nobel Laureate R/Dr Robert Aumann famously (in our circles) explained the distribution of funds in the mishnah on Kesuvos 93a. In that mishnah, a man left behind 3 wives -- but the case works for 3 debts in general. Whatever wife 1's kesuvah is worth in the mishnah would be the same as if 1 of 3 creditors were owed the same amount. It is the creditor version that is the topic of AhS CM 104:15. But it only holds in cases where the assets aren't real estate, or if the debts are loans without certified contracts, if all the debts' contracts have the same date -- in other words, in cases where one doesn't pay the oldest loan fast. Creditor A is owed 100 zuz, creditor B is owed 200 zuz, and creditor C, 300. And the debtor has left than 600 zuz to divide. The AhS notes that there is a minority opinion that would have them divide as we today would probably consider more intuitive -- proportionally. A gets 1/6 of the assets, B gets 1/3 (ie 2/6) and C gets 1/2 (=3/6). And in his day this was a common practice. So, while one may say this became minhag hamaqom and thus a tenai implicitly accepted when doing business or lending money, the AhS recommends that if the creditors assume this division, beis din seek pesharah and divide this way. However, iqar hadin is as per the mishnah. Which the gemara tells us is R' Nasan, and R' Yehudah haNasi disagrees. (Stam mishnah, and the redactor of mishnayos doesn't mention his own opinion???) The first 100z has three claims on it and is divided in thirds. The second 100z has two claims on it, and is divided equally between B & C. And whatever is left is given to C. What this means is that whomever has the biggest loan is most likely to absorb the loss. RRA explains this case in two papers. The first, aimed more at mathematicians, invokes the Game Theoretic concept of nucleolus. (R.J. Aumann and M. Maschler, Game Theoretic Analysis of a Bankruptcy Problem from the Talmud, Journal of Economic Theory 36, no. 2 (1985), 195-213.) In the second, written for people who learn gemara, he avoids all the technical talk. ("On the Matter of the Man with Three Wives," Moriah 22 (1999), 98- 107.) The second paper compares this mishnah to the gemara at the opening of BM, and derives a general rule, RAR saying that no other division in Qiddushin would follow the same principles as the 2 person division in BM. Here is an explanatory blog post on Talmudology blog ("Judaism, Science and Medicine"), by R/Dr Jeremy Brown. (The blog would particularly be interesting to someone learning daf who is interested in science or math.) The aforementioned AhS gives two sevaras for R' Nasan's position: The first is that the first division is taken from the beinonis (mid-quality property) of the debtor's or the estate's holdings. Therefore, it has to be divided separately from the rest of B & C's debt. Each has claim to the full 100z, so each gets equally. The second division is taken from the beinonis of what the person owned that the time he started owing B & C money, and if there is non left, from the ziburis (lesser quality). Again, different material, so it is divided without consideration to the remainder of the debt to C. merchandise. Therefore, it is accounted for separately The second explanation focuses on why this case is different than shutefus, where the shutefim do divide proportionally to their investments. The debtor's assets are entirely meshubadim to A just as much as to B or C. C can't get his 300z until A's 100z is accounted for, no less than the other way around -- each has full power to halt distribution of any of the man's assets. So the division is by shibud, which is equal. But with shutefim, the profit is clearcut. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger It's never too late micha at aishdas.org to become the person http://www.aishdas.org you might have been. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - George Eliot From micha at aishdas.org Fri Jun 29 12:49:17 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 15:49:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Migo vs Chazakah Message-ID: <20180629194917.GA8106@aishdas.org> AhS 82:18 is a qunterus on migo. Looking at #6 (within se'if 18), RYMEpstein looks at two gemaros that discuss migo bemaqom rov -- BB 5a and Qiddushin 64. In BB, Raza"l say that while rov adif meichazaqah, this is not true for every chazaqah. Chezqas mamon outranks rov (you don't make someone pay up on a "probably"), because the mi'ut yeshno ba'olam, so we can't take something out of his hands -- maybe he is of the mi'ut. This is true even though chezas haguf adif mechezqas mamon and migo adif meichezqas haguf. So chazaq IOW: rov > migo rov > chezaqa chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon So rov > chezqas haguf > chezqas mamon But chezqas mamon > rov -- where mi'ut yeshno be'olam, without bitul Acharei rabim lehatos is a case of bitul, so if the majority of dayanim rule that the nit'an has to pay up, that rov does trump chezqas mamon. Hoserver the gemara in R' Nasan says: "Mah li leshaqer?" ki chazaqah dami. Lo asi chazaqah ve'aqrah chazaqah legamrei. (R' Nasan shows up in two of my posts in a row!) Migo doesn't trump chazaqah, because assuming a person wouldn't give that particular lie is itself a chazaqah. Which is it? Another related issue that confuses me is what kind of chazaqah is a chezqas mamon: One could say it's a chazaqah demei'iqara -- preserving the status quo of who has the money. One could say it's a chazaqah disvara -- normally property belongs to the person holding it. Now, say the to'ein is tofeis the money he claims. This can at times work, because it shifts which is hamotzi meichaveiro when they get to BD. However, we know this is a normal case of the person holding the money, we know how he got it. So how would my chazaqah disvara apply? OTOH, it's not your usual case of presrving the old halachic state, because everyone agrees that before the dispute, the property was the nitan's. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger How wonderful it is that micha at aishdas.org nobody need wait a single moment http://www.aishdas.org before starting to improve the world. Fax: (270) 514-1507 - Anne Frank Hy"d From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Jun 30 21:01:59 2018 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? Message-ID: Naaah, of course he was not Jewish. The subject line was just to get your attention. But then again.... I would not have surprised me if Bil'am had said, "I can't do what my god doesn't let me do." After all, religious people of *any* religion generally refrain from going against the will of their god. Likewise, I would not have been surprised if he said, "I can't do what Hashem doesn't let me do." He is a professional, and he knows the rules of the game (most clearly seen in maftir). He knows who he is dealing with, and if he is trying to curse the Jews, it would be a good idea to follow the rules of the Jewish God. But Bil'am didn't say either of those things. What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase. There have been plenty of polytheists who accept the idea that there are many gods, One of them being Hashem, the God of the Jews. But in this pasuk, we see that Bil'am goes beyond accepting Hashem as *a* god - he accepts Him as "my God". I checked my concordance and found about 50 cases in Tanach of the phrase "Hashem Elokai", spelling "Elokai" with either a patach or a kamatz. It seems that this was the ONLY case where this phrase was used by a non-Jew. Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. Akiva Miller From micha at aishdas.org Sat Jun 30 22:44:15 2018 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 01:44:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Was Bil'am Jewish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20180701054415.GA28439@aishdas.org> On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 12:01:59AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: : What Bil'am said was, "I can't do what HASHEM MY GOD doesn't let me : do." (B'midbar 22:18) I was very surprised by this phrase... : Very unusual. There must be something going on here. My understanding : has been that Bil'am was a rasha, but nevertheless he was a deeply : spiritual rasha, and that spirituality enabled him to nevuah. But now : it seems that on top of all that, he was a monotheist. It must not : have been easy to be a non-Jewish monotheist in those days. But I : guess cognitive dissonance is a useful tool for reshaim of all kinds. This works well with my recent (few minute old) blog post. I argue that the whole point of Bil'am might have been to illustrate how monotheism and deveiqus don't guarantee being good people. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Aspaqlaria Bil'am the Frummy by micha ? Published 18 Tammuz 5778 - Sun, Jul 1, 2018 Sun, Jul 1, 2018 The Medrash Tankhuma (Balaq 1) says: And if you ask: Why did the Holy One blessed be He, let his Shechinah rest upon so wicked a non-Jew? So that the [other] peoples would have no excuse to say, `If we had nevi'im, we would have changed for the better', He established for then nevi'im. Yet they [these nevi'im] broke down the moral fence of the world... For that matter, the Sifrei says on the last pasuq of the Torah: And another navi did not arise again in Israel like Moshe: In Israel, [another] one did not arise, but among the nations of the world, one did arise. And who was it? Bil'am ben Be'or. So here you have a prophet with the abilities of Moshe (whatever they meant by that) and yet he was no paragon of moral virtue. He didn't teach them how to lift themselves up, but how to corrupt the Jews. So how does that address the complaint of the nations? They had their navi, but they said it was unfair that they didn't have nev'i'im to give moral instruction -- and Bil'am wasn't capable of leading them in that way. Perhaps Bil'am stood for them as an example to teach them just that point. The nations are described as complaining that if they only had a navi they would have been as good as the Jews. But Bil'am was there to show them nevu'ah wasn't the answer. Even being a navi and having the Shechinah rest upon them is not sufficient to make an ideal person. The whole detour into telling us about an event in the lives of Balaq and Bil'am is such a departure from the rest of the Torah, it is considered a separate book. "Moshe wrote his book and Parashas Bil'am" (Bava Basra 14b) So why it it included? Based on the above suggestion, the section teaches us about the dangers of frumkeit. We can get so caught up in the pursuit of deveiqus, one's personal relationship with G-d, one can end up as self-centered and honor-seeking as Bil'am. We need to start out pursuing moral and ethical behavior, ehrlachkeit, and then the connection with the Divine can be harnessed to reach those goals. From cantorwolberg at cox.net Sat Jun 30 21:01:27 2018 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (Cantor Wolberg) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 00:01:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Pinchas Message-ID: <56A42568-E095-442F-A19F-017F306492C3@cox.net> ?Pinhas? has turned back Chamasi, my wrath, from the people of Israel.? (Num.25:11) Pinhas has proven his unusual power to turn back God?s wrath from Israel through a very courageous, difficult and controversial act. The Vilna Gaon brilliantly observes that in the word chamasi (my wrath), the two outside letters ches and yud read chai ? life ? while the inside letters mem and sav read meit ? death. The hidden meaning is that by Pinchos facing squarely what has taken place on the outside, he has miraculously turned back the wrath of the Almighty. In doing so, he has removed death (meis) from the inside, replacing it with life (chai). Why do we pray with a set text? An opinion recorded in the Talmud states that prayers correspond to the daily sacrifices offered in the Temple which are mentioned in this coming week's portion of Pinchas. (Numbers 28:4) It has been argued that this opinion may be the conceptual base for our standardized prayer. Since sacrifices had detailed structure, so too do our prayers have a set text. If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: